Marjorie wrote: >Is it my imagination or has the size of spam greatly increased? > >Lately, instead of getting URLs to web sites, I'm getting HTML >files with references to GIF or JPEG files that are attached to the >message. The worst I got recently was 97K! How large does spam have >to be before the federal government passes effective anti-spam laws?! > >When such laws ARE passed, I think the penalties should be greater >for those who send these large spam messages. For example, instead >of suing to enforce a flat charge for each individual instance of >spam (Re: that recent lawsuit in the Oregonian) it should have been >a charge per kilobyte. > I am not a lawyer (as Tom always reminds me to say ;) but I would note that the larger spam gets, the more likely it is to constitute a denial of service, theft of service, or other form of attack already covered by existing federal and state computer crime laws.
As an aside, I've noticed an increase in the size of the attachments some Microsoft e-mail viruses use to send themselves to new victims - I've got one mailserver discarding dozens, even hundreds of messages a day that are 200K+ due to attached viruses. -Dan -- I must copy my signatures onto this new system. _______________________________________________ spamcon-general mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.spamcon.org/mailman/listinfo/spamcon-general#subscribers Subscribe, unsubscribe, etc: Use the URL above or send "help" in body of message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Contact administrator: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
