Re: static versus dynamic nature of DNS: rate limiting

On 2004-02-22, at 21.19, Hadmut Danisch wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 22, 2004 at 09:06:34PM +0100, Patrik Fältström wrote:
>>
>> - Given a mail is coming from a peer which the domain owner the mail
>> comes from approves, there are legal and policing mechanisms which can
>> take over
>
> Are you sure?
>
> I do know a lot of countries where nobody would care about
> spammers. Countries which don't put drug dealers into prison
> won't certainly have strong legal mechanisms against spammers.
>
> Maybe you will have such mechanisms in the USA, but how will you
> know whom to sue if you don't know who sent the fedex envelope to
> lease a domain?

First of all, I live in Sweden, not the US.

Secondly, I said "can" and meant to use the word to mean "it is then
possible to...". Not that it always will happen.

But, for example, just see the drastic changes in the EU the last year,
and similar reactions in the US.

The idea is to create a trail which can be followed. If the authorities
go to a domain name seller to ask "who owns this domain name", and they
can not answer? What do you think the next law will be? Of course
people will be forced to know this in the future, or _they_ (the
registrar) will be the one doing the wrong things. Or, with help of
some whois it will be possible to say "no, I will not trust any domain
name which is registered by this registry" etc.

All of these things are possible to do in a much better way when "we"
have minimized the risk for false sender addresses, so tracing the
source is easier.

We need to go down this path.

     paf