On July 9, 2003 at 22:08 dhc(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net (Dave Crocker) wrote:
Barry,
BS> This relates to the idea that the only reason spammers can operate
BS> effectively is because they exploit thousands of hijacked computers
BS> which gives them location mobility (not geographic but in ip space.)
I think your line of reasoning is aided by a distinction I've taken to
making, between "rogue" spammers -- who are not accountable and for
which direct controls are not feasible -- versus "responsible" spammers
-- who are accountable, but too aggressive.
I agree that's an important and useful distinction.
One advantage we tend to have with non-rogue spammers is that they are
generally easy to block (their IP sources are relatively stable and
they don't tend to hide their identities), although I'd agree that one
shouldn't have to waste their time blocking them out of exasperation,
life should be more orderly.
I recently had an experience with Apple who was sending one of their
mailing lists to all kinds of addresses here which never could have
existed (e.g., domains which never had email service.)
Requests to remove those addresses and generally clean up their act so
that kind of thing doesn't happen went completely ignored, not even
the usual automated response brush-off.
Oh well, not hard to imagine where that's going...Apple's just going
to get itself blacklisted piece by piece.
But my point is that is, thus far, the major annoyance to me from the
non-rogue are otherwise reasonably legitimate businesses that have
obtained mailing lists from questionable sources and/or won't clean up
their mailing lists, ever, so the number of mailings and user unknowns
just grows and grows as addresses age and die.
But why should they clean up their act? It's just more expense to
them, this way Apple et al can shift their costs to the recipient
systems.
That is, until they're just blacklisted entirely.
The path you are discussing pertains to rogue spammers, not responsible
ones. That does not make it impractical, useless, or the like. It
merely restricts it to one segment, and not the other.
The other has plenty of legal resources, and always will. And they are
a serious problem, too.
I'll add a third class, and maybe a fourth if you want to split hairs:
Nutballs and sociopaths: These are people (or small groups of people)
who exhibit some of the superficial characteristics of spammers (they
send a lot of unwanted mail by automated means), but their purpose is
either unknowable (nutballs) or malicious (sociopaths.)
The problem with these groups are that many, e.g., economic controls
are likely to be useless with them since they seem to have no
commercial purpose.
Although not the biggest problem I think it's more common than people
imagine.
--
-Barry Shein
Software Tool & Die | bzs(_at_)TheWorld(_dot_)com |
http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD
The World | Public Access Internet | Since 1989 *oo*
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg