spam already produces far too much traffic on the net, this would only
produce more - and yes the companies behind the spammers might not be
getting anything - but how many people are not spoofing http headers
allowing browser statistics and the like, or allowing tracing cookies to be
read? Even if everyone who just got the spam opened a connection to the
server in question and then closed it, this would simply generate more
traffic when spammers steal enough of the net's width as it is.
I can't see that this would work to be honest.
The graylisting seems to be a good idea from the point of view of making
things more difficult and less profitable for the spammers, but to be honest
I cant see that this is a long term solution. Eventually if all servers
implemented this technique the spammers would just send things twice - yes
slowing down their sending and hence profitability, but also slowing down
the net with all that extra traffic.
What would happen then - would there be "block twice and accept the third
time" implemented?

james kearney.

> How about a program that hits every link in a spam message, gives them
> the clicks.  But (obviously) not purchasing a thing.  Soon the companies
> behind the spammers will realize that they are spending money for
> "marketing" and getting zero return.  Goes along the same lines that
> Dick was talking about "THE ONLY WAY TO STOP SPAM IS TO MAKE IT
> UNPROFITABLE".  I like the fast fail approach, to bad you can't fail
> after "." too (send an error code instead of an "OK" code), that way you
> have more data to filter spam on.
>
> On Mon, 2003-12-08 at 14:36, Dick Dowdell wrote:
> > Thanks for the feedback.  However, I do disagree with the idea that
> > graylisting would just cause spammers to resend.  Two years ago I left a
> > company that was in the process of changing from an Internet marketing
> > company into a spammer.  I can assure you that each resend diminishes
> > the profitability of spamming and that if everyone graylisted, the
> > economics of spamming would change dramatically.  Maybe you've noticed
> > the high proportion of spam that comes from Eastern Europe and China.
> > I'm sure they're terrified by the prospect of anti-spam laws passed in
> > the US and the EEC.  THE ONLY WAY TO STOP SPAM IS TO MAKE IT
> > UNPROFITABLE.  Legislation will be no more effective than the War on
> > Drugs is.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dick Dowdell
> >
> >
> > Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> >
> > >Dick Dowdell wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>Graylisting (see http://projects.puremagic.com/greylisting/ for a full
> > >>description) involves logging each incoming piece of mail and
rejecting
> > >>it with a 451 (Try again later) message.  After a specified period of
> > >>time has elapsed for a specific piece of mail, the server will accept
it
> > >>normally.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >If greylisting became widespread, spammers would simply resend.  There
are
> > >huge amounts of money to be made sending spam, and bypassing
greylisting
> > >really isn't that hard, once they know that they have to do it.
Without
> > >being confronted by fines and jail time, spammers aren't going to stop.
> > >
> > >In any event, the three key pieces of information for greylisting are:
> > >
> > >  The originating IP address
> > >  The MAIL FROM parameter
> > >  The RCPT TO parameter
> > >
> > >All of those are available in the SMTPHandler prior to the DATA
command.  We
> > >could easily implement greylisting as a fast fail method, but there is
not a
> > >pluggable interface for it.
> > >
> > > --- Noel
> > >
> > >
> > >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to