Magnus Holmgren wrote:
On Friday 03 November 2006 19:36, Marc Perkel took the opportunity to say:
IMAP requires a password. SMTP it's optional. I think that consumer SMTP should be replaced with not only something that requires a password, but that the user has to log into the account that they are sending email from. SMTP doesn't have to be tied to IMAP accounts. If you have an SMTP account you can spoof anyone. My idea with IMAP sending is to deny the ability of the sender to use a different email address that the one that they are logged into. This is to prevent spam and spoofing.
You never give up, do you? Every time you propose submission by IMAP many people tell you that there is no fundamental difference between that and authenticated SMTP.
I remembered another recent neverending thread "The future of email is SQL" by the same author. One of these days he'll hit on a million dollar idea. This ain't it tho... So please stop wasting Timo's precious time with it! Thanks, Ken A. Pacific.Net
Every ISP in the world, including the large-scale
spammers who act as ISPs themselves, would have to employ suitable policies to avoid transmitting spoofed email. SMTP will still be used to transmit the mail to its destinations. Real authenticity is achieved using digital signatures, e.g. DKIM, in combination with SPF and your personal trust preferences. For example, GMail allows their users to send mail from any email address they can demonstrate that they own. That's good, that's what yoy want, and it is completely unrelated to IMAP.