|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
On Monday 30 September 2002 04:40 pm, gabriel rosenkoetter wrote:
> No, it's most likely no one's concern. There is no reason that Art's
> mail server needs to be even remotely involved for email to appear
> to come from him. This is why we use digital encryption algorithms
> for authentication; source addresses are totally meaningless. IP
> addresses still bear a little bit of weight, but email addresses
> bear none at all.
>
> Unless it's digitally signed, there's no way to prove a given person
> sent something that it appears they sent, and it is demonstrably
> simple to prove that faking it was possible. No court would let
> anything fly based on a source email address. (Cf, topical /.
> headline today.)
Gabe,
What you are saying makes perfect sense to me. Unfortuately, not
everyone receiving mail not-really-from-me has any level of
sophistication.
While no one can PROVE that it was sent by me (since it wasn't), I am
concerned about those who might react -- in whatever way -- believing
that it was me. Ultimately, I'm vindicated, but with what intervening
hassle and inconvenience. That's why I'd like to stop it if I can.
--
_______________________________
Art Alexion
Arthur S. Alexion LLC
mailto:arthur@alexion.com
http://www.alexion.com
_________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.netisland.net/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion -- http://lists.netisland.net/mailman/listinfo/plug
|
|