Close
  • Latest News
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Video
  • Big Data and Analytics
  • Cloud
  • Networking
  • Cybersecurity
  • Applications
  • IT Management
  • Storage
  • Sponsored
  • Mobile
  • Small Business
  • Development
  • Database
  • Servers
  • Android
  • Apple
  • Innovation
  • Blogs
  • PC Hardware
  • Reviews
  • Search Engines
  • Virtualization
Read Down
Sign in
Close
Welcome!Log into your account
Forgot your password?
Read Down
Password recovery
Recover your password
Close
Search
Logo
Logo
  • Latest News
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Video
  • Big Data and Analytics
  • Cloud
  • Networking
  • Cybersecurity
  • Applications
  • IT Management
  • Storage
  • Sponsored
  • Mobile
  • Small Business
  • Development
  • Database
  • Servers
  • Android
  • Apple
  • Innovation
  • Blogs
  • PC Hardware
  • Reviews
  • Search Engines
  • Virtualization
More
    Home Applications
    • Applications
    • Cybersecurity

    Can Computational Problems Stamp Out Spam?

    Written by

    Larry Seltzer
    Published March 21, 2004
    Share
    Facebook
    Twitter
    Linkedin

      eWEEK content and product recommendations are editorially independent. We may make money when you click on links to our partners. Learn More.

      Many people have made the suggestion, without a whole lot of thought behind it, that we could solve the spam problem with a “sender pays” scheme. Just as with snail mail, the sender of an e-mail should pay a “postage” fee. It neednt be large; even a fraction of a penny would change the economics of spam to make it impractical.

      These observers dont often move to the next obvious step of the proposal: Given that the e-mail infrastructure of the Internet doesnt provide for such payments, or even an authentication system to determine who actually sent a message, how would they implement postage? Ive written about this myself in the past. Such petty details are not the concern of big thinkers, I guess.

      Microsoft Research has come up with a different angle on the idea of postage. Their “Penny Black” project describes a system wherein the recipient of a mail message requires that the sender perform some computational task and report on the results. The task neednt be meaningful, but it needs to be nontrivial. The basic idea of the proposal is that sending 1,000,000 messages will cost the sender a lot in terms of computing time. The project is named after the Penny Black postage stamp, which revolutionized snail mail after it was introduced to the British postal system in the 1830s.

      Before I explain more about how it works and how cool it is, Ill point out that there are two main problems with the idea. First, it does little (or, depending on your point of view, nothing) to stop the use of hijacked open-proxy systems for sending spam. (These are systems infected, typically with a worm like SoBig that allows a spammer to take remote control and send spam.) Second, its not a replacement for an authentication system like Sender Policy Framework or caller ID or Yahoos Domain Keys, and in an environment where one or more of those schemes are implemented, Penny Black loses most of its appeal.

      Next page: Gumming up the spam factories.

      Tripping up spammers

      But, ignoring those (ahem) minor issues, Penny Black is really a slick idea. The compute payment would only apply to senders you dont know, so it should not bother you or your regular correspondents. When you, the recipient, receive a message from me, the sender, and Im not on your whitelist, you send me a computational puzzle to solve. Theres enough randomization involved that I really do have to solve the puzzle on a case-by-case basis. Only when I send you the correct result will you accept the message from me. If the computation is complex enough, it will take far longer to send large numbers of unsolicited messages than it does now, throwing a monkey wrench into the economics of spam.

      The nature of the problem that the sender has to solve is central to the idea of Penny Black. The problem isnt a classic problem-solving computation; it is a problem designed to take a particular amount of time, no matter the speed of the CPU. So when they say there is a cost in computing time, they mean it. Microsoft is specifically proposing “about 10 seconds” of compute power. That would mean a 10-second delay for the sender on his or her system. (Im assuming that with task prioritization this neednt be a system-modal 10 seconds in which nothing else is happening but that it will consume 10 seconds of the CPU over some period of time.)

      There are 60*60*24=86,400 seconds in a day. Divided by 10 seconds, that means that one CPU could send no more than 8,640 messages per day. Of course, the real number is less than that because the CPU will have more to do than just Penny Black problems. Microsoft says that spammers would have to invest heavily in CPU resources, and the company is betting they cant. By the way, this 10-second figure is only a proposal and would certainly have to be agreed upon by the community at large.

      Lets think about it another way: Right now the cost to send 1 million e-mails is between trivial and nothing. 1,000,000 divided by 8,640 equals just less than 116, so the cost under a Penny Black system is more than 115 CPU days. Thats nontrivial.

      Next page: Microsoft Research chimes in.

      Thoughts from Microsoft Research

      I asked Microsoft about the problem I mentioned above with respect to hijacked open-proxy systems, and I got this response from Ted Wobber and Cynthia Dwork, both senior researchers at Microsoft Research, Silicon Valley:

      “Hijacking of end-user systems poses today, and always will pose, problems for all sorts of anti-spam solutions (among other things). Adding computational puzzle-solving will make intrusion much more noticeable, so users will 1) notice and 2) have added incentive to protect their computers. In addition, computational puzzle-solving will severely reduce the rate at which spammers can send spam from hijacked machines. Thus, even if spammers manage to capture an order of magnitude (or two) more machines than they have today, the Internet on the whole should still see less spam.“
      Both are good points, but are they good enough?. Im pretty sure that most users infected long-term with worms like SoBig are oblivious to such problems and will take their compute-power beating with a virtual “Thank you sir, may I have another.” But Wobber and Dwork are right when they say that if the postage is high enough, these systems wont be able to send anywhere near as much spam.

      But whats the point of all this when authentication systems are far easier to implement? Unlike Penny Black, they dont require any changes to the user mail software. Lets assume that authentication systems do authenticate properly. They still leave the possibility of spammers sending spam from authenticated systems without all the spoofing they currently use. Authentication advocates (thats me, folks) generally presume that some such spam would get through, but that reputation systems would quickly pick up on authenticated spammer domains and get the word out on them. Penny Black could then be a useful alternative to stop such spam from being practical.

      Im a big fan of authentication, in large part because it requires no changes at all in the client software, as Penny Black does. So even though Penny Black makes authentication work better, I cant get too excited about it. It would be hard to get all the server changes invoked to make authentication work. Getting Penny Black to work requires a brain transplant on the whole e-mail infrastructure. Whatever its merit, its right up there in likelihood with pigs flying, Castro declaring free elections and a Cubs-Red Sox World Series.

      Security Center Editor Larry Seltzer has worked in and written about the computer industry since 1983.

      /zimages/2/28571.gifCheck out eWEEK.coms Security Center at http://security.eweek.com for security news, views and analysis.
      Be sure to add our eWEEK.com security news feed to your RSS newsreader or My Yahoo page: http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/us/my/addtomyyahoo2.gif

      More from Larry Seltzer

      Larry Seltzer
      Larry Seltzer
      Larry Seltzer has been writing software for and English about computers ever since—,much to his own amazement— He was one of the authors of NPL and NPL-R, fourth-generation languages for microcomputers by the now-defunct DeskTop Software Corporation. (Larry is sad to find absolutely no hits on any of these +products on Google.) His work at Desktop Software included programming the UCSD p-System, a virtual machine-based operating system with portable binaries that pre-dated Java by more than 10 years.For several years, he wrote corporate software for Mathematica Policy Research (they're still in business!) and Chase Econometrics (not so lucky) before being forcibly thrown into the consulting market. He bummed around the Philadelphia consulting and contract-programming scenes for a year or two before taking a job at NSTL (National Software Testing Labs) developing product tests and managing contract testing for the computer industry, governments and publication.In 1991 Larry moved to Massachusetts to become Technical Director of PC Week Labs (now eWeek Labs). He moved within Ziff Davis to New York in 1994 to run testing at Windows Sources. In 1995, he became Technical Director for Internet product testing at PC Magazine and stayed there till 1998.Since then, he has been writing for numerous other publications, including Fortune Small Business, Windows 2000 Magazine (now Windows and .NET Magazine), ZDNet and Sam Whitmore's Media Survey.

      Get the Free Newsletter!

      Subscribe to Daily Tech Insider for top news, trends & analysis

      Get the Free Newsletter!

      Subscribe to Daily Tech Insider for top news, trends & analysis

      MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

      Artificial Intelligence

      9 Best AI 3D Generators You Need...

      Sam Rinko - June 25, 2024 0
      AI 3D Generators are powerful tools for many different industries. Discover the best AI 3D Generators, and learn which is best for your specific use case.
      Read more
      Cloud

      RingCentral Expands Its Collaboration Platform

      Zeus Kerravala - November 22, 2023 0
      RingCentral adds AI-enabled contact center and hybrid event products to its suite of collaboration services.
      Read more
      Artificial Intelligence

      8 Best AI Data Analytics Software &...

      Aminu Abdullahi - January 18, 2024 0
      Learn the top AI data analytics software to use. Compare AI data analytics solutions & features to make the best choice for your business.
      Read more
      Latest News

      Zeus Kerravala on Networking: Multicloud, 5G, and...

      James Maguire - December 16, 2022 0
      I spoke with Zeus Kerravala, industry analyst at ZK Research, about the rapid changes in enterprise networking, as tech advances and digital transformation prompt...
      Read more
      Video

      Datadog President Amit Agarwal on Trends in...

      James Maguire - November 11, 2022 0
      I spoke with Amit Agarwal, President of Datadog, about infrastructure observability, from current trends to key challenges to the future of this rapidly growing...
      Read more
      Logo

      eWeek has the latest technology news and analysis, buying guides, and product reviews for IT professionals and technology buyers. The site’s focus is on innovative solutions and covering in-depth technical content. eWeek stays on the cutting edge of technology news and IT trends through interviews and expert analysis. Gain insight from top innovators and thought leaders in the fields of IT, business, enterprise software, startups, and more.

      Facebook
      Linkedin
      RSS
      Twitter
      Youtube

      Advertisers

      Advertise with TechnologyAdvice on eWeek and our other IT-focused platforms.

      Advertise with Us

      Menu

      • About eWeek
      • Subscribe to our Newsletter
      • Latest News

      Our Brands

      • Privacy Policy
      • Terms
      • About
      • Contact
      • Advertise
      • Sitemap
      • California – Do Not Sell My Information

      Property of TechnologyAdvice.
      © 2024 TechnologyAdvice. All Rights Reserved

      Advertiser Disclosure: Some of the products that appear on this site are from companies from which TechnologyAdvice receives compensation. This compensation may impact how and where products appear on this site including, for example, the order in which they appear. TechnologyAdvice does not include all companies or all types of products available in the marketplace.

      ×