2. Analysis - Spam Definition (was Re: [Asrg] Spam definition!)

Liam Meany wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> Sorry for changing the subject but I was wondering if anyone knows if there
> is an offical definition from the ASRG on what spam actually is? I had a
> look at the IETF website but could not find one.
> 

Hi Liam,

First of all just a reminder to follow the posting guidelines
(http://www.irtf.org/asrg/asrg_mailing_list_information.htm). I changed
the subject of the message to comply with the guidelines.

To answer your question - we all agree that we disagree. We do not have
an official definition and are not seeking for one. Rather, we want to
leave the definiation of spam to be defined by each end-user and ISP as
they want, with the ASRG defining and evaluating different tools to make
it happen. This is reflected in the ASRG charter
(http://www.irtf.org/charters/asrg.html):

"The definition of spam messages is not clear and is not consistent
across different individuals or organizations. Therefore, we generalize
the problem into "consent-based communication". This means that an
individual or organization should be able to express consent or lack of
consent for certain communication and have the architecture support
those desires."

 From the consent framework
(http://www.solidmatrix.com/research/asrg/asrg-consent-framework.html):

"This model does not concern itself with defining what spam is – one
person's spam message may be another's freedom of speech. Thus, we only
seek to define a consent framework – everything else is left to the
implementors and the users themselves."

 From the technical considerations document
(http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-crocker-spam-techconsider-02.txt):

<snip>
      Internet mail has operated as an open and unfettered
      channel between originator and recipient.  It has
      always suffered from some degree of abuse, in which
      originators impose on recipients inappropriately.  In
      recent years, a version of this abuse has grown
      substantially.  Called spam, its definition varies from
      "unsolicited commercial email" to "any email the
      recipient does not want".  Often there are no technical
      differences between spam and "acceptable" email. Their
      format, content and even aggregate traffic patterns may
      be identical. Hence spam is a problem for fundamentally
      non-technical reasons, yet the Internet technical
      community must pursue technical responses to it.  The
      lack of strong community consensus on a single, precise
      definition makes this particularly challenging.

      For most working discussions, the term "Unsolicited
      Bulk Email" is sufficient.  The salient point that it
      is a mass-mailing ensures that discussion covers the
      broadest concern of the user and provider
      communities. Mail that is not in some real sense "bulk"
      cannot flood networks or mailboxes. Essentially all
      mail that people object to, as "spam", is bulk. For
      example practically all objectionable advertising mail
      is also bulk, although modern techniques for targeted
      advertising can permit extensive content or address
      tailoring. "Bulk" is usually very difficult for an
      individual recipient to prove, but almost always easy
      to recognize in practice.

      More detailed discussion must, of course, be precise in
      the definition of "unsolicited" and usually must
      distinguish between different types of mail, such as
      commercial, religious, political or personal.
<snip>

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg