Lawsuit threat against RBL users

Sean Finn seanf at cisco.com
Thu Nov 19 16:26:42 UTC 1998


At 11:39 PM 11/18/98 -0800, Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
>That's right. It stops the practice of using a sacrificial account, from
>AOL or netcom, to spam for a web-site that is otherwise protected. Does it
>make a difference that they didn't spam from their own ISP? 

Please allow me a moment to ask:

Does it make any difference whether your customer actually originated the 
offending msgs?

Couldn't such a spamset come from one of their competitor? 

Or a chat room hacker that got pissed off?

I understand AUP regarding what actually happens on an account.

Unless the "throwaway" account can be tied to your customer,
then I don't understand the justification for compromising 
service. 

(I personally don't find "it's generally true", or "it's too much trouble",
 or "the end justifies the means" to be especially convincing arguments.)



More information about the NANOG mailing list