On Tue, 21 May 1996, Declan B. McCullagh wrote:
An alternative I am considering would reduce the utility of the remailer while still allowing these "consensual" uses to continue. Presently the remailers deal with abuse via "block lists", sets of addresses that mail can't be sent to. Generally these are created when someone complains about some mail they have received. By setting up blocking, at least they will not get harrassing anonymous mail once they have complained. But in some cases, as in the case that is causing me headaches now, even one message is too much.
My thought is to turn the block list concept on its head, and make it a "permit list". Simply, the remailer will only send mail to people who have voluntarily indicated their willingness to receive it.
How would you know that the message you received is actually from them? I don't see how this would really help. I like the "knock-knock" approach, though it would of necessity impose load. If someone has an anonymous message waiting, send them a simple note with instructions on how to retrieve it. From: Anonymous Remailer <hfinney@shell.portal.com> To: random person <somebody@there.com> An anonymous message is waiting for you. If you wish to receive this message, simply send an email message with [some unique string, maybe an MD5 hash of the actual message] in the body of a message to hfinney@shell.portal.com. The simplest way to do this is to reply to this message, quoting this text. I certainly think that limiting newsgroup posting would be prudent. It's inexcusable that it's possible to use anonymous remailers to post *forgeries* (see the smoking flames cross-posted to alt.syntax.tactical). -rich