[Coco] Reporting SPAM

[Alan Jones]

Roger,
I'm sorry that my email offended you.
Alan

Roger Merchberger wrote:
> Rumor has it that Alan Jones may have mentioned these words:
>
> [snippage]
>
>> Well that is one possible way to look at the problem Gene. It chaps 
>> my hide that this trash is allowed to continue unabated. Someone, 
>> somehow has to put a stop to it. If ISP's would pro-actively attack 
>> this problem it could be solved.
>
> {Rant on}
>
> No, no it can't. Being a mail system administrator for the last 
> *decade*, I can honestly tell you that there is *no fix for SMTP 
> spam.* None. Nada. Null. Zilch, and whatever other language you want 
> to use.
>
> Anything smart enough to shore up SMTP's lack of authentication breaks 
> SMTP.
>
> Assuming you could stamp out all spam originating in the US, how are 
> you going to stop rogue servers in... say... North Korea, China or 
> Indonesia?
>
> The *only* way to manage spam (notice I didn't say "stop") is to 
> change the entire mail delivery backbone - i.e. ditch SMTP for a 
> better protocol which:
>
> 1) has full authentication and security WRT delivery information, and
>
> 2) puts the storage burden on the *sender* - not the receiver.
>
> We need to make spam more expensive on the sender than the receiver - 
> *without* penalizing the non-abusers.
>
> There are several new protocols designed to do just this - one's 
> called IM2000 and it was designed a long time ago, but no-one's 
> willing to put enough work into uprooting our existing infrastructure.
>
>>  Reporting an unsolicited email to the senders ISP can help if and 
>> when the ISP enforces "their" spam policy.
>
> Yes, but I don't speak Korean, Mandarin or Farsi, so I can't 
> communicate to a lot of the abusers out there to tell them to stop; 
> not to mention all the spyware-ridden zombie PCs out there.
>
>>  I am not an expert on this subject by no means.
>
> I am.
>
>>  But I believe that if each mail server had strict rules of 
>> compliance it would be possible to weed out the spam, but it would 
>> take actual work by the mail server's owner/operator.
>
> I work 15-20 hours per week on the spam problem, and it's "never 
> enough." I've designed a couple of different spam filter "solutions" 
> which work for awhile, but the spammers eventually catch up...
>
>> Let me give you an example from my packet radio sysop days as a ham 
>> radio operator.
>
> This example is a straw-man argument, and has ***absolutely nothing to 
> do with Internet-based spam.*** I have an Extra-class ham radio 
> license myself - the call is AB8KK.
>
>> ... and better software,
>
> and who's going to uproot 37.539 bajallion people using our current 
> email system to supplant it with a better one?
>
> Geeks love change. [[ Remember when Archie, Veronica & WAIS were the 
> kings of the 'net? ]] However, geeks aren't in charge of the Internet 
> anymore. :-/
>
> I'd normally say "plonk" at this point, but "Plugh." might be more 
> apt. [[ Now if that's not the *lamest* attempt to bring a wonky thread 
> ontopic... ;-) ]]
>
> {Rant off...}
>
> Laterz,
> Roger "Merch" Merchberger
>
> -- 
> Roger "Merch" Merchberger   | Anarchy doesn't scale well. -- Me
> zmerch at 30below.com.         |
> SysAdmin, Iceberg Computers
>
>