1. Naftaly Minsky Computer Science Department Rutgers University Reducing Spam by Not Sending it or Can the Spam “Arms Race” be Won?

2. 2 N. Minsky---pervasive computing, Oct. 07 The Spam “Arms Race” and its Discontent  The effectiveness of the anti-spam efforts is impressive.  Yet, there is an arms race between spammers and anti-spammers—with no end in sight.  The harmful effects of this arms race:  It undermines the credibility of email, due to: the false-positive results of filtering. the black-listings created by unregulated vigilantes [Lessig. Code, Version 2.0, 2006].  The overall traffic of spam seems to be increasing.

3. 3 The Elements of Anti-Spam Measures 1. The content of messages. 2. The reputation of email senders & ESPs 3.The “spam immune” email-sending protocols, which are unlikely to generate spam.  payment protocols (e.g., stamps);  rate limiting protocols ;  opt-out and opt-in protocols.  The immune sending protocols have only a minor impact so far—but it is our focus here. N. Minsky---pervasive computing, Oct. 07

4. 4 Making Spam-Immune Sending Protocols Useful for Reducing Spam  Claim: immune protocols can help reduce spam, if the receiver of an email can recognize the protocol that generated it.  We call such an ability “law-based trust” (or L-trust) which is the basis for the proposed trustworthy Self Regulation (TSR) email.  L-trust is provided by LGI, but conventional realizations of i-protocols have hard time satisfying it. N. Minsky---pervasive computing, Oct. 07

5. 5 The concept of law-based trust (L-trust) Under TSR 1.there is a language for writing message-sending protocols (TSR-laws). 2.There is an SMTP-compliant mechanism for sending emails subject to any given TSR-law L. 3.Definition [L-trust] : The recipient of an email has an L-trust in it, if it can determine with reasonably justified confidence, whether or not it is a TSR-email; and if so, it can identify the law under which this message has been sent. N. Minsky---pervasive computing, Oct. 07

6. 6 Naïve Support for L-Trust  For a single law L1:  use a TCB (T L1 ) to mediate sending under a stateful law L1. N. Minsky---pervasive computing, Oct. 07 L1 S * It is badly unscalable

7. 7 N. Minsky---LaSMAA07workshop March,07 Support for L-Trust via Distributed TCB (DTCB) users the DTCB of TSR Alice Bob adopt(L) L SxSx TALTAL Conjecture: A DTCB can be made more dependable, and more secure, than centralized TCB. m ==> Bob Such a DTCB can be used for much more than TSR-email, like: e-commerce, governance of enterprise systems, security of grids, etc

8. 8 A Paid Postage Law (P)—an Example  A user Alice (A) who intends to send P-emails, starts by adopting a controller T A P and instructs it to purchases 1000 stamps from a specified stamp vendor, saving the term stamps(1000) in the state of T A P.  Alice sends her P-email via controller T A P, which would forward an email only if it has at least one stamp in its state; and every email sent by this controller would consume one of its stamps.  No stamps are sent to the target of the message, and none is required. N. Minsky---pervasive computing, Oct. 07

9. 9 Realization of Stamp-Based Email N. Minsky---pervasive computing, Oct. 07 MSA-mail submission agent MDA-mail delivery agent

10. 10 Spam Reduction via Incremental Deployment of TSR-Based Email  Assuming that the controllers designed for mediating TSR- email are provided broadly over the Internet  Several TSR-laws will become popular for their immunity.  Substantial number of users will choose one or more i-laws for preferential treatment. And standards will develop for publishing the preferred i-laws of users.  Email users would increasingly employ TSR for sending email, subject to a preferred law by each destination.  two reasons to believe that these trends would materialize:  It is a win-win proposition  TSR-email can be used together with traditional email.  TSR can ultimately be made into the standard N. Minsky---pervasive computing, Oct. 07

11. 11 On the Deployment of the DTCB of TSR  A wide ranging deployment of the DTCB of TSR is a formidable proposition.  But it is the same DTCB that underline LGI, which has a wide range of applications.  Such as securing B2B commerce, supporting the governance of enterprise systems, and of grid-like federations of institutions.  It is for the sake of this type of critical applications that such a DTCB may end up being deployed over the Internet, enabling TSR-email as well. N. Minsky---pervasive computing, Oct. 07

12. 12 Conclusion  I am seeking help for the implementation of TSR email, and for experimenting with it.  A Draft paper can be found in my webcite: http://www.cs.rutgers.edu/~minsky/index.html under “selected papers”; it is entitled: “ Reducing Spam via Trustworthy Self Regulation by Email Senders” N. Minsky---pervasive computing, Oct. 07

13. Questions? Thank You.