Re:Quick answers. (Score 2)

1) Searching for a decision analysis tool on the Web, you find a review in which the reviewer raves about a particular product. You buy the product and discover it just doesn't work. You desire to prevent this person's ravings from harming anyone else--and you desire to prevent the product from disappointing anyone else.
First rule of the net. Never trust the word of any single unknown person. Do place some trust in the majority of several dozen opinions underthe (usually correct) assumption that most people are not (a) loons or (b) marketroids for the product you're asking about.

In the 1700's, it was the opnion of experts that bleeding you dry (of blood) was a good way to cure what ails you. Regardless of what ailed you.

The correct answer to prevent this problem would have been either a bonding agent (performance bond) or an escrow agent and Digital Cash

After the fact you use that Unforgable pseudonymous identity and Capability Based blah blah to publically announce your dissatisfaction with their product.

2) A product you buy based on a rave review opens your email address book, grabs your entire list of friends, sends itself to them, and sends your password files to a mysterious IP address. It's too late now, but which features would you install before ever touching your computer again?

Again, Capibility based Security. Someone has to be the first, and with proper security (far beyond what is in either NT or Unix) it doesn't matter.

3) A product is advertised on the Web. It sounds good, but the offerer has no Web reputation. What arrangement would you consider adequate to go ahead and procure the product (Note: there are several possible answers; give 2 entirely separate solutions, and that is considered answering 2 questions).
It's the same question massaged over a bit. See (1) and (2) above.

No, it's a different question--go back and reread the instructions.

In this case there are at least 2 different ways of doing things--both (of course) using digital cash. Either use a bonging agent for a performance bond, or a mix of Escrow agents with Capability Based Security.

4) You start receiving thousands of emails from organizations you don't know, all hawking their wares. You want it to stop, just stop!
Just have procmail route it to /dev/null or bounce it back to the sender. If you have no control over incoming mail, you're using the wrong ISP.
Even better, set up your own domain on your own box on a DSL/cablemodem and stuff like this becomes ever so easy to deal with. Never tell spammers to stop spamming you. That just tells them your address is valid and read by a person which results in more spam.

Of course it's easy to deal with, the QUESTION was what technology--HOWto deal with it. WHICH of the listed technologies would be best used to handle it.

Which does procmail fit in?

None--not as it is today.

The answer--within the provided framework--is a mix of Capability Based Security and Bidirectional, typed....

5) You wish to play poker with your friends. They live in Tampa Florida, you live in Kingman. This is illegal in the nation where you happen to be a citizen. You want to do it anyway.
Look at the intent of the law. Gov't is worried about internet casinos and big $$$. Not you and a couple of buddies. You're not worth the effort, manpower, and $$$ to prosecute. Have a blast.

It's obvious you can read, it's also obvious you either don't bother or can't comprehend what you just read. Read it again, especially the part about:
you live in Kingman. This is illegal in the nation where you happen to be a citizen.

Maybe where "you" lives (the country of kingman) the prohibition against gambling isn't revenue based, but rather that the Great God Of Us All has decreed that Thou Shalt Not Gamble, and the Government has set up monitors (software agents) to look for such behavior.

Now how do you get around it?

Digital Currency and Unforgeablepseudononymous identities

6) You hear a joke that someone, somewhere, would probably find offensive. You wish to tell your precocious 17-year-old daughter, who is a student at Yale. The Common Decency Act Version 2 has just passed; it is a $100,000 offense to send such material electronically to a minor. You want to send it anyway--it is a very funny joke.
Again, look at intent. CDA was built as a tool to stop the XXX hardcore pr0n sites and to catch the pedo-kiddie trollers on the 'net. Who's going to be upset and complain? Sender or recipient? Neither, right? Send the mail.

Who's going to complain? Your daughters roommate, using her computer for a paper reads the email. The System Administrator of your daughters mail server, required by law to troll for CDA violations. The NSA when Echelon picks up your email, and they want an excuse to pressure you into revealing some information or spying on somone one.

Strong encryption solves this problem.

7) Someone claiming to be you starts roaming the Web making wild claims. You want to make sure people know it isn't really you.
This one is a bit harder to solve without some cooperation by others.

This is the easiest of all to solve--the tools already exist, and are already deployed. PGP.

This is the "Unforgeable pseudonymous identity bit.

The rest of your suggestions:

(A) Complain to their abuse dept at the forger's site. Failing that (maybe he is his own domain), go one ISP level up. Repeat until solved or you get to the point where they say "we don't care". (B) Ignore him. He probably gets off upsetting you and laughs as you frantically chase his every newspost or whatever to discredit him. Ignore him and he'll get bored and move on to his next inane diversion. besides, who are you worrying about him confusing? Smart net people can easily recognize forgeries. They'll know it's not you.

Assume that there is a site you can complain to. What if the "forger" is using the remailer network so there is no site for you to complain to? What if this person is making claims that could come back to haunt you (aka comments in alt.nambla or some such)?

8, 9, and 10 can all be solved using a combination of arbitrage agents (for stock), escrow agents and bonding agents--the point of the test was to think in terms of existing/new technologies, not in terms of using authority and The Man to sort things out.

As for 11, if you toss the device aside, both of you (you and your daughter) are dead. If you *use* the device to call for help, to "expose" what is happening to you, then you might get help (especially if you can use some of the other technologies on the list). Your daughter still might die, but you might be able to keep someone elses daugher from doing so.