Re: SPAM bill - ineffective government regulation ??
From: David MacQuigg (shuvit_at_127.0.0.1)
Date: 12/11/03
- Next message: Robert L. Bass: "Re: help me!!"
- Previous message: Victor Bazarov: "Re: My hotmail account has been hacked"
- In reply to: Bill Unruh: "Re: SPAM bill - ineffective government regulation ??"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 13:13:20 -0700
On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 11:34:36 +0000 (UTC), unruh@string.physics.ubc.ca
(Bill Unruh) wrote:
>David MacQuigg <shuvit@127.0.0.1> writes:
>
>]Here are my suggestions:
>]1) All email should have valid timestamps and IP addresses in at least
>]the headers attached after it leaves the source. I was astonished to
>]learn that spammers can fake not only the headers attached in transit,
>]but even the timestamp from my own ISP. Having non-faked top headers
>]on every email will at least make it possible to trace the spam to the
>]origninating ISP.
>
>Not the way the ineternet works. I can open up port 25 on another
>machine and deliver mail ( incliding whatever headers I want) directly.
>No ISP in the way. Ie, I can make up as long a list of "Received:"
>headers as I would like.
I believe most of the crap I'm seeing is coming via my ISP, not some
"back channel" directly into my computer. In my email program
(Eudora) I designate a particular email server, and it requires a
password every time I connect. I can also access that server via a
web interface from someone else's computer, and what I see in my
"Inbox" is the same load of crap.
This would explain, however, some emails I have seen where even the
timestamp from my own ISP is faked!! These are relatively few, and
probably from local spammers.
Regardless of these details, it should be fundamentally possible to
verify at each station the IP address of the link just before. These
are point-to-point connections, not omnidirectional broadcasts. It
seems like this is just a matter of proper design of the programs
handling email.
>]2) ISPs who get reports of spam from one of their users should make
>]all reasonable efforts to prevent further abuse by that user. An ISP
>
>Most probably do. but see point 1.
I agree. It's the few causing a problem for many.
>]that is making a good-faith effort should find that effort much less
>]burdensome than complying with awkward government regulations, which
>]will be the inevitable next step. Take a look at the regulations on
>]radio and TV broadcasting, if you want to see a possible future for
>]the internet.
>]3) ISPs who don't cooperate should be blocked by an industry-wide
>]committee, which will listen to their excuses and make a fair
>]decision.
>
>And how would you do that? What trials and hearings and who would
>conduct them? Whose jurisdiction would you have these operate under?
99% is obvious spam. The 1% in question could go to a local committee
made up of ISPs in a region or country. The industry-wide committe
would only have to deal with the few percent of those cases, where the
blocked ISP wanted to appeal the decision of the local committee. The
whole process should take days, not years, as I have heard some
complain about existing poorly-managed block lists.
At any point, the blocked ISP could go to a regular court in whatever
jusisdiction it operates. My guess is the courts would simply follow
the recommendations of the industry committee.
The interesting challenges will come when a spammer gets a court order
from some spam-hosting country. Then there will have to be
international treaties, etc., much like we do now with regular
broadcast media. In the meantime, ISPs would voluntarily honor the
block list, and we would be free of 99% of the spam.
We can solve the problem ourselves, or wait until governments do it
for us. The wait may not be long, however. Spam is already 50% of
the internet traffic, and doubling every 3 months.
-- Dave
- Next message: Robert L. Bass: "Re: help me!!"
- Previous message: Victor Bazarov: "Re: My hotmail account has been hacked"
- In reply to: Bill Unruh: "Re: SPAM bill - ineffective government regulation ??"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
