From: "Tom Thomson" <tthomson(_at_)neosinteractive(_dot_)com>
Dave Crocker wrote:-
>it would help, for example, to see some sort of analysis that shows that
>spoofed spam is somehow more dangerous than non-spoofed spam.
That's quite easy:
A large proportion of spam is illegal in a large proportion of
hurisdictions.
Illegal spam which is unspoofed and is reported to LEA leads to one less
spammer being able to continue his work.
Illegal spam which is spoofed and is reported to LEA simply wastes LEA time.
So, at least for illegal spam, spoofed spam is worse than unspoofed spam.
I will give you an ever easier example. Spoofed spam is harder to trace,
and thus harder to shut down.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yakov Shafranovich / <research(_at_)solidmatrix(_dot_)com>
SolidMatrix Research, a division of SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"One who watches the wind will never sow, and one who keeps his eyes on
the clouds will never reap" (Ecclesiastes 11:4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg