Re: [Asrg] Adding a spam button to MUAs

"Chris Lewis" <clewis@nortel.com> Fri, 05 February 2010 17:18 UTC

Return-Path: <CLEWIS@nortel.com>
X-Original-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DFDC3A6AFB for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Feb 2010 09:18:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.423
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.423 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.020, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SUBJECT_FUZZY_TION=0.156]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WaNmjP3gi5bB for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Feb 2010 09:18:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from zrtps0kp.nortel.com (zrtps0kp.nortel.com [47.140.192.56]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 290F33A6A22 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Fri, 5 Feb 2010 09:18:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from zrtphxs1.corp.nortel.com (casmtp.ca.nortel.com [47.140.202.46]) by zrtps0kp.nortel.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id o15HIsl14789 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Fri, 5 Feb 2010 17:18:55 GMT
Received: from zrtphx5h0.corp.nortel.com ([47.140.202.65]) by zrtphxs1.corp.nortel.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 5 Feb 2010 12:18:53 -0500
Received: from [47.130.80.234] (47.130.80.234) by zrtphx5h0.corp.nortel.com (47.140.202.65) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.340.0; Fri, 5 Feb 2010 12:18:53 -0500
Message-ID: <4B6C52F1.20703@nortel.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 12:18:41 -0500
From: "Chris Lewis" <clewis@nortel.com>
Organization: Nortel
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090812 Lightning/0.9 Thunderbird/2.0.0.23 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
References: <20100204232046.53178.qmail@simone.iecc.com> <4B6B5F78.3070607@nortel.com> <7AC9CB85-1F82-4FD8-8411-F45E74EE6A59@blighty.com> <100204185834.ZM11044@torch.brasslantern.com> <4B6B9721.3010802@nortel.com> <7C87C226-CF1A-4E35-9D35-902306CDE3C2@blighty.com>
In-Reply-To: <7C87C226-CF1A-4E35-9D35-902306CDE3C2@blighty.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Feb 2010 17:18:53.0797 (UTC) FILETIME=[4AB9D950:01CAA687]
Subject: Re: [Asrg] Adding a spam button to MUAs
X-BeenThere: asrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/asrg>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2010 17:18:12 -0000

Steve Atkins wrote:

> Also, if the failure mode is that the original sender of the email can cause feedback loop reports to be sent to any email address they like there aren't many real concerns.

You're assuming that only the UA would generate ARFs.  I can envisage a 
situation where BOTs caught at the front end MTAs could be sent.  MTAs 
doing it would be instant death on a forged target, even if the MTAs 
hard rate limited (think backscatter bomb).  It could also be instant 
death on a non-forged target, but they're more likely to be able to 
handle it.

Then there's Joe Jobs.  Not necessarily so much with source IPs, but 
with, say, web site payloads getting falsely accused.