Re: sender vs author, channel vs object, designated sender vs crypto signatures

[Meng Weng Wong <mengwong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Mar 18, 2004 at 10:50:20AM -0500, Meng Weng Wong wrote:
| 
| OK, let me rephrase.
| 
| I believe that the solution domain of designated sender schemes matches
| the problem domain of RFC2821 MAIL FROM authentication, and that the
| solution domain of crytographic signatures matches the problem domain of
| RFC2822 header From: authentication.

OK, let me rephrase again.

1) I believe that it is important to protect the RFC2821 MAIL FROM from
   illegitimate spoofing, independent of the RFC2822 header From:.

2) I believe that the most appropriate way to do so is with a designated
   sender scheme.

3) I believe that it is also important to protect the RFC2822 header From:
   from illegitimate spoofing, independent of the RFC2821 MAIL FROM.

4) I believe that the most appropriate way to do so is with a cryptographic
   signature system.

5) By "appropriate", I mean "engineering tradeoffs that require the
   least amount of total work to preserve existing desired functionality
   and inhibit undesired illegitimate spoofing."  I assume that some of
   this work may have to be done by operators of newsletters, forwarder
   services, senders of web-generated email, etc.