Should the abuse reporting standard also cover inquiries regarding email
that should be getting through but is not? I understand that the intent
is to facilitate abuse complaints for spam received, but the other side
of the coin - regardless of what becomes standard for regulating email
delivery (encrypted email, sender authentication, consent system,
etc...), is that much contact may need to be made for email that is
failing to be appropriately delivered.
Should the Abuse Reporting Standard also coordinate inquiries about mail
failing delivery, whether by systematic failure, intentional blocking,
or whatever by that ISP?
The intent of an abuse reporting standard would be to allow ISP's to
efficiently handle complaints. Regarding email delivery failure, would
a uniform and well-formed inquiry into the ISP at the appropriate place
so their abuse staff can manage it appropriately be useful as well?
ISP's have generally been happy to provide such information. Yahoo! for
example has a specific address, bulkmailinquiry(_at_)yahoo(_dot_)com where they
accept these inquiries as well as some web forms.
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/mail/bulk/bulk-01.html
http://add.yahoo.com/fast/help/us/mail/cgi_bulkmail
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/mail/defer/defer-01.html
http://add.yahoo.com/fast/help/us/mail/cgi_defer
Having a common standard seems like a good thing.
Thx!
Tom
Tom Bartel
303.642.4104
-----Original Message-----
From: asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org [mailto:asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org]
On
Behalf Of Art Pollard
Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 10:28 PM
To: John Levine; Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [Asrg] 7. BCP - Abuse Reporting standard
I agree with John. Furthermore, I think it is a great idea
and should be
pursued.
I use Eudora for my Windows mail client (so I don't suffer
from all the
trojans that are so prolific with Outlook). When I try to
forward spam to
the various abuse departments, Eudora almost always if it is
HTML mail
succeeds in munging the original message sometimes making me
wonder how
useful it is to the abuse department. (This is caused by the
HTML being
loaded into Eudora and then being saved back out again -- as
if it were
composed in Eudora and not in its original format.) I wouldn't be
surprised if this were not an isolated case as far as mail
readers go. The
standard should ensure that the original spam is sent back to
the abuse
department in its entirety including full headers obviously
and not some
reconstruction by the mail client.
I think that Mime parts would be the way to go. Furthermore,
I think a
standard reporting address should be specified. Most have settled on
abuse(_at_)domainname(_dot_)com but not all and it is only an informal
standard at best.
If an ISP were able to in real time analyze the complaints,
they could
compare the messages that were forwarded in the complaints
against outgoing
mail streams and quickly isolate which user is sending the offending
messages. This could be done by any number of means the most
obvious would
be some sort of Bayesian or vector space model filtering. In
either case,
it would not be too difficult to automate to some degree
relieving the
abuse department from much of the load.
-Art
--
Art Pollard
http://www.lextek.com/
Suppliers of High Performance Text Retrieval Engines.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.558 / Virus Database: 350 - Release Date: 1/2/2004
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.558 / Virus Database: 350 - Release Date: 1/2/2004
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg