Re: [Asrg] 0.General - News Article - NYT Reports Porn Spam Hijacking Network

["Jon Kyme" <[e-mail]>]

> 
> So you're proposing that ISPs be required to run something like 
> SpamAssassin on all *outgoing* e-mail, and bounce e-mail back at the 
> user if it looks like spam?
> 

This is a real live issue for providers of (for instance) free webmail
services. I'm familiar with a situation where the admin overhead of
investigating and terminating accounts following abuse allegations is
making this kind of outbound filtering look very attractive. I realise that
free webmail is a special case, but it's clear that the volume limits
imposed by many such providers are a step along this road.


> I see a problem with that--will users accept it, or will they take 
> their money elsewhere? I know that when *I* send an e-mail, I expect it 
> to be sent--if my ISP bounces it back because they don't like the 
> content, it's time for me to find another ISP.
>

Most (if not all) ISP have AUP which prohibit the use of their systems for
sending spam. I suspect that if a customer had a lot of trouble with
outbound content filtering it would be because either;
(a) their ISP does filtering badly - in which case you're right, the
customer would walk, or (b) the customer *is* a spammer.

I believe that it is in the long-term interests of ISP to keep spammers off
their networks. The consequences of blacklisting on legitimate customers
can support arguments for outbound filtering.

I don't see how you'd "require" ISP to use this, perhaps you might choose
to whitelist ISP who assert that they do.
 






--

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg