PDA

View Full Version : Spam me and pay $500!


Mr. Anderson
May 24, 2003, 06:03 PM
Wow, this is going to be interesting to see how well it works.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/internet/05/24/spam.bill.reut/index.html

It might end up being tough to collect but if not then people will happy to get spam. I'd be a multimillionaire by now if I was payed $500 for each bit of spam I've ever received.

D

trebblekicked
May 24, 2003, 06:12 PM
that's wonderful. i hope include provisions for multiple-points-of-origin spammers. i think maybe we're seeing the begining of the end for spam.

Doctor Q
May 24, 2003, 06:15 PM
California already requires the letters ADV to be put on the front of unsolicited e-mail, although the law is mostly ignored.

I've read that by July spam is expected to pass a milestone: 50% of all e-mail.

By coincidence, Mr. Anderson, I was coding my own experimental spam filter when you made your post.

Mr. Anderson
May 24, 2003, 06:54 PM
Originally posted by Doctor Q
By coincidence, Mr. Anderson, I was coding my own experimental spam filter when you made your post.

Ha, cool.

There has been a lot of work in the field of spam filtering - and as everyone who's ever used one knows there is a long way to go until it works 100% correctly.

A colleague of mine mentioned that checking for the string "FF0000" is about as good as it gets for a single filter search key. It the color red in hex and what's used in html emails.

Of course it makes all sorts of assumptions, like no one is going to send you an html email that isn't spam...;)

D

Doctor Q
May 24, 2003, 07:03 PM
In addition to the obvious method - looking for words or patterns in the Subject, From, or body text - there are a few tricks for recognizing spam that can be automated:

* Doing reverse name lookups to recognize forged headers.

* Checking for mail that passed through mail servers that are open relays. The Open Relay Database (http://www.ordb.org/) can be used for this.

* Checking for blacklisted sites with a service like the one from Spamcop (http://www.spamcop.net/).

trebblekicked
May 24, 2003, 07:15 PM
o just checked my lycos account for the first time in about a month:

over 700 spam messages.

you think the fine could be retroactive?:)

crazytom
May 24, 2003, 08:50 PM
I don't think the law would change much since it's already pretty hard to find the spammers in the first place. They should be giving the fine to the company who's wares are being sold and force the company to regulate their own 'advertisements'.

rainman::|:|
May 24, 2003, 10:26 PM
Originally posted by crazytom
I don't think the law would change much since it's already pretty hard to find the spammers in the first place. They should be giving the fine to the company who's wares are being sold and force the company to regulate their own 'advertisements'.

yeah, this law would be totally unenforceable. you cannot track most spam messages back to the company that sent them, and you can't legally hold responsible the site advertised-- what if a competitor sent out spam for their site, to drive the company bankrupt? It's circumstancial.

only way spam will stop-- redesign the way email works. if security is implemented, it would be easy to stop spam with laws. but the current email system is far too trusting...

god i hate spam...
:)
pnw

QCassidy352
May 25, 2003, 01:06 AM
Originally posted by paulwhannel
yeah, this law would be totally unenforceable. you cannot track most spam messages back to the company that sent them, and you can't legally hold responsible the site advertised-- what if a competitor sent out spam for their site, to drive the company bankrupt? It's circumstancial.

only way spam will stop-- redesign the way email works. if security is implemented, it would be easy to stop spam with laws. but the current email system is far too trusting...

god i hate spam...
:)
pnw

eh... what's the big deal with spam anyway? mac OS X mail automatically deletes any spam I get, so I never even see it. :)

szark
May 25, 2003, 02:51 AM
Just this past week, I received a spam message advertising anti-spam software!

Yeah, I'd trust them... :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

rt_brained
May 25, 2003, 06:58 AM
If the Hormel company sends you unsolicited email offering 1 free sample of their favorite canned meat delivered to your home, provided you forward the message to two of your friends, how much spam is that?

P-Worm
May 25, 2003, 10:10 AM
Isn't this going to be too easy to avoid? I thought the people that did this kinda stuff disappeared right after the emails were sent.

P-Worm

eyelikeart
May 25, 2003, 10:48 AM
So this means I could not only get approved for a home mortgage loan...but get $500 for doing so? ;)

jelloshotsrule
May 25, 2003, 01:26 PM
2 problems (in addition to not being able to enforce it very well) i see:

1. the companies will keep trying to act like you signed up for it... and most likely, companies will go even further to make you unknowingly agree to receiving email from other companies or themselves...

2. can i sue people for sending me dumb forwards that say i have to send it to 10 people by noon or else i'll never fall in love??? :( ;)

vniow
May 25, 2003, 02:14 PM
Originally posted by jelloshotsrule
2. can i sue people for sending me dumb forwards that say i have to send it to 10 people by noon or else i'll never fall in love??? :( ;)

Damn, I'd be loaded!

Mr. Anderson
May 25, 2003, 03:29 PM
Originally posted by jelloshotsrule
2. can i sue people for sending me dumb forwards that say i have to send it to 10 people by noon or else i'll never fall in love??? :( ;)

It will be odd to be able to sue a person for spamming - I wonder if it will ever go to court - one person suing another individual.

Bet it happens eventually.

D

jelloshotsrule
May 25, 2003, 03:36 PM
Originally posted by Mr. Anderson
It will be odd to be able to sue a person for spamming - I wonder if it will ever go to court - one person suing another individual.

Bet it happens eventually.


i put my money on some ex friends or lovers... the one who did the dumping sends the other one some type of forward a few weeks/months after the breakup. the dumped one is still bitter, and lashes back in court!

wdlove
May 25, 2003, 03:55 PM
How does eveyone find that the junk mail filter works for them in the Mac OS X's mail software program?

Doctor Q
May 25, 2003, 05:05 PM
Originally posted by wdlove
How does eveyone find that the junk mail filter works for them in the Mac OS X's mail software program? It wasn't especially accurate for me, so I edit the rules by hand using Mail -> Preferences -> Rules -> Edit. I'm glad it has "Stop evaluating rules" as one of the possible actions, because some other e-mail applications I've used forgot that one.

MrMacMan
May 25, 2003, 08:12 PM
Gah, finding out who is spamming may be an even bigger problem.

Doctor Q
May 26, 2003, 01:07 AM
Originally posted by jelloshotsrule
can i sue people for sending me dumb forwards that say i have to send it to 10 people by noon or else i'll never fall in love???You can sue anybody for anything, but I don't think the laws being enacted will give you much of a case. The laws vary in their descriptions of "the crime", but many apply only to the senders of unsolicited e-mail in large quantities, e.g., tens of thousands or more.

wsteineker
May 26, 2003, 02:25 AM
It seems to me that the best way to go here is to try some of the same approaches that the RIAA (filthy bastards) are using to combat P2P file sharing. Place the burden not on the spammer or the company being advertised, but on the ISP. So far their suit against Verizon has been successful, and it sets a precedent to some degree. I'll guarantee that 95% or more of the spam that originates in the US will stop when ISPs start seeing spammers as financial and legal liabilities. Also, some sort of database listing all known spammers could be used by the ISPs to deny or severely restrict service to known spammers. Just a drunken thought... ;)

MacFan25
May 26, 2003, 11:29 AM
wow, $500! :D

I really hardly ever get any spam at all anymore, since I changed my e-mail adress a few months ago. I might get one spam every couple weeks. And, usually the mail app notices it is spam. :)

Giaguara
May 26, 2003, 11:59 AM
if this would pass, i'd e a millionaire. and i remember once i got 52 000 emails from apple in my inbox. :)

normally the moderate 50 - 200 spams a day would be anough to not make me work. all i'd need would be 20 hotmail accounts and using them in public places like foras... :D

alset
May 26, 2003, 05:50 PM
Originally posted by paulwhannel
only way spam will stop-- redesign the way email works. if security is implemented, it would be easy to stop spam with laws. but the current email system is far too trusting...

god i hate spam...
:)
pnw

While I hated the idea the first time I heard it, I say let's have an email tax. If every email cost $.01 to send it wouldn't make much of a dent for the average person. Spammers who send over a million messages a day will be crippled.

Dan

Mr. Anderson
May 26, 2003, 07:03 PM
Originally posted by alset
While I hated the idea the first time I heard it, I say let's have an email tax. If every email cost $.01 to send it wouldn't make much of a dent for the average person. Spammers who send over a million messages a day will be crippled.



Ah, the eStamp :D

It would be nice - yet there would be some issues. For personal accounts it wouldn't be too bad, but for corporations it would get expensive.

Logistically putting it into effect would be a disaster. And can you imagine having your email returned due to lack of postage?

D

wsteineker
May 26, 2003, 09:07 PM
What about a tax for bulk e-mailers. I'm not talking about corporate intranet e-mails, or even corporate mass mailings between offices, as they don't pose such a nuisance. But say that it was a tax targeted solely at spammers. Not a bad idea at all, really.

(edited for clarity)

Doctor Q
May 26, 2003, 09:36 PM
The trouble with an e-mail tax is that there is no central authority to collect it. It would have to be collected by every ISP, and they aren't likely to want to add to their overhead, annoy some of their customers (the ones who don't find it a welcome tradeoff if it lessens spam), or do work (tax collecting and recordkeeping) on behalf of Uncle Sam. And the Internet is international, so taxing cross-border e-mail would be almost impossible.

rainman::|:|
May 26, 2003, 09:37 PM
Originally posted by alset
While I hated the idea the first time I heard it, I say let's have an email tax. If every email cost $.01 to send it wouldn't make much of a dent for the average person. Spammers who send over a million messages a day will be crippled.

Dan

I know this is supposed to be a good idea, but I can't go with it-- I send tens of emails every day, business and personal alike... Businesses that use email would crack down so you couldn't use email for anything personal at all... it would just be bad all around...

someone asked how Mail's filter worked for us... i personally love it... it took it a while to figure out those spams that use no text, just solid images, but now it takes those away too. I love it, I check my junk folder every few days to make sure nothing valuable went in there, but it rarely does (and hasn't in months...) the filter is the best i've seen.

But that still doesn't do it for me... I want a cure for the problem, not a symptom. If Mail were suddenly unavailable, i'd be buried under spam in a way i don't even want to think about. it has to stop, it's crippling the internet's functionality...

pnw

rainman::|:|
May 26, 2003, 09:40 PM
Originally posted by wsteineker
What about a tax for bulk e-mailers. I'm not talking about corporate intranet e-mails, or even corporate mass mailings between offices, as they don't pose such a nuisance. But say that it was a tax targeted solely at spammers. Not a bad idea at all, really.

(edited for clarity)

The problem is again, how do you track it and how do you enforce it.

Spammers now use viruses that proxy send mail *totally* anonymously, as a matter of course. They're ruthless... and i say again, nothing will stop them short of redesigning the email system. I like it being so simple, but I guess we have to adapt it because of a few ****head spammers.

:)
pnw

Sun Baked
May 26, 2003, 10:01 PM
Originally posted by pantheus @ news.spamcop.net 2003.05.22.18.01.01

On Thu, 22 May 2003 11:52:14 -0500, Jill wrote:

> What if Spam cop and related organizations considered offering up this
> suggestion to isp's:
> As part of an isp policy they could do a black list policy in which
> spammers pay extra fees after let's say a certain amount of abuse
> reports come in about them. After all the isp has to route the
> complaints, they should get something for the trouble, and to prevent
> future spammers, perhaps send a portion of spam money collected to
> organizations Spam cop and Spamhaus (since they deserve every penny they
> get) . ISP's would profit, spamcop could grow, it's all good. This might
> give isp's more incentive, and save the spam victims from having to pay
> for all that filtering software, time, headaches, resources, etc..etc...


Jill,

Nice thought ...but ...

The ISPs that are carrying most of the spew that gets into our inboxes are being paid premium prices BY the spammers (It's called pink contracts) already. They *know* who the spammers are, and since they are getting paid to carry the spam, they have no incentive to eliminate the cash-cow they are creating. The majority of the spam we see is from ISPs that will /not/ do the "right thing" (tm) even if it were shoved up their nose.

The blackhat ISPs: Verio, Rackspace, Exodus, et al are not about to stop the spam. Aside those US-based ISPs we have the Chinese, Taiwan, Brazil, Argentina, and several others with broken relays (and the refusal to fix them) that are accounting for the huge amount of spam we see.

The chickenboners at an ISP that gives a **** are far and few between. The majority of our spew comes from rouge ISP and broken relay/proxy and the professional spammers: Ralsky, Scelson, Betterly, Richter and the rest of the mob gangs. They are trying to find a way to legitimize spam with the backing of the DMA, as hard as we are trying to eliminate it.

Doctor Q
May 26, 2003, 10:01 PM
Ever have a brilliant idea when you are half awake, then wake up and find out that it made no sense at all? I had such a non-inspiration last week. While daydreaming, I thought of this plan:

Everybody picks an "e-mail codeword" and tells it to the people and companies that they are willing to accept e-mail from. Then they set a filter to remove all e-mail that does not have that word within the Subject field. For example, if someone had e-mail address stevie@apple.com and picked "clarus123" as his codeword, then e-mail to stevie@apple.com with subject "Hey Steve, send Doctor Q some free equipment [clarus123]" would go through but "Gil wants his job back" would be filtered out.

Then I realized that if you could somehow maintain a list of everyone you'd allow to e-mail to you (in order to inform them of your codeword), you might as well forget the codeword and simply set an e-mail filter to reject e-mail from other than those addresses. Furthermore, if you posted your e-mail address in a forum or on a web page or used it for business purposes, you'd have to include your codeword to make the e-mail address usable so the codeword would get picked up by spammers.

So, as Emily Latella would say, "never mind!"