ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: spam (fwd) (edit error on previous)

2003-05-26 16:52:56
On Tue, 27 May 2003, Anthony Atkielski wrote:

Dean writes:

Of these types of spam, Type 1 and Type 2
can be dealt with by law ...

Not on a worldwide network.  No organization or government has worldwide
jurisdiction.

They don't need worldwide juridiction.  They have control over products
sold in their jurisdiction, and the transfer of money into and out of
those jurisdictions.  Many countries have extradition treaties.

What is unclear is how much of the total spam
is due to each of these types.  A lot of the spam
that I recieve, and I have kept all this for
some time now, appears to be from type 3B.

Almost everything I get seems to be Type 1, although I don't look at it very
closely.

Perhaps you should look more closely.

I note that helllabs.com.ua makes false and
misleading claims that relays and proxies are free.

What is false about such claims?

That they are free. First, only the owner of the service can make
definitive statements about the price of the service. False statements
made by others are just that, false.  Newspaper stands and sidewalk vendor
carts are also unsecured, but taking their products without permission or
payment is theft. Telling others that they can take those products without
paying is solicition of a crime at worst, and false advertising and
trademark infringement at best.  Telephone systems can also have open
relay services configured, but it is well established that unuathorized
use is toll fraud.

But what protocols can be specified to reduce or
eliminate spam?

Almost none.  The problem is that spam is in the eye of the beholder.
Catching it with machine intelligence is practically impossible.  It's like
trying to scan messages for sarcasm.

True.


                --Dean