: Push vs. Pull: Implications
: Summary
- 1
-
CLABURN, T.
Big guns aim at spam.
Information Week (Mar. 2004).
- 2
-
DELANY, M.
Domain-based email authentication using public-keys avertised in the
DNS (domainkeys).
Internet Draft (Aug. 2004).
[draft-delany-domainkeys-base-01.txt].
- 3
-
DUAN, Z., DONG, Y., AND GOPALAN, K.
DiffMail: A differentiated message delivery architecture to control
spam.
Tech. Rep. TR-041025, Department of Computer Science, Florida State
University (Oct. 2004).
- 4
-
DUAN, Z., GOPALAN, K., AND DONG, Y.
Receiver-driven extensions to SMTP.
Internet Draft (May 2005).
[draft-duan-smtp-receiver-driven-00.txt].
- 5
-
FU, K.
Personal communication.
MIT, (Mar. 2005).
- 6
-
GOMES, L., CAZITA, C., ALMEIDA, J., ALMEIDA, V., AND MEIRA, W.
Charactering a spam traffic.
In Proceedings of IMC'04 (Oct. 2004).
- 7
-
GRAHAM, P.
A plan for spam.
http://www.paulgraham.com/spam.html (2003).
- 8
-
JUELS, A., AND BRAINARD, J.
Client puzzles: A cryptographic defense against connection depletion
attacks.
In Proceedings of NDSS-1999 (Networks and Distributed Security
Systems) (Feb. 1999).
- 9
-
KLENSIN, J.
Simple mail transfer protocol.
RFC 2821 (Apr. 2001).
- 10
-
LAURIE, B., AND CLAYTON, R.
"Proof-of-Work" proves not to work.
http://www.apache-ssl.org/proofwork.pdf (May 2004).
- 11
-
LYON, J., AND WONG, M.
Sender ID: Authenticating e-mail.
Internet Draft (Aug. 2004).
[draft-ietf-marid-core-03.txt].
- 12
-
RBL.
Real-time spam black lists (RBL).
http://www.email-policy.com/Spam-black-lists.htm.
- 13
-
RISHI, V.
Free lunch ends: e-mail to go paid.
The Economic Times (Feb. 2004).
- 14
-
SANDVINE INCORPORATED.
Trend analysis: Spam trojans and their impact on broadband service
providers (June 2004).
- 15
-
THE WASHINGTON POST.
FCC sets sights on mobile phone spam (Mar. 2004).
- 16
-
BERNSTEIN, D.
Internet Mail 2000 (IM2000).
http://cr.yp.to/im2000.html.