Re: Authentication, cancels, etc

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Ralph Babel (rbabel@babylon.pfm-mainz.de)
Date: Sun Oct 14 2001 - 06:40:42 CDT


Seth Breidbart wrote:

> It's easy to fake a signature that will fool anybody whose
> software doesn't check them, which is just about everybody.

So obviously that software needs to be fixed, and an
authentication RFC (preferably covering _all_ RFC-2822-based
formats) should provide the technical basis for this. Not a
news issue, though, so let's move on.

>> why did the "site admin" give the poster
>> permission to post in the first place?
>
> He didn't know better, the poster lied on his application.

So obviously the application procedure needs to be fixed.
That's more of a legal issue and not something an RFC can
provide, so I'd suggest you take your straw man elsewhere.

>> If the so-called "spam attack" doesn't carry a valid
>> signature, everyone can recognize that it didn't
>> come from "your site". Not a cancel issue.
>
> For a very small value of "everybody".

So - assuming we had an authentication RFC - obviously
too many people use broken software, which would be
a social issue that cannot be addressed by an RFC.

Next topic, please.


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29.