I have thought a solution both for email spam and email reliability problems, of Internet.



1. Assuming a sender@sender.address and a receiver@receiver.address, after the sender sends an email at the 
receiver, the receiver.address server sends back a message with a random number to the sender.address server.


2. Then, the sender@sender.address sends again the email with the exact received number to the 
receiver.address server.

3. The receiver.address server makes the email available to the receiver@receiver.address.

4. The receiver.address server sends a successful receipt email with the same random number.



Thus it is authenticated both that the original email address is valid, and that the email reaches its 
destination.



What do you think?



-- 
Ioannis A. Vranos

C95 / C++03 Developer

http://www.cpp-software.net

Ioannis Vranos wrote:
> I have thought a solution both for email spam and email reliability 
> problems, of Internet.
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Assuming a sender@sender.address and a receiver@receiver.address, 
> after the sender sends an email at the receiver, the receiver.address 
> server sends back a message with a random number to the sender.address 
> server.
> 
> 
> 2. Then, the sender@sender.address sends again the email with the exact 
> received number to the receiver.address server.
> 
> 3. The receiver.address server makes the email available to the 
> receiver@receiver.address.
> 
> 4. The receiver.address server sends a successful receipt email with the 
> same random number.
> 
> 
> 
> Thus it is authenticated both that the original email address is valid, 
> and that the email reaches its destination.
> 
> 
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> 
> 

There are already many "Challenge-Response" systems available.  See:
http://www.0spam.com/support.shtml

Spam will continue to be a problem while there is no cost associated 
with sending vast quantities of email.  Personally, I think governments 
should tax emails!

Phil, London

Philip Herlihy wrote:
> Ioannis Vranos wrote:
>> I have thought a solution both for email spam and email reliability 
>> problems, of Internet.
>>
>>
>>
>> 1. Assuming a sender@sender.address and a receiver@receiver.address, 
>> after the sender sends an email at the receiver, the receiver.address 
>> server sends back a message with a random number to the sender.address 
>> server.
>>
>>
>> 2. Then, the sender@sender.address sends again the email with the 
>> exact received number to the receiver.address server.
>>
>> 3. The receiver.address server makes the email available to the 
>> receiver@receiver.address.
>>
>> 4. The receiver.address server sends a successful receipt email with 
>> the same random number.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thus it is authenticated both that the original email address is 
>> valid, and that the email reaches its destination.
>>
>>
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>>
>>
> 
> There are already many "Challenge-Response" systems available.  See:
> http://www.0spam.com/support.shtml
> 
> Spam will continue to be a problem while there is no cost associated 
> with sending vast quantities of email.  Personally, I think governments 
> should tax emails!


This isn't a solution to spam, since most spam emails are sent from botnets (remotely controlled infected PCs) 
with fake or invalid email sender addresses.


Also you can easily setup your PC to be an email server and send emails from your PC directly.



I took a look at the URL you provided, however that approach is complex. I am talking about a simple solution.



 From a reply message I posted to another newsgroup on this topic:



The approach is aimed to be as simple as possible, that is, the current design of an email address is to 
receive emails from anyone. My approach keeps this design.


Also most of the spam emails are sent from botnets and *not* from real email accounts.



The free email provider I am using (www.freemail.gr), provides an antispam option named "greylisting" which 
radically reduced the amount of spam I am receiving, from many in a day to very few a week.


Here is info about "greylisting" (translated from Greek):

"Greylisting is a ==>transparent checking method of new/unknown senders. When it is active, and a sender sends 
an email for the first time to a particular user, Freemail denies to receive it and requests from the server 
of the sender to resend it. This usually happens within a few minutes, so the sender address is confirmed 
without any bother to the sender or the receiver".


However if an email server is misconfigured, a legit email may not be received. However I haven't come across 
any situation that I haven't received any email from someone who is not a spammer, since my alternate email 
address with no antispam protection exists at my site shown in my signature in all emails I am sending, and 
all messages I am posting to Usenet, so one could notify me of this.


So in summary, my approach is based on the concept of greylisting, and is based on the following facts:

1. 99% of spam emails are sent from botnets with fake or invalid sender email addresses.

2. Misconfigured legit servers may not work with greylisting (I haven't encountered such a problem so far), 
and the suggested approach *ensures* that the email ==> of only a legit email account is received and not 
rejected by the recipient server.



So, what do you think?



-- 
Ioannis A. Vranos

C95 / C++03 Developer

http://www.cpp-software.net