Colin the MathmoQuestion: would people tolerate a 'Proof of work' for email? Requires a delay of, say, 30 seconds? Tolerable?
David Bremner@ColinTheMathmo I would consider a delay in email a feature, not a bug. People seem to confuse email with instant messaging. Email is supposed to be asynchronous. I guess some instant messaging tools are also supposed to be asynch, but apparently everything should be like SMS. #getofmylawn
@bremner The system I'm looking and and developing a "proof of concept" for might require it. It's a fully encrypted "dead drop" messaging system that disguises most of the meta-data, as well as the content. But a PoW might be needed to throttle malicious misuse.
@ColinTheMathmo BTW, there is ongoing work on "Memory Hole" for encrypting message metadata in email. Possibly of interest.
@bremner A quick Google turns up too much noise to be certain of which you speak.
@ColinTheMathmo This looks plausible: http://modernpgp.org/memoryhole/
@bremner I don't understand what's going on here - an email has to get delivered, so it needs to have an address. How is that being avoided?
Colour me confused ...
@bremner It looks like all they're doing is encrypting/obscuring things that aren't needed for delivery anyway. Which is fair enough.
What I'm looking at is a system that hides everything. Mostly. Sort of.
@ColinTheMathmo right, different problem spaces, I guess memory hole is only interested where the transport protocol is insecure in certain ways.