Re: [Asrg] 0.General - News Article

On Tuesday, July 15, 2003, at 08:47 AM, Alan DeKok wrote:
> mathew <meta@pobox.com> wrote:
>> If the user's copy of Microsoft Outlook is capable of sending e-mail,
>> then it doesn't matter if you authenticate or verify before allowing
>> SMTP.
>
>   Who is the "you" in that sentence?

The user's ISP.

>   If, on the other hand, the roaming sender authenticates to his home
> domain, and uses his home MTA for email, then the home domain now has
> the opportunity to be a Good Netizen, and filter out the crap before
> spewing it onto the net.  This won't happen all of the time, but it
> will happen sometimes.

Filter how, though? How are you going to distinguish between e-mail 
generated by the computer's owner and sent by his e-mail software, and 
e-mail generated by malware and sent by the computer's owner's e-mail 
software?

>   Spam filtering on outbound messages is perfectly permissible in many
> cases, and legally required in many.  Do you really think that it's
> legally acceptable for businesses to allow their employees to send
> (whatever illegal content) to each other, or to people outside of the
> company?

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?

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.

mathew

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

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