Impoverish a Spammer Today

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by michael on Friday June 25, 2004 @07:00AM from the lose-money-fast dept.

esj at harvee writes "Recently the Camram project released its latest version of a hybrid sender-pays anti-spam system. The project has proven that sender-pays works and has demonstrated how to make it work with existing e-mail systems. Camram has developed hybrid sender-pays techniques that scale down to the desktop and up to the enterprise. It's a completely decentralized system that can put spam-fighting power in the hands of individuals. It gives you control of not only the current generation of spam, but also any future commercial spam -- why replace Viagra ads from a scam artist with Viagra ads from Pfizer?"

3 of 343 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Re:E-postage is not the answer... by Shoeler · 2004-06-25 07:13 · Score: 0, Redundant

Ok - so I run a web forum as a hobby. I get some donations from members that help pay for it but mostly I foot the bill. Occasionally, I like to e-mail all of my subscribers about a cool event or cool new happening - so now I have to pay some amount that, even a fraction of a penny, would amount to almost a month of hosting charges.

For companies with web presences it makes sense. Even if you use the idea that your ISP would pay a lot of the charge, we all know most ISPs will gladly hike fees in response to it.
Re:The problem is... by Kenja · 2004-06-25 07:14 · Score: 0, Redundant

It makes it prohibitively expensive to send ANY email from low power devices such as my PDA, cell phone and even my mail server (500mhz VIA C3).

--

"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
Re:The problem is... by squiggleslash · 2004-06-25 07:55 · Score: 0, Redundant

For one thing, most spam I get is claiming to be from a known source (ie someone who knows me has a worm and is spamming from their address book).
I think your experience is abnormal in that regard. Yahoo!'s bulk folder for my Yahoo address generally never contains names I'm familiar with except the occasional misdirected email (ie something Yahoo marked as spam that wasn't.) I haven't heard anyone make such complaints.
Also, white lists dont deal with the fact that a lot of email is from first time corresponders such as online retail outlets.
The system falls back to CRM114 for those emails that do not pass the white list. Generally the thing seems to be designed as much as possible to prevent legitimate email from being dropped. One might even describe it as a way to fix the holes the various anti-spam systems are creating in the integrity of the email system.

--
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.