An Online ID Registry 278
Neil Gunton writes "Over the years I have had a few ideas for websites which would allow for free registration and trial, but I always ran up against a brick wall with regard to how to stop people from re-registering as someone else once the trial was up, or registering multiple times for abusive purposes. The question of how to verify online identity has been bugging me for a while now, so eventually I just sat down and wrote a prototype for an Online ID Registry. There's a white paper explaining what it's all about. I am curious to know what the slashdot crowd thinks of all this, whether I am on the right track, and what to do next. Should it be for-profit or non-profit? Is the whole thing pointless and stupid, or a cool idea? I don't really know where to take it next, because I don't really want to be sitting at home verifying people's documentation for free, and I am nervous about the security and legal aspects if I do it for money. I have no clue how to set up a non-profit organization, and my business knowledge is almost non-existent. I am sort of stuck with a working website but nowhere to go with it... that is, if it's even worth going anywhere. Perhaps it was just an interesting exercise... thoughts and ideas welcomed. (Note: The server may get a little slow, since while I have a caching reverse proxy front end, people will inevitably be trying out the registration, which involves key generation and other cpu intensive activities, so I don't really know how well the mod_perl backend will stand up...)"
Interesting choice of words... (Score:4, Funny)
Not anymore you don't. Problem solved!
how do i know (Score:5, Funny)
online registration (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Centralization (Score:2, Funny)
I'm trying to imagine what an athiest newsletter might have to say every month...
"Supreme Being: Still Made Up" or something like that?
Re:how do i know (Score:4, Funny)
Oops
How Dare You Solve My "Problem!" (Score:4, Funny)
Which is to say: GO, MAN, GO....!!!
Re:In Finland banks do this (Score:2, Funny)
Re:My random thoughts.... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Given That... (Score:1, Funny)
Is that you, Mr. Ashcroft?
easy solution (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Why? (Score:3, Funny)
As for number 2, make it part of a ruleset (like SpamAssassin), and it can be adopted gradually. For fun, here's the whole form:
(in short, all potential implementation problems that are difficult in and of themselves. The worst being identity theft via worm or virus. But, if he got a perfect solution to his problem, it could solve spam problems right quick.)
----
Your post advocates a
(x) technical ( ) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
(x) Users of email will not put up with it
( ) Microsoft will not put up with it
( ) The police will not put up with it
( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
(x) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
( ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
( ) Open relays in foreign countries
( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
( ) Asshats
( ) Jurisdictional problems
( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
(x) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
(x) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
( ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
(x) Extreme profitability of spam
(x) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
( ) Technically illiterate politicians
( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
( ) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
( ) Outlook
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
(x) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical
( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
( ) Blacklists suck
(x) Whitelists suck
( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
( ) Sending email should be free
(x) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
( ) I don't want the government reading my email
( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
(x) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!
Re:Step One: Use a Secure Server... (Score:2, Funny)