Richard D G Cox wrote:
It looks very much as though Michael Ellis <mike(_at_)date(_dot_)com> wrote:
|> {snip}
|>
|>| b) that ISP's and blocklist maintainers be held harmless for
|>| good-faith efforts to block/reduce unwanted email. This includes
|>| deliberate boycotts of non-spamming address space of bandwidth
|>| providers who host spammers in other parts of their address space.
|
| I do not see how you could ask the government to be hands off for ISPs who
| filter or use blocklists but be hands on for those who are spamhaus's or
| poorly maintained security (open relays etc). It really has to be all one
| or the other.
Hey! You've quoted my quote - which I criticized - not what I said!
The spamhausen will very shortly be illegal in Europe. Given the risks
to critical infrastructure (can you say DDOS bots?) then the existence
of any insecure machine on the net should have a legal remedy. Any spam
it sends is trivial compared with the rest of the harm it could do.
All I ask is that governments hold harmless those who share information
on which to base decisions - actual blocking decisions are a matter
between the network and its (recipient) customer.
| And given that those 'data protection' laws have been passed in
| Canada, Europe, Australia and many parts of asia, its doubtful
| you could get them to be hands off about it at all
Data Protection laws do not and will not protect those who commit crimes!
oooops sorry Richard. Was a bit confused there. But also what I meant by the
data protection comment was that it is extremely unlikely that the gov'ts
involved will allow something to be 'above' their new data protection laws given
that they were just put into effect and are considered far -reaching and binding
on all
--
Michael Ellis, IAPP
Privacy Manager
Date.com
Phone (416) 306-0022 ext 620
Fax (416) 306-0023
Date.com - "The New Way To Date"
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg