Vendors spamming NANOG attendees

bzs at theworld.com bzs at theworld.com
Thu Jun 15 18:09:58 CST 2017


On June 14, 2017 at 14:22 goemon at sasami.anime.net (Dan Hollis) wrote:
 > On Wed, 14 Jun 2017, bzs at theworld.com wrote:
 > > Merely deciding not to patronize them may not be sufficient and that's
 > > why we make that sort of thing just outright illegal rather than hope
 > > market forces will suffice.
 > 
 > Most spam is sent from compromised machines anyway, so there are already 
 > criminal violations involved in sending spam.

FWIW I believe the context was a vendor spamming NANOG attendees (see
the Subject:) so not likely being done from compromised machines.

That said, yes, a lot of spam is sent from compromised machines as you
say.

But criminal violations can be additive, even rising to things like
RICO charges (a pattern of organized criminal behavior etc.) which can
be both criminal and civil and added onto charges like the criminality
of specific mechanisms (compromised systems etc.)

It really depends on how interested one can get the legal machinery in
the problem. Thus far that's hit or miss. I can't find any instance
where RICO charges were used against a spam gang tho, at least on a
quick search.

-- 
        -Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die    | bzs at TheWorld.com             | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD       | 800-THE-WRLD
The World: Since 1989  | A Public Information Utility | *oo*


More information about the NANOG mailing list