EFF whitepaper

Tue Nov 16 13:10:29 UTC 2004

On Mon, Nov 15, 2004 at 02:47:14PM -0800, Tom (UnitedLayer) wrote:
> To me, and people who rely on email for reliable communication, yes absolutely

Email (that is: SMTP or ESMTP) was never been designed for reliable
communication.  It's best-effort.  No more.

(*Should* there be a new Internet mail protocol which provides reliable
communication?  Maybe.  Maybe not.)

However, if you wish email, as presently designed and implemented, to
be more reliable than it presently is, then you must make a total
committment to stopping spam: anything else is just wishful thinking.
To put it another way: if mail is less reliable in 2004 than in,
say, 1994, (and I certainly think it is) then the number one reason
why it is so, by a very wide margin, is spam (whether of the "traditional"
variety or that generated by viruses/worms).

> Collateral damage is unacceptable, period.

Oh, I most certainly agree -- but then again, since nobody is being
"damaged" in any way (something the EFF clearly doesn't understand),
this is not a problem.

Note: all instance of "you" which follow are rhetorical and not intended
to apply to any individual.

If you call me, and I do not accept your call, have I "damaged" you?
No.  I have merely declined to extend you a privilege.

If you send me a letter, and I choose not to accept delivery, have
I "damaged" you?  No.  I have merely declined to extend you a privilege.

If you send me an email message, and I choose to refuse it, have I
"damaged" you?  No.  I have merely declined to extend you a privilege.

        "Global" connectivity (as in, access to OTHERS'
        PRIVATELY OWNED equipment) is a COURTESY and PRIVILEGE
        granted by the owners of that equipment. It is not a
        birthright.
              --- Bruce Gingery

Make nice -- and you will enjoy my generosity, as I will continue to
extend you these privileges.  Don't make nice -- as in permit your
network to be a persistent source of spam and other forms of abuse --
and you can expect at some point that I will stop doing so, as I am not
required to tolerate your incompetence or active collaboration with
abusers (which are indistinguishable from my chair).

To put it another way: if it came from _your_ network on _your_ watch:
it's _your_ spam/abuse.  Not Ralsky's.  Not Richter's.  Not some
pirate-software gang's.  YOURS.  Expect to be held accountable for it.

That may be an unpleasant prospect.  If so, then let me suggest that
if we can see spam entering our networks, you can most certainly
see it leaving yours.  Fix it.  It's not hard.  All it requires are
simple tools such as "root/enable passwords" and "wirecutters".

---Rsk