Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 06:26:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: John C Klensin <klensin@MCI.NET>
Subject: Re: X-Sender, X-Archive
In-reply-to: <21042.872564369@foxharp.boston.ma.us>
To: pgf@foxharp.boston.ma.us
Cc: drums@cs.utk.edu
Reply-to: John C Klensin <klensin@MCI.NET>
Message-id: <SIMEON.9708260631.P@tp7.Jck.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Priority: NORMAL


On Mon, 25 Aug 1997 22:59:29 -0400 Paul Fox 
<pgf@foxharp.boston.ma.us> wrote:

> anyone with an email account has the resources to forge a piece of email. 
> there are more hurdles for postal mail:  correct postmark and handwriting
> at a minimum.  people have learned to trust postal mail because it _is_
>...

You forgot one: in most countries, altering origins of 
postal mail with the intent of defrauding or misleading is 
a criminal offense.  When forging email is merely juvenile 
behavior and bad taste, and forging postal mail can land 
someone in jail, people tend to take the latter as more 
authentic.   That suggests a path I don't want to go down, 
but the distinction may be useful.

> (on the other hand the recent advent of junk postal mail with personalized
> scrawls in the margins ("Paul -- Thought you'd be interested in this! -- RC")
> have confused and angered many people, because they fall outside the bounds
> of traditional postal mail experience.  but we got used to the personalized
> form letter, and we'll get used to the apparently handwritten version as well.)

Indeed.  Good point.  May even help explain the email 
problem to the naive.  But, per the above, note that these 
advertisers go to considerable lengths to avoid pretending 
to be some specific, existing, entity which they aren't.  
Sending out an advertising letter with a return address of 
"President of the United States, Washington, DC" and 
containing a decent imitation of the canonical stationery 
would have high odds of landing one in *deep* trouble.

   john