Re: [Asrg] Re: Spam, why is it still a problem?
2006-01-18 01:24:20
In message <63E00039-3AC0-4FAB-ADB3-B856C3FC5B8B(_at_)mail-abuse(_dot_)org>,
Douglas Otis <dotis(_at_)mail-abuse(_dot_)org> writes
Sender ALLOW
Remove sender from Allow list -->
https://www.vqme.com/pk/eh?op=remove_from_allow&From=asrg%2Dbounces(_at_)ietf
.org&VU=bCnsahfkMSAuP8lpCMGeUQ
Block sender -->
https://www.vqme.com/pk/eh?op=block_sender&From=asrg%2Dbounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org&
VU=bCnsahfkMSAuP8lpCMGeUQ
On Jan 17, 2006, at 3:32 PM, Craig Cockburn wrote:
Moving on then to the next stage, if these technologies are still
deemed inadequate because of false positives or an unacceptable
quantity of spam (+ phishing + viruses and worms etc) arriving then
a global upgrade of email in some form needs to happen. Whilst I'm
not denying this is a difficult job I don't think it's quite as hard
as people make out. Especially for those people who find their
legitimate email blocked they could easily be persuaded to join in
some form of sender reputation based framework as there's something
in it for them. e.g.
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/specs/draft-allman-dkim-ssp-01.txt
I find it interesting one would equate protection from email blocking
with SSP.
Sorry about that. With 41 replies already on a normally fairly quiet
list I was trying not to get into individual solutions as this would
presumably increase the volume even more. I was simply trying to say
that some sort of positive rating framework or positive sender
reputation would have something in it for certain senders who for
legitimate reasons are already having genuine mail misclassified.
--
Craig Cockburn ("coburn"). http://www.SiliconGlen.com/
Please sign the Spam Petition: http://www.siliconglen.com/spampetition/
Home to the first online guide to Scotland, founded 1994.
Scottish FAQ, weddings, website design, stop spam and more!
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
|
|