Re: Excerpt on SPAM from Edupage, 11 February 1997

jim bell wrote:
> At 02:05 AM 2/14/97 -0600, snow wrote:
> >Pete:
> >> 	Yes, but why does monetary compensation make it then O.K.?  I'd rather
> >> pay for my Internet access, then be bombarded by spam, no matter what
> >> they paid me!  I think the best soln. is the one that is currently in
> >> place for phone calls - they can call once, but if I tell them not to
> >> call me again and they do, I can then begin legal action against them. 
> >> I pay more per month for my phone service than my Internet service (
> >> although in NY, *everything* is more expensive. ), and junk phone calls
> >> are way more intrusive then spam.
> >
> >	I figure if this scheme comes to fruition, I'll just set up a seperate
> >account (or procmail) to filter out the spam, deposit the coin, and go on
> >about my business.
> 
> 
> That's fine...that's EXACTLY the way the system would work!  Intentionally 
> so!  The purpose of the payment is not because the sender feels some sort of 
> legal obligation to pay; rather it's analogous to a tip to a waiter.
> 
> The sender makes the payment based on however much he _wants_ you to pay 
> attention to his message, but fully aware that there is no guarantee that 
> you'll do so.  

I can suggest a scheme where a fee would be attached to the message,
and the recipient would be able to get the money only after having
read and understood the message.

For example, you might receive the following message (it could be encrypted
by your public key to preserve the cash from the MITM):

To: jimbell@pacifier.com
From: spammer@dm1.com (Direct Marketing, by way of telysis.com)
Subject: an encrypted cyberdollar for you
X-Encrypted-Postage: 0891281229qwqoifoweihjrfiohsdlifhsluire82374029849
                     weuiyruiy3478ye874t23876459823y4897y5897y23849y589
                     39847578r3498yt893y75t9843y75t897y4385t9y74897gy77
X-Encryption-Key: in the message body

Dear Jim,

Here's one cyberdollar for you. It is "locked" by an encryption key. The
cybercoin is encrypted by an IDEA key and you can find out the key
by reading the message below:

@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 
Valentines' day presents at www.cheap-stuff.com!

An ideal Valentine's day present for your significant other, at a 
reduced cost for you! You can buy your loved one a thousand used 
condoms (mint condition) at a reduced rate of ONLY $5.95!

Visit us at http://www.cheap-stuff.com/cgi-bin/condoms/key.cgi?name=jimbell
to get your postage!
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 

The encryption key is located at the URL above.

###########################################################################

My opinion on this: I personally feel that this scheme is the way to 
go for spammers. Obviously, it is possible to build mail readers that 
would verify some kind of trusted signature on the attached postage, and
would highlight all such messages. The meaning of signature is "these
people are not crooks, there really is an encrypted dollar there".

Clearly, spammers who pay their readers to read their messages (and who
do get them to read) will have a very high response rate. That may 
justify adding postage to their letters.

The advantages are obvious. The disadvantage is a possibility of someone
stealing the money on the way, if the letters are not encrypted.

	- Igor.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In list.cypherpunks, ichudov@algebra.com writes:

> My opinion on this: I personally feel that this scheme is the way to 
> go for spammers. Obviously, it is possible to build mail readers that 
> would verify some kind of trusted signature on the attached postage, and
> would highlight all such messages. The meaning of signature is "these
> people are not crooks, there really is an encrypted dollar there".

I much prefer the plan where a potential mail correspondant includes an
e-cash dollar directly cashable by me.  If I like the mail (and the
sender), I throw the dollar away and the sender goes on the approved
list.  If not, I keep the dollar, and the sender goes on the twit list.
Paper junk mail costs an advertiser more than $1 per piece, so they'd
still be getting a bargain.  And potentially, some receivers may throw
away the dollar and welcome the spam.

> Clearly, spammers who pay their readers to read their messages (and who
> do get them to read) will have a very high response rate. That may 
> justify adding postage to their letters.

It should also spur development of intelligent agents which can retrieve
this cash without human intervention.  Spammers will doubtless alter
their pages to require more interaction to find the key to the cash.
Then the IA's will be improved.  Then... remember the copy protection
wars?  This isn't necessarily a negative point.

> The advantages are obvious. The disadvantage is a possibility of someone
> stealing the money on the way, if the letters are not encrypted.

Or that the money wasn't there in the first place (absent a trusted
signature system), or the key doesn't exist, or the wrong key is
offered, or the sender put the same e-dollar on all 60000 mails sie
sent and it's already been redeemed.
- -- 
           Roy M. Silvernail     [ ]     roy@scytale.com
DNRC Minister Plenipotentiary of All Things Confusing, Software Division
PGP Public Key fingerprint =  31 86 EC B9 DB 76 A7 54  13 0B 6A 6B CC 09 18 B6
      Key available from pubkey@scytale.com, which works now

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMwXqzxvikii9febJAQHv7QP9HQ+S3dZ+MCOTfUJYZwQ/l7xDU83RUIZI
IMve5eFvBbSHabXacwM//1dHmWVpMqVpfN7kchXm/N+vsEqpGMGgNkNj7dGZdoWn
NN6cHkDHJywgnlhT62BZ0u6n2lb4wJcKMaGn63bnmHCRSUN9HwUCKFrFXi72s08r
sxju8mXi8N0=
=4Skg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Roy M. Silvernail wrote:
> > Clearly, spammers who pay their readers to read their messages (and who
> > do get them to read) will have a very high response rate. That may 
> > justify adding postage to their letters.
> 
> It should also spur development of intelligent agents which can retrieve
> this cash without human intervention.  Spammers will doubtless alter
> their pages to require more interaction to find the key to the cash.
> Then the IA's will be improved.  Then... remember the copy protection
> wars?  This isn't necessarily a negative point.
> 
> > The advantages are obvious. The disadvantage is a possibility of someone
> > stealing the money on the way, if the letters are not encrypted.
> 
> Or that the money wasn't there in the first place (absent a trusted
> signature system), or the key doesn't exist, or the wrong key is
> offered, or the sender put the same e-dollar on all 60000 mails sie
> sent and it's already been redeemed.

Well, if the trusted party performs the encryption by both recipient's
public key and the "retrieval key", the problem that you mention can 
be avoided.

	- Igor.

At 10:19 AM -0600 2/15/97, Roy M. Silvernail wrote:

>I much prefer the plan where a potential mail correspondant includes an
>e-cash dollar directly cashable by me.  If I like the mail (and the
>sender), I throw the dollar away and the sender goes on the approved
>list.  If not, I keep the dollar, and the sender goes on the twit list.
>Paper junk mail costs an advertiser more than $1 per piece, so they'd
>still be getting a bargain.  And potentially, some receivers may throw
>away the dollar and welcome the spam.

The basic flaw in all of these schemes is that they are "top-down"
solutions, imposed on the market for invented reasons.

The reason paper mail "spam" (advertisements, solicitations, whatever)
costs whatever it costs (hint: less than a dollar...check the Bulk Rate
prices, and look for the 8-cent and 16-cent stamps on many of the
solicitations) is because this is what the Postal Service charges.

Granted, the USPS is hardly a free market player, and uses force to keep
out competitors, but the general principle is that some semi-market-based
fee is charged, and larger packages will cost more, etc.

The basic flaw with e-mail is that the senders of e-mail are not paying for
carriage.

However, just "making up" a fee--as Roy does here, and as Jim Bell and
others have done before--is not a solution either. Nor does it stand any
chance of being "enforced" (for a large number of reasons I won't get into
here).

I don't expect any solutions anytime soon, but I certainly will not push
for "synthetic" prices which do not solve the underlying problem.

--Tim May




Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside"
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."