Slashdot Mirror


On Futureproofing Spamhaus

BMcWilliams writes "Spamhaus director Steve Linford announced a new funding plan Tuesday. According to Linford's announcement, large ISPs and big corporate users of the Spamhaus zone transfer service (renamed the Spamhaus Data Feed Service) will be required to pay an annual subscription fee ranging between $190 and $14,500.(The free public-query mirrors will continue to exist.) The point of the new plan is to ensure that 'the millions of users who rely on our anti-spam systems can be assured we'll be here for as long as spammers plague the Internet'."

5 of 146 comments (clear)

  1. I'll fund them for life... by bhmit1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just as soon as this $54Mil bank transfer goes through for this poor Nigerian widow.

  2. Self-eliminating business model. by Hanzie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If Spamhaus eliminated Spam, Steve Linford would be the first one dancing. He'd probably get a knighthood, but I think he'd prefer a good night's sleep.

    MS claims that Hotmail receives 2 Billion spams a day. (That's 2x10^9 to you friends across the puddle). I don't see that going away, more's the pity.

    --
    ********* sig: If you don't like the law, get filthy stinking rich, and buy a better one.
  3. This is not a bad thing. by BCW2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If a corporate IS department is running their own mail servers, it would be wll worth the money. Transfer the lists into the server and check all incoming mail instantly instead of the latency caused by going to Spamhaus. The bandwidth and time saved for someone like GM, GE, Siemens,..... Thats a lot of money saved. $14,500 is pocket change to them anyway, and if it saved $50,000 over a year, thats a good return. I'd bet it would save a lot more than 50K though.

    The fact that it keeps Spamhaus a viable concern is another plus.

    --
    Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
  4. Re:Very true. by grasshoppa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    1) Everybody has a use for this. If you are part of an organization that uses a paid for spamhaus, then you have a use for it.

    2) Spamhaus recommends organizations that get 200,000+ emails a day sign up for the service. Conservatively, I think, we can estimate that would mean 100,000 users ( some get considerably more, most not at all ). At the high end, it's 14,500 a year. So, 14500/100000 = 14.5 cents a YEAR per user. I'll give you a fiver, if you shut up about the cost for the next 30+ years about it.

    3) Say I'm way off, and the number is more like 20,000 users. That puts us at about 73 cents per year per user.

    If you really can't afford that, how the hell are you able to sit here on the internet and gripe about it?

    4) Spam, annually, costs you way more. Or, more accurately, they cost your provider more, which in turn, gets passed on to you. So what they are doing is a cost saving measure.

    So, in closing, let me say this: Stop bitching, you are wrong.

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
  5. Corporate thinking and expensing. by j3ll0 · · Score: 5, Insightful


    I may be an idiot, but it seems to me that most organisations could justify any of the amounts listed by doing some simple cost benefit analysis.

    My understanding is that Spamhaus allows you to blackhole IP blocks that are known to tolerate\encourage spam.

    If you step back and work out the cost of bandwidth to accept all of that spam, versus the cost to pay Spamhaus to blackhole it, it probably works out in favour of paying for Spamhaus.

    Here in .au, I seem to remember that a 2Mb FR link to .sg (our next corporate uplink) was in the order of AU$10K a month. So 14.5K = approx US$18K = approx 2/12 FR service. Given that the current stats say the amount of spam crossing the internet as a percentage is HEAPS higher than that, it would have to work out as more cost effective to pay Spamhaus, and save the bandwidth.