I think the interaction on this topic has been fairly healthy and Paul's
done a good job of summarizing what to do next. I do believe that
techniques using a 550/NSU response are effective in truly reducing spam
attacks over time and would be more than willing to assist w/ a research
project as has been outlined.
And the note on marketing sounding messages has been taken and will
comply. So if we can get a few to step up and participate, lets roll.
We're using the domain "cyber-hawaii.com", which is an old (9 yrs)
domain with several old users that collective get a good spam volume. We
can create additional fresh accounts on this domain to support the tests
below.
Peter Kay
President of Noticably Absent Marketing Messaged Organization
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Judge [mailto:paul(_dot_)judge(_at_)ciphertrust(_dot_)com]
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 8:25 PM
To: 'Alan DeKok'; 'asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org'
Subject: RE: [Asrg] 2.a.1 Analysis of Actual Spam Data -
Titan Key reduces spam attacks
I think the point of Peter's measurement is not an overall
comparison of 'spam products' as Alan seems to be suggesting.
It is to look at the effect of spam response on future spam volume.
We've already established that the measurement needs:
1. larger sample; ideally all the accounts receive exactly
the same spam initially 2. a control set 3. possibly other
variables such as systems with other responses such as DSN,
no response, or challenge/response etc 4. longer period of
time to account for the large short-term fluctations in spam volume
Peter has volunteered to do this analysis as a member of this
research group. The call for a third-party evaluation is
unfounded. Sure, in every area of life, folks like to see
their work be successful; however, you have to assume that
each contributor has a level of integrity that assures that
sound process will be used and factual data will be
presented. At the same time, I'm sure Peter will be sure to
not use such marketing-sounding email subjects in the future.
-----Original Message-----
From: Alan DeKok [mailto:aland(_at_)freeradius(_dot_)org]
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 5:08 PM
To: asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [Asrg] 2.a.1 Analysis of Actual Spam Data -
Titan Key reduces spam attacks
"Peter Kay" <peter(_at_)titankey(_dot_)com> wrote:
I think you've laid out a good foundation. We would be happy to
provide reasonable computing/account/domain/etc resources
to assist.
I think for transparency, it would be better to have a third party
(non-vendor) do the data collection.
What I would suggest is to collect the data with respect to
the use of your product, and to make that data public, where
possible. If a few vendors do that, then it will not only be
easier to compare solutions, it will be easier to see where
ASRG should focus its efforts.
Alan DeKok.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg