spamassassin-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Gregorie <>
Subject Re: Do we need a new SMTP protocol? (OT)
Date Wed, 01 Dec 2010 16:55:17 GMT
On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 17:29 +0100, Toni Mueller wrote:
> Hi,
> On Wed, 01.12.2010 at 16:13:06 +0000, Martin Gregorie <> wrote:
> .....
> > IMO the best solution would have been a charge per e-mail provided it
> > was universally enforced. A small charge, e.g. $0.001 to $0.01 per
> > addressee per message would be almost unnoticable to a normal user or
> > business while still being enough to discourage volume spammers by
> > wiping out their profits. Another benefit would be that the bill
> > received by a bot-infected user would serve as a powerful wake-up call
> > to get disinfected.
> This is imho a very bad idea, as it would destroy much of the freedom
> of the Internet in one go, since it would then be impossible to send
> anonymous emails.
How, exactly do you work that out? Send through your ISP, ISP knows who
you are anyway and collects.

Send through, say, TOR and either you use a wrapper (your ISP collects
that and TOR strips the wrapper and sends the actual message, or you use
a browser to connect to Tor and they collect. Either way, since I
believe a mail can't be tracked through Tor, the result is anonymity.

Besides, I seem to remember hearing that IPV6 is never anonymous and
we're all going to be on that as soon as IPV4 address space is
exhausted, and there are only two /8 chunks left unassigned.

OT comment 1: if IPV6 is indeed never anonymous, where does *that* leave
spammers and botnets.

OT comment 2: another major source of spam is web forums, yet I seldom
hear anything about controlling those sources.


View raw message