Re: anti-spam WKBIs, Worsening google service reputation and abuse

[Damian Menscher via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>]

On Sat, Aug 16, 2025 at 6:08 PM Matthew Petach via NANOG <
nanog () lists nanog org> wrote:

> On Sat, Aug 16, 2025 at 5:47 PM John Levine via NANOG <
> nanog () lists nanog org>
> wrote:
> > It appears that Matthew Petach via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org> said:
> > > I think we should take a cue from cryptocurrencies, and have a "proof of
> > > stake" type of
> > > challenge for email messages sent out.  The recipient machine doesn't
> > > accept a message
> > > until the sender has demonstrated they have put some skin in the game as
> > well.
> >
> > Dwork and Naor invented that in 1992.  Clever idea, doesn't work in
> > practice.
> >
> > https://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il/~naor/PAPERS/pvp.pdf
>
>
> OK, I read the paper through, and they put considerably more thought into
> the calculation side;
> however, this paper explicitly calls for a centralized Pricing Authority,
> which is exactly what I'm
> advocating *against*.
>
> And this would, in my opinion, be why it's a non-starter.  You'll never get
> a system
> that requires everyone to adhere to dictates from a central authority.
>
> Instead, I'm advocating for a decentralized, one-at-a-time type approach,
> where the penalty box is in the time domain, so it's easily implemented
> unilaterally by the receiving side.  It's the very opposite of what the
> paper you're citing proposed.

Pretty sure what you're proposing is the equivalent of Hashcash?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashcash

Damian
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/CNIBTYPQLRO7JCXPFMN5MUGXQXITXKNJ/