Just wondering, how would it be cracked?
If I had a complete message, that included sender name and receiver name plus text. Therefore to send a mail to 10 people (even same text) requires 10 computations (different receiver text).
I have an (updatable) algorithm on the sender side and the receiver side. The sender requires 30 seconds of computing, the reciever requires 1 second.
How would you send 100 emails without computing 100 times?
There is nothing to be cracked!
Instead of putting the effort of defining spam on the user, put the effort to defining non-spam. This could be be done quite easily, maybe in a method that would be "expensive" to spamitize.
Create an algorithm, similar to sha1, but that can be calculated with any given number of calculations. Perhaps make it easier to decompute than compute.
So, when sending a mail, attach a CPU cost of lets say 20 seconds. (X number of calculations)
When your friend receives the mail, he spends 2 seconds checking the calculation (or maybe 20, does it matter?) And then accepts it is probably not spam.
Thus, a spammer, in order to spam, would need a reallly fast computer! This would cost money, etc. I'm guessing that spammers probably have cheap equipment anyway, so calculating their message tag would be much more time-consuming than an average joe?
Space astronaut Vassily Argonof from Russia confirmed that the SpaceStation Alpha has been experiencing technical difficulties, but added, "do not worry, it is nothing a little _duck-tape_ cannot fix."
I remember my highschool physics teacher declaring "Discover is pornography for scientists." Hmm.. and no, I'm not still in highschool..:)
Although sometimes, man, school is wasted on kids. Not that _high_school_ was anything worth remembering. But the idea of spending 8 hours a day, doing virtually nothing but dreaming and socializing.
I wonder if they will invent "teenage hormones" for popular ingestion.. "Want to feel like god and suicidal concurrently, try our new T3 pill."
I also had a bad experience at the San Francisco CompUSA on Market street. Never buy there, use the silly macs and then move on!
Most unbeleivably annoying, condescending salesman I've ever met. And then, the manager was just as bad. I was trying to buy a Viao without their incredibly expensive warranty, and boy, they just wouldn't have it!
Luckily I eventually got a ThinkPad which rocks.
I WAS successful in convincing friends not to buy there though.
Slashdot Mirror
I just can't beleive the audacity of these guys.
r ce_QandA .html
..... hahahahahaha - rediculous.
Read their faq and have a laugh.
http://www.sco.com/scosource/Final_SCOsou
It seems as if they wish linux to be "SCO/GNU/Linux"
Just wondering, how would it be cracked? If I had a complete message, that included sender name and receiver name plus text. Therefore to send a mail to 10 people (even same text) requires 10 computations (different receiver text). I have an (updatable) algorithm on the sender side and the receiver side. The sender requires 30 seconds of computing, the reciever requires 1 second. How would you send 100 emails without computing 100 times? There is nothing to be cracked!
Here's a possibly novel spam solution.
Instead of putting the effort of defining spam on the user, put the effort to defining non-spam.
This could be be done quite easily, maybe in a method that would be "expensive" to spamitize.
Create an algorithm, similar to sha1, but that can be calculated with any given number of calculations. Perhaps make it easier to decompute than compute.
So, when sending a mail, attach a CPU cost of lets say 20 seconds. (X number of calculations)
When your friend receives the mail, he spends 2 seconds checking the calculation (or maybe 20, does it matter?) And then accepts it is probably not spam.
Thus, a spammer, in order to spam, would need a reallly fast computer! This would cost money, etc. I'm guessing that spammers probably have cheap equipment anyway, so calculating their message tag would be much more time-consuming than an average joe?
-- What do you think?
Space astronaut Vassily Argonof from Russia confirmed that the SpaceStation Alpha has been experiencing technical difficulties, but added, "do not worry, it is nothing a little _duck-tape_ cannot fix."
I remember my highschool physics teacher declaring "Discover is pornography for scientists." Hmm.. and no, I'm not still in highschool.. :)
Although sometimes, man, school is wasted on kids. Not that _high_school_ was anything worth remembering. But the idea of spending 8 hours a day, doing virtually nothing but dreaming and socializing.
I wonder if they will invent "teenage hormones" for popular ingestion.. "Want to feel like god and suicidal concurrently, try our new T3 pill."
Ramble, ramble, ahh good old Francis Kanner.
Most unbeleivably annoying, condescending salesman I've ever met. And then, the manager was just as bad. I was trying to buy a Viao without their incredibly expensive warranty, and boy, they just wouldn't have it!
Luckily I eventually got a ThinkPad which rocks.
I WAS successful in convincing friends not to buy there though.
don't look at egg-troll's link, ugh. pure barf... How long will it take for that image to wear off?
-I should've guessed-