Spam Control Considered Harmful
Jay R. Ashworth
jra at scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us
Tue Oct 28 23:32:54 UTC 1997
On Tue, Oct 28, 1997 at 04:05:24PM -0500, David Bowie wrote:
> Phil Lawlor wrote:
> > I am not a sendmail expert, but I am told that it is in the forgery area
> > that it could be improved. Forgery and relay hijacking seem to be the
> > largest areas of abuse. If these areas could be improved, it could go a
> > long way to solving the problem.
> I tend to agree with Phil - to a point. Nip it in the bud. Everyone could
> use some strengthening in their AUP and it is up to each ISP to come down
> hard on those who abuse the net.
Indeed. As we noted last month on the topic of ingress filtering, you
have to catch this stuff on the _intake_ side, to have any real hope of
spotting the offenders.
Personally, if the spam isn't forged, and is for a real product, and
doesn't include a stupid bulkmail software ad at the top, I no longer
chase it, I just delete it.
> Ease of use, and the free flow of information must be maintained. Fraud,
> unrepentant misuse, and theft-of-services should result in loss of access.
> Zero-tolerance, and/or a charge structure (fines?) can be levied by ISPs to
> combat the scourge.
Fines on whom? How would you implement this?
Jay R. Ashworth jra at baylink.com
Member of the Technical Staff Unsolicited Commercial Emailers Sued
The Suncoast Freenet "Pedantry. It's not just a job, it's an
Tampa Bay, Florida adventure." -- someone on AFU +1 813 790 7592
More information about the NANOG