Re: Let's try to be productive...

On January 10, 2014 at 12:52 [email protected] (Ian Eiloart) wrote:
 > Hi,
 >=20
 > If the object is to classify anti-spam efforts, then probably the wrong =
place to start is with classifying spam. As a rough first draft, I=92d star=
t here:

I like your effort but if we can't agree on what is spam, and I think
you'd be surprised, it's difficult to recommend where to put effort.

Consider #5 in your list, legislation, that's going to require a
pretty good definition of what one is legislating against.

So it's push-pull, you need both.

I also think there's drift, those who want to market will redefine to
suit their own objectives.

For example, I get email from Angie's List here to addresses which
can't possibly have ever existed (e.g., to domains which are just
parked and have no mailboxes.) I distinguish this from the perhaps
more forgivable expired mailboxes, but even that.

So Angie's List (and they're not the only ones by far) have punted on
any sort of confirmed opt-in.

If you tell me that's illegal under CAN-SPAM I'll say the word
"enforcement?"

And I think the line is much fuzzier than that once you try to write
down details. That's just one crass example which comes up all the
time here.

Another is Apple, their "insideapple" list is a mess.

And not only is their list a mess I have it on HIGH AUTHORITY (I know
someone who pinged someone at the VP level at Apple about this for me)
that their attitude is: We will NEVER fix that. That was the
answer. Sorry, Apple will NEVER fix that, you're wasting your breath.

Which means they sense zero pressure to fix it, of course.

Ok, sounds like a small problem.

But the one with Angie's List is new to me this week. How many
companies are there out there who can't be bothered to even do
confirmed opt-in? Do the math. Thousands? Tens of thousands?


 > 1. Ensuring your own network security. Clearly this is a different task =
for at least these groups: Internet Service Providers, Email service provid=
ers, home and business consumers of both types of service.
 >=20
 > 2. For email service providers: filtering inbound email, including as co=
nsumers of higher level co-operative ventures like RBLs.
 >=20
 > 3. Provision of information about bad senders, such as RBLs with IP addr=
ess and sender domain reputations.
 >=20
 > 4. Provision of information about suspect content, such as header and bo=
dy content patterns. SPAMCOP rules would be one example.
 >=20
 > 5. Legislation: drafting of national and international legislation, and =
state enforcement actions.
 >=20
 > 6. Internet governance: drafting of standards to support best practice.
 >=20
 > 7. Internet governance: actions taken against known bad actors, such as =
taking down IP addresses, domains, etc.
 >=20
 > 8. Code support for detecting bad actors, filtering email on that basis,=
 and co-operating with other Internet users to share information about emai=
l source reputations.

--=20
        -Barry Shein

The World              | [email protected]           | http://www.TheWorld.c=
om
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD        | Dial-Up: US, PR, Cana=
da
Software Tool & Die    | Public Access Internet     | SINCE 1989     *oo*
-
This is the asrg mailing list.  To change your subscription settings, see
http://lists.services.net/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr/domain=3Dlists.gurus.org