spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: SPF and Responsibility

2004-07-21 14:07:24
[David Brodbeck] wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 22:35:30 +0300, Andriy G. Tereshchenko wrote
There is
no reasons for ISPs to support STMP AUTH. They usualy do not care
about spam. Spam is source of thier money. If end-user will spend
more time to recieve his email using dialup - this mean more money
for ISP.

This is only true in places where ISPs bill by the minute.  In the U.S.,
almost no one does anymore.  So spam *does* represent a cost to the ISP,
because it uses up bandwidth without increasing revenue.

LOL. I will buy you a nice 2-story house somewhere in Ukrainian village for 
only 3000-4000 USD.
But you will have to pay for traffic or per minute for Internet access.
I'm pretty sure there are others countries still providing over-priced Internet 
services.
Even more - I'm sure there is some areas in USA with per-MB or per-Minute tarifs
For example McDonalds WiFi. They charge per hour (at least not not so long time 
ago)
McDonalds benefit from spam if you use their WiFi to read your mail.
You will have to buy additional meal or pay for additional hour to continue 
read spam.

Spam is not USA-only problem. It's global.
Even more - I'm pretty sure that most of USA companies can afford legal 
(spam-free) ways to deliver ads.
Legal risks in USA are pretty high. If I was USA company and need to send spam 
- I will hire somebody outside of USA (like
China) to send spam on my behalf.
This way nobody will be able to prove that I've order this. And if they try to 
do so - using international law is extremely
hard (if not impossible ;-).

This is why you see outfits like AOL on the vanguard of anti-spam technology.
Yea... Even I know that AOL is a major source of spam.
No needs for me to renew my B1/B2 visa to visit USA and check this.
AOL has a major PR problem. Take a look on latest AOL Porsche sweepstake.
It was purely PR action.
AOL simply need to clean their brand name. They have nothing against spam in 
general.


Costs to protect users from spam are much higher that possible sales/income 
increase.

There is no way for single ISP to provide spam-free email services without big 
support cost increase.

Technology that will protect all-ISPs (not only you) will not get real support, 
as they do not provide any competive
advantage.



Currently ISPs forced to implement anti-spam solutions or block spammers only 
because of third-party supported block lists.
Third-party lists were able to solve conflict of interests. But even they can 
be used for abuse.
For example forcing users to move from competitor to another services because 
of blacklisting.

NOTICE: This is my _current_ and _personal_ opinion.
It's based on limited amount of information currently available to me.
My opinions can change/evolve over time if additional information related to 
matters described above will be obtained.

It does not represent opinion of my employer.

Quotations of my opinion cannot be done without reference to this notice.
--
Andriy G. Tereshchenko
TAG Software
Odessa, Ukraine
http://www.24.odessa.ua


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>