slashdotting physical mail is wrong because it involves making a misrepresentation, claiming that the intended recipient has an interest is receiving the free samples or trial subscriptions involved
( ... )
"This type of thing goes on all the time, it's just random."
Yeah, at first glance it sure looks that way, but there is a common element to all of it. The SMTP protocol doesn't require authentication. It is too quick to trust. It is trivial to fake information, and once a message is in the system, RFC compliant servers are obligated to trust data they never verified, like the recipient of the bounce message (the faked sender address).
The cascading failures are inherent to the system. The SMTP protocol is the problem.
If you don't find that the value of sending and receiving email outweighs the costs, quit sending and receiving email. Pick a replacement with a cost/benefit ratio you prefer.
Personally, whenever I hear somebody complaining about spam, I tell them something to the effect of, "Well, if you can't deal with spam, maybe you shouldn't have an email address."
I, personally, get somewhere in the vicinity of 10-20 spam messages a day. Yeah, it's annoying. I take what steps I can to get rid of them. But, since I am not willing to change my email address, I accept this as just part of what I pay for the privilige of not shelling out hard-earned money for my email.
I do believe that email providers who require that one pay for one's email have an obligation to have a better filtering system in place than providers who provide a free service. But, obviously, nothing is going to be foolproof or perfect.
I was going to respond to this with "10-20/day? Luxury! 10-20 is about what leaks through my spam filters." However, it seems that I only see 5-15/day leaking through my filters, and over the past five months, SpamAssasin has flagged an average of 26 messages per day for automatic deletion. This is only double your numbers, which is hardly the impressive overburdening I was originally thinking it was
( ... )
not about spam...regularhoodlumOctober 30 2003, 21:42:21 UTC
I searched for people who listed mpp as an interest since I can't go to new jersey. There will be a conference in november, I figured I should tell someone. Pass it on
Comments 6
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Yeah, at first glance it sure looks that way, but there is a common element to all of it. The SMTP protocol doesn't require authentication. It is too quick to trust. It is trivial to fake information, and once a message is in the system, RFC compliant servers are obligated to trust data they never verified, like the recipient of the bounce message (the faked sender address).
The cascading failures are inherent to the system. The SMTP protocol is the problem.
If you don't find that the value of sending and receiving email outweighs the costs, quit sending and receiving email. Pick a replacement with a cost/benefit ratio you prefer.
Reply
Personally, whenever I hear somebody complaining about spam, I tell them something to the effect of, "Well, if you can't deal with spam, maybe you shouldn't have an email address."
I, personally, get somewhere in the vicinity of 10-20 spam messages a day. Yeah, it's annoying. I take what steps I can to get rid of them. But, since I am not willing to change my email address, I accept this as just part of what I pay for the privilige of not shelling out hard-earned money for my email.
I do believe that email providers who require that one pay for one's email have an obligation to have a better filtering system in place than providers who provide a free service. But, obviously, nothing is going to be foolproof or perfect.
Reply
Reply
Reply
http://www.drugpolicy.org/events/dpa2003/
Reply
Leave a comment