URL de trackback de esta historia http://blojj.blogalia.com//trackbacks/13834
| 1 |
|
||
|
Virginia has done something more. Fresh news ;) |
|||
| 2 |
|
||
|
Wrong link. What do you mean? |
|||
| 3 |
|
||
|
sorry, Virginia Arrests Man for Spam Email Under New Law salió en slashdot. |
|||
| 4 |
|
||
|
Yep, I see now from the sources. Well, yes, good. What are they going to do with the korean spammers? Send the marines?
|
|||
| 5 |
|
||
|
I don't know. I suppose that if each one is able to control its own spammers, she can press another countries to do the same or close/restrict their mailings.
|
|||
| 6 |
|
||
|
Spam control in the server side is the way to go. What about a "SMTP death penalty" a la Usenet? If a server relays tons of spam, it should be banned from the others. |
|||
| 7 |
|
||
|
fernand0: if a single computer in a single country is ready to send spam, we already have a problem, which might be made more complicated by open relays, trojans and viri.
|
|||
| 8 |
|
||
|
JJ: There are lots of antispam tools that use standard blacklists. I don't see why my ISP should not be using them. If there was a "email death penalty" any ISP would have to be very careful about the messages it relays...
|
|||
| 9 |
|
||
|
I guess ISPs cannot afford to be sued by spammers on "censorship" charges. Or maybe they're just too stupid. |
|||
| 10 |
|
||
|
I mean just a contract clause: "The user agrees not to send unsolicited junk email".
|
|||
| 11 |
|
||
|
Most ISP customers are not willing spammers; they are used by spammers who take advantage of their open relay. Of course, that's just legalese: if the contract read "The user agrees not to send, or be used to send unsolicited junk email", that will be taken care of too. |
|||
| 13 |
|
||
|
best web hosting
|
|||