From: Seth Goodman
Sent: June 16, 2004 6:22 PM
Subject: FTC: we need sender authentication before "Do Not Spam"
can work
A couple of comments:
* Mailing standards for solicited bulk mailers:
My concern with moving to a higher standard is
for those e-publishers who have been running
confirmed opt-in mailing lists for a number of
years.
I stand to be corrected on this point, but my
understanding was the implementation of verified
opt-in was to deal with the problem of "joe jobs."
Since SPF responds to this problem, is there a
need to move to a higher standard?
As a side note, whether the standard is
unconfirmed opt-in, confirmed opt-in or verified
opt-in this has not and will not stop abusive
behaviour.
The best I can gather, all verified opt-in does,
given the existing state of email delivery is
make it easier to sort through whether the spam
complaint is legitimate or not.
* Interference by outside groups
I have no love lost for marketing or business
associations which continue to support the
sending of UCE in bulk, which is simply a subset
of UBE.
The objective is to have wide spread and rapid
adoption and implementation of SPF. This in turn
makes it easier to identify and block spam
sources.
But when I read a call in the DMNews for SpamHaus
to step aside and allow the FTC to take over the
Dot Mail proposal, I become concerned as to
intentions.
(Know the opposition is a cardinal rule of
business.)
Yes, I appreciate we are merely having a
discussion on a mailing list about spam and how
to deal with it. And heh, the later is always a
topic which can generate lots of debate.
* Actions by black lists
The concern is not with "spammers rights." Rather
it has to do with solicited emailers ending up as
collateral damage.
"People use them [black lists] because they block
spam and very little, if any, legitimate mail."
Unfortunately, this is not correct:
"SpamCop runs a "blacklist" that is highly
controversial and has proven to be very
unreliable. There are frequent reports of
SpamCop's blacklist erroneously listing confirmed
opt-in email as spam! For these reasons, CAUCE
does not recommend use of the SpamCop blacklist.)"
http://www.cauce.org/about/resources.shtml
Solicited emailers are seeing ever increasing
problems with delivery, while spam levels
continue to soar.
Just as much as the ultimate objective is to
reduce levels of abusive behaviour at the same
time, presumably people want to stop the shooting
of innocents, so we can all "enjoy the common
green again" without being mugged, pillaged and
plundered.
* Classification and Accreditation Services
"Why should we even consider handing the keys to
the castle over to a group of corporations whose
combination of actions and inaction created the
problem in the first place?"
Why then did CAUCE come out in support of TEOS?
Don't take my question in response the wrong way.
I fully respect the sentiment of your question as
put to me.
My concern is this. To many people, the Internet
is a low cost way of getting into business. I am
talking about running simple honest businesses.
These people are not associated with the DMA or
any other large marketing organization.
Just ordinary folks, who want to make a better
life for themselves and in doing so are prepared
to follow some basic rules. No sending of UBE. No
marketing of illegitimate or illegal businesses.
Run a clean business. Give good service for good
value.
Presumably it is not the intention of seeing
these folks shut out of the market place as we
move from an open e-mail system to a closed
e-mail system, or am I mistaken?
John Glube
The FTC Backs Sender Authentication
http://www.learnsteps4profit.com/dne.html
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Send us money! http://spf.pobox.com/donations.html
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate
your subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.701 / Virus Database: 458 - Release Date: 07/06/2004
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.701 / Virus Database: 458 - Release Date: 07/06/2004