[jadmin] Re: Google Talk federation policy proposal

[Fabio Forno]

Florian Jensen wrote:
> Well, same with eMail. But Blacklist don't bring alot. I am sure Fabio the 
> moment you put up a Blacklist network you will be able to override it will 
> come out. Best example: DynDNS. Just change your domain! It is free! Ok ... 

But it requires time for registering and in case of intolerable abuses
entire domains can be banned. I do not mean defeat all spam, I think
it's impossible, but if blacklists are quickly distributed and updated
spammers sending tons of unsolicited messages can have a hard life. It's
just a question of economy: you don't send spam if it cost you too much
in term of maney or work (that is money) if the benefit is too small ;)

> maybe IP blocking? No, most hackers don't have a static IP and just reset 
> their Router / Modem. Not to mention Proxies. There are million ways to 
> override blacklists.

If fact with IPv6 it will get even worse :/ There the only effective
method should be banning entire subnets

> The great thing about Jabber is that there is NO real supervising power. 
> Everyone is free to do what he wants! If Google uses such a standard they 
> will make sure that something like this will not happen on their Servers. 
> Even internally!
> They will surely already have a protection in development. And maybe they will 
> make it publically available soon. 
> Google can't permit themselves to bring an unsecure System on the market! They 
> have too much to use and developping such an extension doesn't cost much for 
> them.

I forsee a problem. Such solution sounds like a version of Spam
Assassin for IM. But IM needs instantaneity and bayesian filters can
introduce load and delays in queues. Mail systems can afford such
delays, IM can't.

-- 
Fabio Forno, PhD
Istituto Superiore Mario Boella
Jabber ID: xmpp:ff at kamin.polito.it
** Try Jabber http://www.jabber.org