Slashdot Mirror
Anti-Spam Site Accused of Spamming, Fixes Error
An anonymous reader writes "According to this article on CNN, banthespam.com is accused of spamming its visitors. Excerpt: Even if an Internet user chose not to receive e-mail updates from the Telecommunications Research and Action Center, one of the effort's sponsors, the Web site replied with the message: 'You are currently signed up for news and information.' This doesn't help guys . . ." As the article states, the problem was quickly caught and corrected -- and banthespam.com looks like another force for good in the world.
It seems that this is much ado about nothing. It seems that it was a case of overzealous cutting and pasting.
According to this response by the alleged spammers:
The TRAC site did indeed for a short period of time state "You are currently signed up for news and information." - but that statement was inaccurate and was just a template response that was generated when a person's story was submitted (standard language from a script that was copied).
Don't ascribe to malice that which can be better explained by incompetance...
While it's not really a good thing for any large or visible company to make a mistake, it happens. This was probably just a 1-line or even 1 word fix in a script. Hopefully this won't become a reason for users to roast banthespam over a slow grill. People always seem to remember the bad things most... must be human nature.
However, it is somewhat of an amusing irony to cover in slashdot...
Now, I'm just left wondering if it was an honest mistake to spam the visitors, or if someone thought the irony would boost visits...
/. posting some news that really didn't matter, just in an attempt to be funny...
'Cuz that would be like
=D
Karma: \Kar"ma\, n. [Skr.] (Buddhism) One's acts considered as fixing one's lot in the future existence.
...to stop spam is to filter all the email that says "this message was not sent unsolicited."
"Derp de derp."
When I was just a lad, I read all about 'em. Edgar Rice Burroughs wrote about Captain Carter, Barsoom, and the dreaded banthespams... Very dangerous.
Dunno, sounds like the auto-reply message was simply a cgi (or equivalent) bug. I've been known to write a few goodies in my life, too. Anyway, assuming it was a bug, no big deal.
Although I don't think this was going on here, there seems to be the perceptions from nonprofits/groups/personal websites that if isn't selling something it isn't spam. I run a couple of large email lists and many people feel offended when I deny usage of the list, because sending unsolicited messages might be seen as spam.
-Sean
I can't help but admire the irony of the spam messages I receive offering to "remove pop-ups for ever!!!". I am just waiting for the first spam that offers to "eliminate spam today!!!"
Okay, so the web designer put the wrong message for the 'No mail' option. It was an embarrassment to the site and somewhat funny to the rest of us but not really all that news worthy.
Oh well, at least I went to there site and read an article that did have value. Apparently the Telecommunications Research and Action Center is asking the FTC to rule that unsolicited commercial email is "deceptive and therefore unlawful"
The email would have to meet certain criteria that are similar to the Washington State's anti-spamming law.
Email would be considered illegal if it:
Misrepresents the sender (in source or routing information)
Misrepresents the subject or content of the email
Fails to provide reliable contact information for the real party in interest
Fails to provide a reliable opt-out system
Is sent to an individual who has opted out or resigned from sender's list, or to whom sending unsolicited, commercial email is otherwise prohibited by law.
Laws like this are seen as being a balance between our rights to privacy and a companies rights to communicate. Unfortunately, with any 'opt-out' strategy, the victim is overwhelmed by SPAM because he/she can not opt out as fast as his or her name is sold.
We really need laws that make the selling of email addresses illegal.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
Microsoft was found to have several pieces of software (including the ever popular BOB) which had licenses that looked suspiciously like GPL. However, after being called the "prince of open source movement," Company spokesdrones declared that it was in fact a clerical error, and Microsoft has every intention to continue on the path of Evil Empire (tm), and promptly put very restrictive licenses onto the aforementioned software, therefore continuing to be a force of evil in the world.
My life in the land of the rising sun.
I've been following the anti-spam newsgroups and organizations for something like five years now, and I've never heard of banthespam.com before now.
Are they for real or what?
Spammers, like 'em or not, are just exercising their rights to free speech and to free capitalistic enterprise.
You are either an idiot or a spammer yourself. Spammers usurp the resources of third parties without permission in order to distribute and store unwanted advertising. Spammers are typically sociopaths who care nothing that they are bothering others and stealing the resources of third-party ISPs.
I just suffered a mailbomb attack because the owner of www.praise-jesus.tv and documented fraud artist Clark Mankin didn't like that I complained about his spam run to QWest.net. Spammers are evil, and death is too good for them.
Spam is not 'free speech'. It is theft of service and trespass to chattel. It is no more a right than is spray-painting graffitti on privately owned businesses.
STOP MISUSING APOSTROPHES, YOU MORONS!!!
Just as amusing is the spam that offers to sell me a million "carefully selected e-mail addresses that are receptive to direct marketing". If my address is on that list then the selection process obviously isn't all that careful.
Funny that the site should come from TRAC. This is a classic example of Washington "astroturf", phoney grass roots organizations. TRAC is run by Sam Simon of Issue Dynamics, a P.R. firm that works for incumbent telephone monopolists like Verizon. Their main activity is publicizing anyone but AT&T as being a better long-distance alternative to AT&T. There's a long and bitter blood feud between AT&T and Verizon (fka Bell Atlantic). Sam's a hired gun.
In this case, it's likely that Verizon is smarting over the cost of spam to its Verizon Online operation. Verizon is trying to get the FCC and/or Congress to give them an absolute monopoly over DSL ISP service. The FCC has a proposal on the table now (FCC NPRM 02-33) to remove common carriage rules from ILEC DSL, so that Verizon can say that if you use their DSL telecom service, you must use their ISP. Bye-bye to all the local ISPs who buy Verizon DSL to reach their subs. There's also the Dingell-Tauzin bill in Congress which effectively repeals the Telcom Act, and bans competitive LECs from accessing ILEC raw wire in order to provision their own DSL. Also note that Verizon Online forces you to put @verizon.net in the From: field of mail sent through their SMTP relay; you can't be From: your choice of mail hosts! Forced advertising, no less.
So when they come out with an anti-spam site (and Sam doesn't brush his teeth without a Verizon top exec's permission), I take it with a boulder of salt.
We sometimes get blamed for spam at Sneakemail.com. The funny thing is when we get blamed its because the user just forgets they are using Sneakemail and when spam gets sent through their disposable email address we provide its so transparent they forget whats happening and think we're spamming them. Actually when they get spam it means Sneakemail worked perfectly since their real email address wasnt actually spammed, as it would have been. This actually got us kicked off our first net provider.
:P
I work for Sneakemail.com. We are an anti spam site. The first and longest living disposable email address site for what its worth, over 2 years. See the sig for the link. Sneakemail is an online application that truely fights spam and lets you catch spam easily. What is this, a anti-spam petition? Thats so much easier than thousands of lines of code, why didnt we think of that, damn?
If we screw up and actually send people spam do we get a story on slashdot?
Thanks for reading, this has been a shameless promotion for Sneakemail.com
Sneakemail is to spam filters what an ounce of prevention is to a pound of cure.
As someone around here has as their sig...
"You have freedom of speech, but I expect you to use your own printing press".
Don't use MY resources and try to hide behind the first ammendment.
Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my
Can you delete me now? Good!
Pigs aren't big enough to make more than a couple dozen cans of Spam... so now they're making Spam out of Banthas? I hope the Sand People don't find out... they'd probably get upset.
Oh, and just because all Spam posts need a haiku:
Bantha: Shaggy beast
with big horns, on Tatooine
now in small tin cans
Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my
The thing is, there are some quite interesting perspectives out there on spam, which should be given a bit more consideration all-round.
First, there's the guy who received an email from a colleague at my previous company, sent only to addresses of folks at a local computer expo who expressed an interest - ranting loudly, "I'm sure Spews will be interested to hear of your bulk-mail!" (to all of 20 people anyway) etc etc. Strangely enough, after I replied in person I didn't hear as much as an apology. Rate this chap how you may.
Second, there's the role of a sysadmin in a company where several forms of regular and/or bulk mail-shots are either required and/or requested. Specifically, I can think of at least one financial-services website where there was a weekly newsletter, a monthly newsletter (both opt-in at signup time) and a service for receiving stock-price alerts as well. Of course you get people who forget they opted-in to things, or make a mistake and click the wrong buttons, or change their mind and want to opt out... that's where being a real sysadmin who *does* honour the "mail us here to opt out" line in an email gets quite interesting as I'm well aware of it being a spam-harvester line (as is everyone else) rather than a genuine attempt, which it actually can be.
And thirdly, there's the dubious joy of being on the receiving end of a spammer using an open relay somewhere in Turkey with envelope headers set to your domain name. Just watch all the net-weenies reply to *you* complaining lots thinking "from, subject, to" constitutes "all the headers"...
There are these extremes, but if people know the companies with which they have regular dealings, and if they stop to think, a lot of the heat and anger can be taken out of this "anti-spam activism" crap, and a genuine mission to stamp out real spam undertaken in a more gentlemanly / professional / calm-headed manner.
~Tim
--
Rushing on down to the circle of the turn
You wouldn't be saying it was alright if they made a 'mistake' by not stepping on the brake pedal and running someone over, or made a 'mistake' by not locking their firearm away
No, but if someone said "I didn't step on the brake", when actually they did, or they DID lock their firearm away, but said they didn't, that would be a 'mistake'.
Considering the only 'damage' was that they printed the wrong message, I think it DOES excuse it.