Re: [Asrg] Spam detection system proposal

"David F. Skoll" <dfs@roaringpenguin.com> Wed, 05 March 2003 19:42 UTC

Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA24556 for <asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 14:42:44 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h25JrNL14008 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 14:53:23 -0500
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h25JrNO14005 for <asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 14:53:23 -0500
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA24539 for <asrg-web-archive@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 14:42:12 -0500 (EST)
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h25Jo0O13786; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 14:50:00 -0500
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h25JnGO13699 for <asrg@optimus.ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 14:49:16 -0500
Received: from ottawa-hs-209-217-122-117.s-ip.magma.ca (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA24313 for <asrg@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 14:38:06 -0500 (EST)
Received: from shishi.roaringpenguin.com (shishi.roaringpenguin.com [192.168.2.3]) by shevy.roaringpenguin.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h25Je3BD031661 for <asrg@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 14:40:03 -0500
From: "David F. Skoll" <dfs@roaringpenguin.com>
To: asrg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Asrg] Spam detection system proposal
In-Reply-To: <20030305193102.GS14655@main.templetons.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.53.0303051434200.4869@shishi.roaringpenguin.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.53.0303050925440.2189@shishi.roaringpenguin.com> <200303051523.h25FNx7p019253@calcite.rhyolite.com> <Pine.LNX.4.53.0303051038360.2189@shishi.roaringpenguin.com> <20030305193102.GS14655@main.templetons.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/asrg/>
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 14:40:03 -0500

On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, Brad Templeton wrote:

> The real world doesn't usually do security with physical security.
> It punishes after the fact and uses that as deterrence.

Right.  But you need a way to detect the problem before you can
punish it.  A distributed mechanism for detecting anomalous
SMTP behavior is like an alarm sytem.  And alarm systems are
pretty common in the real world.

> Very few of the world's low level security problems are solved by
> putting up a clever high fence.  You notice that there is nobody
> checking your bags as you leave the Sears store.

It depends where in the world you live. :-)  Lots of stores I've
been in demand you leave parcels at the front, and if you walk through
with a bag, you will be searched.

In North America, this isn't so common, of course.

> The number of bad addresses is another test, but not nearly so
> reliable.

Well, isn't it?  I don't know, and I don't think you know either.  Some
posters have complained how their systems are stressed from bounce
messages during spam attacks.  This suggests to me that a large number
of invalid addresses is a good indicator of a spam attack.  Unfortunately,
it's not necessarily the case that a spam attack always yields a large
number of bad addresses; there probably are spammers out there who keep
their lists clean.

> In the end, though, if we can get most of the legit bulk mailers to
> do something -- anything -- to let us know they are accountable for
> abuse, I think we can lick this thing.

That would help, but it requires buy-in from a lot of different groups
with a lot of different vested interests.  And I'm not sure that
non-technical solutions fall within the charter of the IETF, although
it certainly should consider them and recommend them to legislators.

I don't advocate distributed statistics-gathering and analysis as a
panacea.  But I do believe it could be one more effective detection
tool in our arsenal.

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