Man, I'm beginning to see Chuq's viewpoint - what a forest of Cc's to whack
away for one list reply!
--On Tuesday, February 25, 2003 12:11 PM +1100 Brent Chapman
> At 10:14 PM -0800 2/23/03, Chuq Von Rospach wrote:
>> a combination of good whitelists and good spam analysis software
>> will go a long way towards getting the spam problem under control.
> Perhaps from a list-manager's or an end-user's point of view, but not from
> a network-provider's point of view. If you make the list-based or
> user-based filtering systems more effective (i.e., they drop more spam, and
> allow less through), how are the spammers going to respond? They're simply
> going to throw more spam at the filtering systems, to increase the amount
> that gets through. The list or the end user might not see it, but the load
> on the network provider (bandwidth, spool space, processing horsepower,
> etc.) goes up considerably.
> If you really want to address spam, you've got to address it at all levels,
> including the network level, not just the list or end-user level.
> Otherwise you're just pushing the problem off onto somebody else, and the
> whole email ecosystem is still going to collapse.
First, I suspect spammers will attempt to increase their volume no matter
what list administrators do.
Second, the real "wall" spammers are pushing against is not the independent
list admin represented here, but large ISP spamfighters like Earthlink, AOL
Third, if we filter better for our users and spammers respond by upping their
wattage, it makes it EASIER, not harder, for the political and economic clout
to be marshaled that will allow the all-levels attack being called for.