[66121] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: MS's new antispam idea
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Doug Luce)
Sat Dec 27 02:27:24 2003
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 02:32:36 -0500 (EST)
From: Doug Luce <doug@nanog.con.com>
To: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <2147483647.1072474118@imac-en0.delong.sj.ca.us>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
More than likely, spammers will have their hijacking programs spread out
the load so as to remain unnoticeable. I think that's important to
maintain control over a large number of machines: the jig is up once a
user notices far more lagtime than ever before.
I also think that "make your operating system more secure" is a specious
request. To reduce spam, something as simple as highlighting email from
addresses that you've written before, or that belong to a web-of-trust
involving chains of such authorship, or many other fairly simple schemes
wuld assist to minimize spam. And is something only Microsoft is in a
good position to wield upon us.
Doug
On Fri, 26 Dec 2003, Owen DeLong wrote:
> It's an interesting concept... Now spammers will use a noticeable portion of
> the CPU on the boxes they've hijacked, instead of the currently virtually
> unnoticable portion of the resources, so, in that sense, it might help
> identify
> the owned boxes to their true owners.
>
> However, I think Micr0$0ft could do much more to reduce SPAM if they simply
> made their OS less 0wn-able.
>
> Owen
>
>
> --On Friday, December 26, 2003 2:23 PM +0000 "Stephen J. Wilcox"
> <steve@telecomplete.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3324883.stm
> >
> > Ok so in summary you have to use a bit of CPU to solve a puzzle before it
> > lets you send email.
> >
> > So either this doesn't work because spammers dont actually use their own
> > PCs to send email or we are talking about a whole new mail protocol,
> > either way I'm thinking this isnt going to work and its yet another
> > publicity stunt.
> >
> > Steve
> >
>
>
>
> --
> If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me.
>
