[Coco] Reporting SPAM

[George's Coco Address]

Alan,

  I don't think that was directed at you. I think he's probably just tired 
of the problem as we all are. As he said, there is no viable solution.

George

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Alan Jones"
To: "CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts" <coco at maltedmedia.com>
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 7:29 PM
Subject: Re: [Coco] Reporting SPAM


> 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
>>
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>