[INFORMATIONAL] Challenge-Response Systems (was: <snip>)

"alan connor FAQ" wrote:

> Path: <snip>
> Newsgroups: <snip>
> Subject: <snip>
> From: alan connor FAQ <alanconnor@earthlink.net>
> Message-ID: <Spew-from-Alan.slrnedf44o.1dc.i3x9mdw@b29x3m.invalid>
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> References: <slrnedf44o.1dc.i3x9mdw@b29x3m.invalid>
> Date: 08 Aug 2006 05:56:38 GMT
> X-No-Archive: yes
> X-Ac1: Who is Alan Connor?

Me.

> X-Ac2: Alan Connor is the inventor and implementor of the final ultimate
> X-Ac3: solution to the spam problem, and everyone who dares claim otherwise
> X-Ac4: is a spammer.

Nope. Challenge-Response Systems (which is what he is referring
to) were in use long before I ever touched a computer.

Here's a brief introduction to them:

http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/elrav1/cr.html

They are hated by spammers and trolls because they can't beat
them.

> X-Ac5: That is basically the gist of the messages Alan
> sometimes spews into NANAE.

No it isn't.

> X-Ac6: Alan Connor is appearently also active on many other
> newsgroups, including comp.mail.misc.

Well. That's where mail filters are most often discussed.

And where you obviously got the information that you then
distorted.

(Although the group is infested with trolls and I seldom post
there any more.)

> X-Ac7: http://www.pearlgates.net/nanae/kooks/ac/

That website was put up by a spammer/troll who hates
Challenge-Response Systems with a blinding purple passion.

Whom I kept beating in debates on comp.mail.misc, even though he
cheated and used dozens of sockpuppets.

He hates C-R Systems because he can't beat them.

I've never even looked at the site.

The opinions of Internet vermin are of no interest to me, and
like this feeb, they have threat ratings below zero.

The site has been up for years and hasn't slowed me down a bit.


> X-Ac8: ----------------------------------------------------------------
> X-Ac9: So what is he raving about?

Until you started using your Usenet spamming utility to follow me
around the Usenet and post this garbage in response to my every
post, I hadn't even brought up the subject of mail filters in
ages.

> X-Ac10: In reality, Alan's system is known as a
> challenge-response or C/R system;

It's not my system. And there is no reference to my personal
implementation of C-R Systems on my informational webpage at:

http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/elrav1/cr.html

It just isn't an implementation suitable for the average user.

> X-Ac11: it auto-answers incoming email with a challenge and only lets the email
> X-Ac12: through if it receives a valid response.

No. First the mail is sent through a conventional spam filter
which dumps all of the obvious spam, the vast majority of it.

Very few challenges are sent out.

> There are several problems with
> X-Ac13: this concept, but Alan doesn't want to hear them. In addition,

Well. Many ISPs (like Earthlink) and MSPs (mail service
providers) use them. Why don't you discuss it with them?

> X-Ac14: Alan's system isn't even a very good implementation of
> the C/R concept,

Do you mean the C/R concept that you are trying to misinform
people about?

> X-Ac15: as it fails to address the chicken-egg problem that is inherent to C/R:

There is no such thing.

> X-Ac16: What if your C/R system sends a challenge to an email address that is
> X-Ac17: also protected by a C/R system? Because of this, Alan and Timo Salmi,
> X-Ac18: another C/R advocate, are unable to email eachother.

That's incredibly stupid. We exchange mails all the time.

> So basically Alan's X-Ac19: system is a broken implementation
> of a flawed concept.

Would this be the system that you have been trying to bust for
years?

With no success?

Yep. It sure would.

<snicker>

> X-Ac20: ---------------------------------------------------------------

<snip>

> Lines: <snip>
> Xref: <snip>
> X-Received-Date: <snip>

<article not downloaded:
http://slrn.sourceforge.net/docs/README.offline>

Note that this person is using software that only a Usenet
spammer would have.

Alan

--
See my headers.