First U.S. charges issued for suspected spammers http://www.dailystar.com/dailystar/news/19949.php Jim On Thu, 2004-04-29 at 17:49, Fred Wright wrote: > At 05:00 PM 4/29/04, you wrote: > >Message: 12 > >Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 16:52:11 -0700 > >From: Carl Parrish > >To: plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us > >Subject: Re: Secure mailing lists Was: my public key > >Reply-To: plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > >> Perhaps I should make this a separate thread however I feel the need to > > >> bring this up. The open source community is going to have to address > > >> these concerns before M$ does. If we do it we have a small chance of > > >> keeping the standards open if M$ comes up with a viable (or even > > >> believable ) solution before we do we can say goodbye to an open > > >> internet. Everyday now I receive bounce mail that I never sent out. I > > >> have to assume that some spam list somewhere is sending spam out > > >> claiming to be from me. We have to be able to stop that. It shouldn't be > > >> too hard to create a mailing list that only allows signed messages > > >> though. But perhaps we should be thinking on a grander scale how about a > > >> mail server that only routes gpg signed msgs. How about a mail filter > > >> that puts all unsigned messages in a seperate folder. None of the > > >> current issues with mail are really big. In fact I believe the > > >> technology is mostly there already but if we don't put them all together > > >> (think napster) M$ is going to hijack the web. > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Carl Parrish(cparrish@carlparrish.com) > > >> http://www.carlparrish.com > > >> -- > > >> Registered Linux User #295761 http://counter.li.org > > > > > > > > > I think that prior discussions on this issue had concluded that the > > > "sending" ISP needs to verify that the sending user is who he/she says > > > they are. Earthlink uses SMTPAUTH. If that is not adequate, what is? > > > > > > > > > > >What happens when the spammer *is* the ISP? > > How do you mean *the spammer is the ISP*? How is any identifiable spammer > exempt from prosecution even if they are an ISP? > > Today's news included some discussion about spammers arrested in > Detroit. They were spoofing addresses and were caught by the law officers > attempting to purchase whatever the spammers were selling. I haven't been > able to trace down a print copy of the story. > > --------------------------------------------------- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss