[13093] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jay R. Ashworth)
Tue Oct 28 18:51:49 1997
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 18:32:54 -0500
From: "Jay R. Ashworth" <jra@scfn.thpl.lib.fl.us>
To: David Bowie <dbowie@bbnplanet.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <34565394.51CA@bbnplanet.com>; from David Bowie <dbowie@bbnplanet.com> on Tue, Oct 28, 1997 at 04:05:24PM -0500
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@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
