Savvis Grudgingly Get Savvy About Spam

ElvenMonkey writes "The BBC is reporting that Savvis has finally promised to ditch those accounts that are using its network to send spam, in an effort to reduce the damage already done against its reputation; the CEO promises that all such accounts will be closed within 10 days (working days?) Amongst these accounts are believed to be the majority of the top 150 worst spammers worldwide."

Comments

Question

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do they still have any link to the network? Other ISPs should cut them off if they refuse to cut off spammers.

If it makes money...

[ElForesto]

... the spam will keep flowing. I guess the spammers themselves aren't the only ones raking in the green. I would imagine that the prospect of losing so much face to their largest clients is probably the only thing that got them to consider fixing the problem. If I happened to operate a large company, I wouldn't want to be associated with a company that's a spam factory.

Why 10 days?

[garcia]

They obviously know who the 148 people are so why will it take them 10 days to remove their accounts?

Are they going to send them a greeting card or something that says, "oh, even though you are great customers we are being told we can no longer host your illegal activities so you have 10 days to vacate?"

Re:Why 10 days?

[gclef]

Obviously, this will be conjecture, but my guess would be that 10 days is "reasonable", by their definition in the contract. The idea is if they get sued by any of the kicked spammers, they can point to the termination clause that includes "reasonable notification" and claim that 10 days is "reasonable", so they were within the terms of the contract.

Re:Why 10 days?

[SkjeggApe]

Because that's how long it would take savvis to set up savvis2.net, or spamfriendlyisp.net, or something similar, move some servers around, send a "Don't use savvis.net/login anymore, use savvis2.net/login" email to all their "premium" customers, and LOUDLY proclaim that savvis.net has taken extreme measures in the battle against spam, and is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

Dropped for now

[sbackholm]

Savvis may be finally ready to drop these spammers, but how long before another ISP is willing to pick-up the $2 million dollar cash flow?

If they were serious.

[www.sorehands.com]

If they were serious about spam (not just because it is starting to cost them), they could do more.

When they cancel a spammer, make the information on the spammer public so that the spammer can be tracked and sued.

I thought all Spam was from evil non-Americans?

[mark2003]

Every time a story gets raised on Slashdot about spam, hundreds of Slashdot posters blame it on those commies in China, Korea, Russia etc and then call for blocks of all emails from these countries...

Now we have some proof that 148 of the world's worst spammers are hosted by a US company will these same people call for a complete block on US emails or is that now a crazy approach?

From TFA...

[jcr]

As rumours about Savvis and the spammers grew on the internet, executives discussed different ways of keeping the customers and whether they could hide them by changing their names or their computer IP addresses.

One memo, from a senior Savvis executive in charge of Information Security, warned fellow management that the company was in danger of losing its good reputation and a secure and honourable provider.

He warned that they could lose their ability to sell to upstanding customers.

Too late. The fact that the PHBs at Savvis actually considered keeping the scumbags as customers takes them off my acceptable vendors list.

May they burn in hell.

-jcr