Spam Control Considered Harmful

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?  

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
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