Re: Spam

On Sat, 31 May 2003 21:54:17 CDT, "Eric A. Hall" said:

> One of the potential benefits of binding IP address to the host identity
> would be enforcement. A spammer may be able to crank millions of
> identities into thousands of domains, but they will only ever have a
> handful of servers and that smaller subset would be significantly easier
> to enforce against, at least until they move.
We're starting to see the rise of zombie networks of trojaned machines to
send spam, similar to the DDoS networks.  Which makes Paul Vixie's comments
even more important:

On Sun, 01 Jun 2003 02:14:07 +0000, Paul Vixie said:
> knowing the intent of the owner of the host is important.  we can't
> tolerate any more hosts which become open proxies or open relays by
> virtue of having swallowed an ms-outlook script-cookie pif-file.  if
> a host hasn't made its intent to send e-mail known through a trusted
> framework, then there's no reason for me to accept a tcp session from
> it.  (credit goes to margie arbon of maps for proving this to me.)

pgpjI7sIa2O3U.pgp
Description: PGP signature