Re: Isn't spam a ISP issue?

.....
>> to use a mail list simply has to pay their ISP money to get a escrow key to
>> the bulk sender interface.
>
> Sounds like a couple services we all knew in the not so distant past
> Goodmail/BondedSender (original incarnation).  See how good that
> worked, even with paying customers...

Hmm, missed those. Pity. Wast not thinking from the service perspective, but
in the smtp blocking mass mails, with an option (not per see for commercial
purposes, we do have a lot of legit mail lists, like this).

>
>> 1. The senders get more public, easier to find, either through the ISP
>> agreement or his own MTA's IP showing up.
>> 2. The cost increases for bulk mailers, and that will stop a lot, the more
.......
>
> You are assuming that legitimate bulk mail is the biggest issue here
> and not the various examples of; user accounts with stolen credentials
> (ex: Ongoing Y! issues), the recent uptick in spam from compromised
> web hosts, bots, malware, ISPs that don't/wont enforce AUPs, ISPs that
> don't know any better (emerging markets).

Not at all, they are maybe 1-2%, but as I said, what I still can see, using an
ISP mailer seems still to be the most common way to spam, not setting up your
own MTA.

It was a try to think out of the box, changeing something with big impact,
affecting just few.

If any account is limited to, say 100 addresses in a mail, they need to put in
more time sending out, not getting the outflow they wish. If integrated in the
SMTP rfc, it doesnt matter if malware using an innocent, stolen accounts or
what ever. If a limit in the smtp stack to number of addresses, someone will
see misuse faster, for instant notifying a person, that his/her PC tries to
mail more than allowed.

MTA:s not supporting is an issue, but if your the ISP receiving such a scheme
can work also here, getting 200-300 mails from the same IP, is an idication of
spam, the same rule applying.

If forcing the spammers to put in more work for the same income, if to high,
well, they leave for greener pasture.