Slashdot Mirror


Spam Replacing Postal Junk Mail?

TheOtherChimeraTwin writes "I've been getting spam from mainstream companies that I do business with, which is odd because I didn't give those companies my email address. It is doubly strange because the address they are using is a special-purpose one that I wouldn't give out to any business. Apparently knotice.com ('Direct Digital Marketing Solutions') and postalconnect.net aka emsnetwork.net (an Equifax Marketing Service Product with the ironic name 'Permission!') are somehow collecting email addresses and connecting them with postal addresses, allowing companies to send email instead of postal mail. Has anyone else encountered this slimy practice or know how they are harvesting email addresses?"

52 of 251 comments (clear)

  1. Do you shop online? by Old97 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Every time I buy something on-line I have to provide my billing address so now the e-mail address I use and possibly more (can it read cookies?) is known to the vendor who can turn around and sell that information to others. How easy is it for some Javascript or something to poke around for e-mail addresses when you are at a site? Also, my e-mail providers know my address - i.e. yahoo, google, aol, apple and comcast. Could they be selling that information? I wouldn't be surprised.

    --
    Very often, people confuse simple with simplistic. The nuance is lost on most. - Clement Mok
    1. Re:Do you shop online? by aj50 · · Score: 4, Informative

      A given site can only read cookies which have been set by the same site (well, domain). There are various exploits to get around this called Cross Site Scripting (XSS) attacks which involve somehow putting javascript onto someone else's page (such as a slashdot comment). This type of attack can be thwarted by properly escaping any dynamic content.

      Allowing access to other site's cookies is a problem because most sites which allow you to log in tell users apart by giving each of them a different cookie. By stealing someone else's cookie you might be recognised as them without having to log in.

      --
      I wish to remain anomalous
    2. Re:Do you shop online? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      My standard email address for sites I dont wish to give my real details to is bill@microsoft.com

      I used to give the local recycling centre as my real address.

    3. Re:Do you shop online? by aztracker1 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Just a clarification. A site can only see cookies set *TO* that domain. Sub-domains can see cookies set to the parent domain as well. Beyond this, any site can *SET* a cookie *FOR* another domain, they just can't read it.

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
    4. Re:Do you shop online? by Jurily · · Score: 2, Informative

      How easy is it for some Javascript or something to poke around for e-mail addresses when you are at a site?

      Decent browsers don't expose data not created by the site, aside from the standard browser ID, and even that can be turned off. And if you use a browser with the security profile of swiss cheese, your email adress is not your main problem.

      Also, my e-mail providers know my address - i.e. yahoo, google, aol, apple and comcast. Could they be selling that information? I wouldn't be surprised.

      That's just about the only thing I trust Google not doing. If you want to know how they get it, try giving out different adresses to different sites and see which ones get what spam.

    5. Re:Do you shop online? by LowlyWorm · · Score: 2, Informative

      Javascript can indeed "poke around" for email addresses or any other information you provide while on a given site as well as non-personally identifiable information such as connection speed, browser, etc. The main thing to understand is javascript can only access that which you provide. It cannot (at least not alone in a client-side environment) actively coerce such information. It can actively record just about anything you do on a page but state information (information between sessions on a site) is very limited to the size of a cookie file. Javascript can be linked with other scripting environments that could though.

      --
      Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
  2. have your own domain-get universal forwarding by way2trivial · · Score: 4, Informative

    I have my own domain- EVERYONE except family gets a different email address
    one gets caught by spammers- the address gets killed.

    I understand gmail allows using a + in the address line to sort mail in a similar fashion
    googleid+identifyingstring@gmail.com and you still get it-- only you know the source.

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
    1. Re:have your own domain-get universal forwarding by ticklemeozmo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Many websites which require email addresses discourage and in fact prevent the use of + while signing up.

      --
      When modding "Informative", please make sure it both has a source and IS actually informative.
    2. Re:have your own domain-get universal forwarding by Zerth · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not so much that they discourage it, they just have badly coded email validators. The allowable characters in an email address is much broader than most systems' valid usernames, but the lazy just assume people will only have a username as their mailbox.

    3. Re:have your own domain-get universal forwarding by AnalPerfume · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If I need to reply to an email to join a site I'm dubious about, in other words actually receive it, I use the Trashmail addon for Firefox. It expires after a couple of emails. If they turn out to be OK, I can then change the email to a more permanent one in the options.

    4. Re:have your own domain-get universal forwarding by KlaymenDK · · Score: 4, Informative

      I understand gmail allows using a + in the address line to sort mail in a similar fashion
      googleid+identifyingstring@gmail.com and you still get it-- only you know the source.

      Only until someone 'helpfully' sends you something from a postcard site, joke list, or lottery draw. Then you'll get spammed at the "root" address (sans "+") and almost never again at any "+" address.

      Don't ask me how I know this.

    5. Re:have your own domain-get universal forwarding by maxume · · Score: 3, Informative

      You may have a hard time telling where it came from (they could accept address+marker@gmail.com and then scrub the +marker, it isn't exactly a secret).

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    6. Re:have your own domain-get universal forwarding by techno-vampire · · Score: 4, Informative
      I have my own domain

      So do I. I also have * addressing as a catch-all. When I have to provide an email address to register at a dubious site, I make one up that tells me something about where I used it; e.g., to sign up at example.com, it might be examplejunk@mydomain.com. That way, if I ever get anything sent to that email address and not clearly from example.com, I know exactly who sold my email address, and can add a filter deleting everything sent to that address. It hasn't happened, yet, but maybe I've just been lucky.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    7. Re:have your own domain-get universal forwarding by SpammersAreScum · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yup. I suspect this is a case where Hanlon's Razor should be remembered.

    8. Re:have your own domain-get universal forwarding by Matt+Perry · · Score: 3, Informative

      While using the + in this fashion is a great idea, it breaks the specification for email addresses in the RFC.

      No it doesn't. Using the plus sign in an email address is already specified in the RFC and has been for quite some time.

      --
      Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
    9. Re:have your own domain-get universal forwarding by KlaymenDK · · Score: 4, Informative

      Which RFC, though?

      821 (from 1982) does not allow it.
      822 (also 1982) does.
      2821 and 2822 (2001) also respectively don't and do.

    10. Re:have your own domain-get universal forwarding by MagicM · · Score: 2, Informative

      RFC 5233 mentions it.

    11. Re:have your own domain-get universal forwarding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Which RFC, though?

      821 (from 1982) does not allow it.
      822 (also 1982) does.
      2821 and 2822 (2001) also respectively don't and do.

      Ancient relics. It's all about RFCs 5321 and 5322. Don't you get a feed of all the latest RFCs?

    12. Re:have your own domain-get universal forwarding by number11 · · Score: 3, Informative

      While using the + in this fashion is a great idea, it breaks the specification for email addresses in the RFC.

      Wrong, wrong, wrong.

      RFC5321 is the relevant RFC.

      Wikipedia summarizes the permitted characters in a somewhat more human-readable fashion. The "local-part" is the part of the email address to the left of the @:

      >The local-part of the e-mail address may use any of these ASCII characters:
      >
      > * Uppercase and lowercase English letters (a-z, A-Z)
      > * Digits 0 through 9
      > * Characters ! # $ % & ' * + - / = ? ^ _ ` { | } ~
      > * Character . provided that it is not the first nor last character, nor may it appear two or more times consecutively.

      A "+" does not break the RFC. It may break some buggy address validators. (Note that there are also other interesting possibilities for breaking non-compliant software, such as case-sensitive addresses.)

    13. Re:have your own domain-get universal forwarding by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Funny

      Ancient relics. It's all about RFCs 5321 and 5322. Don't you get a feed of all the latest RFCs?

      I've got it set up as a podcast in iTunes.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    14. Re:have your own domain-get universal forwarding by zorg50 · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can also use Spam Gourmet at http://www.spamgourmet.com/. It has several features that go above and beyond what GMail has (to my knowledge).

      First, it will forward the e-mails to any address, so you don't have to use GMail. Second, it lets you include an identifying string, like GMail. Finally, however, is the best feature: in the address you give you can specify the number of e-mails that you want forwarded to you before they start getting sent to /dev/null. You can also whitelist addresses if you choose. I've been using it for years, and it works very well.

      identifyingstring.numtoforward.username@spamgourmet.com

    15. Re:have your own domain-get universal forwarding by lewko · · Score: 2, Informative

      I used to do this, but can now say that 'catchall' addresses suck.

      Firstly, some spammers brute-force addresses, so you will receive spam sent to john@yourdomain, nancy@yourdomain etc.

      Secondly, if you ever decide you want to kill your catchall, you'll find it impossible to find all the sites which have their own addresses.

      I just use Gmail now.

      --
      Do you or your partner snore? - Visit www.snoring.com.au
  3. I had enough by Krneki · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I use 2 emails, one for spam and one for private mails.
    Now both my emails are full of junk, but while google spam option are working my old yahoo email is beyond saving.
    Just keep clicking on "this is spam". It's not worth your time to understand why it's happening, and even if you do understand, you will find out it's impossible to avoid.

    Hell, I can't even check my old SMS because it's full of spam.

    --
    Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
    1. Re:I had enough by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I use 2 emails, one for spam and one for private mails. Now both my emails are full of junk...

      It should be:
      One for email from IT persons.
      One for registration confirmation and chainmail-forwarders.

    2. Re:I had enough by nomadic · · Score: 5, Funny

      I have 13 e-mail addresses. E-mail the public one, and you get sent a riddle, which if you answer correctly gets you the next e-mail address. Each riddle is more fiendish than the last, and nobody has reached the 13th e-mail address.

  4. ISP ? by johnjones · · Score: 3, Insightful

    first person I would suspect is the ISP or your webmail

    without knowing any details of even the country your in it's kind of hard to guess...

    but ISP's use deep packet inspection and even easier I am guessing you fill in your email address for their webmail and they bill you...

    regards

    john jones

  5. What I do... by Mr.+Conrad · · Score: 5, Funny

    I just handle electronic spam like normal junk mail. Hit Ctrl+P and then throw the damn thing away. Good riddance.

  6. Email honeypot traps by peterofoz · · Score: 4, Informative

    I use a special domain name which maps all aliases (*) to my mail box. Nearly every email I use for online purchases or registrations is custom for that site so when I receive email from an unexpected source I can trace it back to where I originally used it. I also always opt out of companies sharing info. I recently caught out SCE having passed my email to a government energy program and called them out on it. If I get spammed on one 'channel', I can reroute it to the /dev/null mailbox.

    1. Re:Email honeypot traps by jez9999 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I use a special domain name which maps all aliases (*) to my mail box. Nearly every email I use for online purchases or registrations is custom for that site so when I receive email from an unexpected source I can trace it back to where I originally used it.

      I've been doing this for a few years now, because I thought it was a good idea, and here's what I've discovered: very few companies actually seem to sell my e-mail address to spammers. What I tend to get from them is dumb newsletters that they honour my requests to unsubscribe from.

      What does happen, however, is that spammers realize that you have a domain with a catch-all set up... it only has to happen once, and you're fucked. They then proceed to mercilessly Joe-job you, setting their spams' From addresses to SomeRandomBullshit@yourdomain.com, and many clueless MTAs will still bounce this stuff back at you with 'blocked: spam', 'undeliverable', and a zillion variants of this (in a zillion languages, too). By this time you've given out so many different email addresses to so many different sites that you don't want to risk adopting some kind of whitelist policy because you're bound to forget about 50% of the places you signed up to and accidentally drop all their e-mail. You revert to standard anti-spam tactics, in addition to setting up lots of filters to dump as many bounceback and 'out-of-office' messages you receive also.

      In short; this doesn't work well, don't bother.

  7. Use temporary addresses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Yahoo lets you create temporary addresses that you can disable at the drop of a hat.

    I use those for most of my business correspondence.

    Your mail provider may offer something similar.

    1. Re:Use temporary addresses by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 2, Informative

      Gmail uses +'s. As in, username+foo@gmail.com will come to username's inbox. You can then use the filters to sort mail on that address (such as to the spam or trash folders.

  8. E-mail is Preferable, it can be Filtered by CodeBuster · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Although it would be best if email marketers were simply swallowed by the earth and sent directly to wherever it is the bad people go, if they are going to continue annoying us then I would prefer that it be through email and not postal mail. At least with email they are competing on our playing field where we have a decisive technical advantage in filtering. If the choice is between them stuffing my post box with paper or trying to stuff my inbox with spam (they will fail due to ThunderBayes among others. What's the word? Thunderbird) then I say bring on the spam, we are ready.

    1. Re:E-mail is Preferable, it can be Filtered by fl!ptop · · Score: 4, Funny

      if they are going to continue annoying us then I would prefer that it be through email and not postal mail

      i disagree, with postal spam at least if they provide a pre-paid return envelope i have the satisfaction of putting everything they sent me in that envelope, along w/ a few rusty washers (to add weight), and maybe a sunday paper glossy ad or two (more weight, and thickness) and sending it back to them on their dime.

      --
      When you recognize love in another and realize how precious it is, everything else seems so insignificant.
    2. Re:E-mail is Preferable, it can be Filtered by techno-vampire · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not only that, they have to pay to have the material designed, printed and mailed so it's not exactly free for them as it is with spam. Not only that, but even though they're using the bulk mail rate, all that junk mail stuffing your mail box each day is helping subsidize the cost of first class postage. In the case of spam, the spammers are being subsidized by the rest of us which is what makes it so bad.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    3. Re:E-mail is Preferable, it can be Filtered by nine-times · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Also, at least email is probably more environmentally friendly then manufacturing the paper, the ink, any other chemicals involved, and then shipping the stuff across country. It's really sad, when you think about it-- all that trouble just to deliver trash to my doorstep.

      I know, that's not a novel thought; that's why they call it "junk mail". But it still strikes me funny whenever I really think about it. People almost literally manufacture trash and send it to your address against your wishes, just for you to throw it away without looking at it. What a waste. Not just a waste of materials and a waste of environmental resources, but what a waste of human effort.

    4. Re:E-mail is Preferable, it can be Filtered by mauthbaux · · Score: 2, Funny

      i disagree, with postal spam at least if they provide a pre-paid return envelope i have the satisfaction of putting everything they sent me in that envelope, along w/ a few rusty washers (to add weight), and maybe a sunday paper glossy ad or two (more weight, and thickness) and sending it back to them on their dime.

      Obligatory bash.org anecdote:

      #127039 +(10530)- [X]
      [wolf] 1. Save every Free Credit Card Offer you get, Put it in pile A
      [wolf] 2. Save every Free Coupon You get, put that in pile B
      [wolf] 3. Now open the credit card mail from pile A and find the Business Reply Mail Envelope.
      [wolf] 4. Take the coupons from pile B and stuff them in the envelope you hold in your hand.
      [wolf] 5. Drop the stuffed to the brim envelopes in your mail and walk away whistling.
      [wolf] I have now received two phone calls from the credit card companies telling me that they received a stuffed envelope with coupons rather then my application. They informed me that it they are not pleased that they footed the bill for the crap I sent them. I reply with "It says Business Reply Mail" I'm suggesting coupons to you to ensure that your business is more successful. They promptly hang up on me.
      [wolf] Now, I did this for about a month before it got boring, so I got an added idea! I added exactly 33 cents worth of pennies to the envelope so they paid EXTRA due to the weight. I got a call informing me about the money, I said it was a mistake and I demanded my change back. After yelling at the clerk and then to the supervisor they agreed to my demands and cut me a check for the money. I hold in my hand at this very moment a check from GTE Visa for exactly 33 cents.

      --
      "Operating systems suck: you're better off using only the BIOS" --trainsaw.com
    5. Re:E-mail is Preferable, it can be Filtered by nachoboy · · Score: 2, Informative

      if they provide a pre-paid return envelope i have the satisfaction of putting everything they sent me in that envelope, along w/ a few rusty washers (to add weight), and maybe a sunday paper glossy ad or two (more weight, and thickness) and sending it back to them on their dime.

      Don't bother. Business reply envelopes that are clearly not used for their intended purposes are discarded by the Post Office as waste. So now all you've done is annoy your local letter carrier and increase the burden on the postal service. And guess what happens to postage rates when you incur extra work for the postal service without any extra payment?

    6. Re:E-mail is Preferable, it can be Filtered by techno-vampire · · Score: 2, Informative
      You've got that backwards. First-class postage subsidizes bulk mailing; that's why, in part, that bulk mail costs a fraction of what 1st class mail costs.

      Not according to what I've read, although I can't locate a cite at the moment. One of the reasons it costs less, BTW, is that much of the Post Office's work has to be done ahead of time, such as sorting out the mailing by zip code. However, just to pick a nit, if bulk mail cost .9944 the cost of first class postage, it would still "cost a fraction of what 1st class mail costs."

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
  9. I am a database direct & email marketer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    What's happening here is that there are companies that aggregate profile information, and they're able to link your email to your profile information. They then sell append services so the marketing company can add that email to your existing full name and address (FNA).

    It is wrong for companies to append an email address and then market to it.

    Companies do a lot with their (your?) customer data, including hygienization, appends, completion, profiling, etc. Most of this happends under the sheets, and most customers don't really want to know the details.

    However, I advise clients to NEVER use an email append service for a variety of marketing and spam/technical reasons. Most clients will listen, some will choose not to. However, I'm seeing that more stupid companies will forge forward like its nothing, and companies with dwindling budgets are too suckered in by the cost savings.

    Its only going to get worse.

  10. GMail by Aladrin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Once again, GMail is my solution to this. Prior to GMail, I used spamgourmet to keep my inbox clean. The oldest email I have used to get 30,000 emails per month that were all SPAM. Right now, it's getting about 11,000. (I haven't really used that address in a long time.

    I have had maybe 10 SPAM emails in the last year make it to that inbox. (It's hosted under Google Apps.)

    So once I found out how well Google's SPAM filters work, I quit caring about giving out my main email address. I give it to everything now, and if a company SPAMs me, I just mark it as SPAM. When enough people do that, it seriously hinders their ability to contact their legit customers, and they learn a valuable lesson.

    There's a little bit of fallout from people who use the SPAM button incorrectly, but I think Google does its best to account for that, too.

    --
    "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    1. Re:GMail by Sephr · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It seems you think spam is always all caps. All-caps spam is a trademark of the makers of that lunchmeat: http://www.spam.com/about/internet.aspx

  11. Mod parent up: +5, Truth by berend+botje · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Everytime I got a new email adres, there is always that one clueless git that adds my address to one of those cute 'send something funny every week' sites.

    Never got that funny, but the spams just starts flooding in.

    Now I'm a lot more picky about who gets to see my real address. The rest goes to my temporary catch-all of the month.

  12. Re:E-Stamps, the only way to reduce spam by Matt+Perry · · Score: 4, Funny

    E-stamps are the only effective way to reduce spam. Bulk spammers will go from paying something like 0.1 cents per message to say 25-cents, making it uneconomical, and more trace-able. When you buy an e-stamp, 1/3 of the amount goes to the recipient (usually as credit), 1/3 to the ISP, and 1/3 to a monitoring agency. "Approved" recipients could send for free.

    Your post advocates a

    ( ) technical ( ) legislative (X) market-based ( ) vigilante

    approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)

    ( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
    ( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
    (X) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
    ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
    ( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
    (X) Users of email will not put up with it
    ( ) Microsoft will not put up with it
    ( ) The police will not put up with it
    (X) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
    (X) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
    ( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
    ( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
    ( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business

    Specifically, your plan fails to account for

    ( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
    (X) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
    ( ) Open relays in foreign countries
    ( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
    ( ) Asshats
    (X) Jurisdictional problems
    (X) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
    ( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
    ( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
    ( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
    ( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
    (X) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
    ( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
    ( ) Extreme profitability of spam
    ( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
    ( ) Technically illiterate politicians
    ( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
    (X) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
    ( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
    ( ) Outlook

    and the following philosophical objections may also apply:

    (X) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever
    been shown practical
    ( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
    ( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
    ( ) Blacklists suck
    ( ) Whitelists suck
    ( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
    ( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
    ( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
    ( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
    (X) Sending email should be free
    ( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
    ( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
    ( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
    ( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
    ( ) I don't want the government reading my email
    ( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough

    Furthermore, this is what I think about you:

    ( ) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
    ( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
    (X) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your
    house down!

    --
    Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
  13. Email Append by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's a service called an "email append", offered by the major credit reporting companies. The purchaser gives them a list of names and addresses, and the credit reporting company finds matches with email addresses. They send an opt-out mailing, and the email addresses of everyone who doesn't opt-out are returned to the purchaser.

  14. An interesting change by AnalPerfume · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In the UK, junk mail does subsidize the postal service, so although you can opt out, they plead with you not to, as it would increase the cost of normal post by quite a margin. How much of this is real and how much is just them desperate to hold onto an income from companies paying them to shovel shit through our letterboxes is open to question. I do accept it in principle though.

    If that switched en-masse to email, those contracts would expire, meaning snail mail prices would increase. The Royal Mail don't have any way to transfer delivery from paper to email, so they couldn't recoup those loses. Since email is free, nobody would make any money from these mass email contracts.

    On the other hand it would cut down on a LOT of wasted paper, which 99.99999999999999% people take from door to bin, bypassing the eyeballs, some people do recycle but not enough.

    While email is great for most communications, snail mail is sometimes required so it can't be allowed to die. I doubt it would die if they lost the junk mail contracts.

    For me, the worst offenders are the magazines and newspapers you have to pinch at the spine and shake over a bin before opening, to release all the leaflets stuffed inside. Is it not enough that for every 5 pages of a publication, 3 pages worth are adverts? If that's the state of the magazine industry, maybe it deserves to die too. The internet has already steamrolled over many business models, what's another one to add to the list?

    Perhaps a solution would be a commercial / personal email distinction at an ISP level with a legal backing. Personal email is always free, commercial email costs say 1p per email. Charities / schools etc would be exempt from charge too. Make it something you have to declare with your ISP and legally stand by. Spammers using botnets wouldn't be affected since they operate illegally anyway, but it'd regulate the "normal" "legal" marketing companies. Make it a legally enforceable requirement to ONLY email people who have opted in, and fine them for ALL breaches.

  15. Re:I wish spam replaced postal junk mail by RoboRay · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There is a trash can right next to my mailbox, which enables me to deal with paper spam about as easily as the electronic kind.

    I do keep the little response cards with "return postage guaranteed" stamps, though. Those are great for gluing to bricks or other heavy objects you want to dispose of. Drop them in a mail box, and they not only get wind up in a mailbox at the company that spammed you, but that company gets billed for the postage, by weight. The heavier the object, the better!

  16. Egham is "spam capital" of UK by David+Gerard · · Score: 4, Funny

    Email filtering company MessageLabs reports that Egham, Surrey, on the suburban outskirts of London, is the town that receives the most spam in Britain.

    "It's not like there's much else to do," said Boris Busybody, 77 (IQ), of Egham Hythe, idly whirling his four-foot penis around his head in a desultory fashion. "Expanding your manhood, growing your breasts, increasing your sperm ... the Lib Dem phone calls get a bit much. That's Doctor Busybody, by the way. My Ph.D arrived last week."

    Spam has revitalised the local economy. Mr Busybody has given up cab driving and is now working a lucrative job processing payments from home after he sent them his bank details in response to an urgent security message. "I had that King Otumfuo Opoku Ware II in the back of my cab once. Very generous and helpful fellow."

    The Egham Tourist Board has seized the day, with plans for a 50 foot tall penis sculpture at Junction 13 of the M25 on the exit ramp to the town. The sculpture will be encircled by a genuine imitation Rolex and spray a fountain of Spermamax, obtained at a very reasonable rate from a Canadian pharmacy. "You will search an hour for your underwear in the ocean of our spam!" is to become the new town motto.

    "I did get a good one the other day," says Busybody. "Barrister Matthew Sergeant Busybody of MessageLabs said we could promote our town to millions of people just by sending them an advance fee to process our incoming email. The stuff they try! 'Scuse me, V!k@grk@ kicking in, got to go have sex again. Sorry."

    --
    http://rocknerd.co.uk
  17. Re:Email Append - BINGO! by TheOtherChimeraTwin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Yes, I think you've hit the nail on the head. Experian eMail Append overlays deliverable email addresses onto your active customer file and contacts customers via email on your behalf to obtain permission to communicate with them online.

    By "permission" they mean they send you email until you complain. If they happen to pick an email address that is normally not read by a person, they don't get any complaints. (Not that I opt-out of spam; I block it.)

    Further on, they state Retain your customers by keeping your brand top-of-mind through consistent, relevant and interactive email communications. Yeah, good luck with that. I know four companies that have just lost my repeat business.

    Thanks to all for an excellent discussion.

  18. Re:E-Stamps, the only way to reduce spam by Helix150 · · Score: 4, Informative

    To understand why this won't work you have to understand how e-mail works. We start from when you hit 'send' in outlook.

    Your message first goes to your ISP's or company's outgoing mail server. Let's ignore that for a moment.

    That outgoing mail server looks at the recipient- user@domain.com. So it uses DNS (the thing that converts a name like www.google.com into an IP like 74.125.93.147) and asks what the MX (mail exchanger) servers are for domain.com. Domain.com has those listed in its DNS.

    The outgoing mail server then connects to the domain.com MX server. It says "i have a message from person@company.com for user@domain.com". If the MX agrees to take it, your outgoing mail server transmits the message, and the MX sends a confirmation that it is accepted. They then disconnect.

    If you're running your own mail server, or are using a company mail server, or a different email system, your ISP has nothing to do with this other than moving your packets around.

    The point is that email is not a single system that can be changed like raising the fare on the subway. If you're the city and you want higher subway fares, you just reprogram a few thousand turnstiles (all of which you own) and you're done. Email/SMTP isn't like that, SMTP is an agreement, a protocol which millions of networks and servers have chosen to implement. Email is just another internet protocol, no different than AIM, skype, HTTP/wwww, FTP, etc. It's just one of the most widely used protocols.
    There is no central authority to enforce anything like e-stamps. For this to be enforced, the domain.com MX would have to say 'please give me a tenth of a cent before I deliver your mail'. The only useful way to handle that would probably be with a 3rd-party clearinghouse for exchanging the 'stamps', so your mail server would say 'i give you stamp ID (long stamp id number)', the destination MX looks that up with the clearinghouse, approves it, then accepts the message for delivery.

    For that to happen, both your SMTP server and the recipient's MX would have to be modified to deal with these payments, and optionally require them for mail delivery. There are many different mail server programs out there, this would require all of them to be updated to support payments, and then (heres the hard part) all the people who run them would have to install those updates. Then anybody who runs a mail server would have to do some financial setup to let them accept payments and send payments for email. IE, every random geek and company and IT department and ISP that runs a mail server now has to jump through a financial hoop. If I run my own mail server, does that mean i get 2/3 of the payment (the recipient fee and the ISP fee)? Does my ISP get it even though I'm not using their servers? There will be great resistance to this.

    The main issue is, it would *NOT* be transparent, not to anybody. This would be a large, time-consuming and very expensive implementation.

    Now let's say best case scenario, lets say you get all the major isps and webmail providers on board (msn, aol, yahoo, google, comcast, timewarner, verizon, cablevision/optimum, charter, adelphia, etc).
    Let's say they immediately set up their system to start dealing with these micropayments.
    What happens to the (literally) millions of companies in the US and abroad who run thier own mail servers, but whos systems are NOT updated? Can they no longer send mail to all of the above networks, or is there a break in period? If the payments are optional, what incentive does anybody have to adopt them?

    Also you say approved senders can send for free. Who is an approved sender? What is the qualification? If it's difficult and expensive, some of the large bulk-mailing companies will try it anyway, and the smaller legit companies are shut out. If it's easy to get one even for a small biz, then the spammers will get them too. If extensive investigation is performed on the applicants, that money has to come from somewhere, so it'll be expensive.

    --
    --IronHelix
  19. Optimstic but Wrong by Zancarius · · Score: 2, Informative

    I'm assuming you didn't see the humor in Matt Perry's post. I hate to sound like such a pessimist, but your solution and response is naively optimistic. Let's examine why.

    (X) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money

    It becomes the credit-card co's or ISP's problem, not yours. It's like any other $ transaction.

    ISPs already have a lot on their plate insofar as legislation and (potential) filtration goes. Forcing them to operate as a collection agency simply won't work. I also doubt anyone would advocate or appreciate giving credit card companies (i.e. banks) even more control. They've already demonstrated a certain incompetency in recent years that has most certainly been making news!

    (X) Users of email will not put up with it

    Why do you say that? It would be mostly automatic.

    If you have to ask this question, you don't understand the problem.

    E-mail has been effectively "free" since the inception of the Internet (more on this in a moment). As it stands, spam is killing e-mail, and fees intended to kill spam will only succeed in killing both.

    We should also consider those ISPs which charge their customers on a per megabyte basis. In effect, users of such services are already paying a tax on e-mails they send; it's just that e-mail is often times such a small chunk of data that it would hardly go noticed, unless of course you were about 2KiB from a threshold that would require paying a little extra and happened to send an e-mail that bumped you over. In either case, charging on a per e-mail basis simply won't be accepted by users. They'll feel they're already paying for e-mail as part of their service plan.

    And let's not even mention the technical aspect of it being "mostly automatic." There is no such thing. If you forcible turn off non-payment e-mail services, you kill e-mail as we know it. Without a great deal of unprecedented international cooperation (and good luck getting those governments who are probably influenced by people making money from nefarious deeds), this sort of thing simply will not happen. In fact, I predict two things will happen before any significant change is made to e-mail: IPv6 rollout or Duke Nukem Forever's debut.

    (X) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once

    No, just agreement between a few big co's and/or a gov't project.

    No, the semi-humorous post in reply to yours is correct. It doesn't require the cooperation of a "few big [companies]" or a "[government] project." It requires cooperation from hundreds of individual businesses, ISPs, organizations, and governmental cooperation on an international scale. You can't just simply rewrite SMTP and say "here, everyone download this. This will fix the problem with spam." For one, you're assume the new system would be impregnable to spammers and two that it is a wide-sweeping, multi-platform solution that can just be fitted in place.

    Here's a hint: It won't happen.

    (X) Jurisdictional problems

    International may be a little tricky, but this may also keep out "shady" foreign operators.

    Not if, say, several dozen European countries (rightfully) decline to participate. Then what do you do? Shut off e-mail to all of Europe?

    Remember, just because someone doesn't find it fair to tax their people more doesn't mean they're a "'shady' foreign" operator. They could be mindful of the rights of their people to freely exchange information. (See my comments earlier on "free.")

    If you only send a few messages a day, it would probably be part of ISP bundle, and frequent recipients

    --
    He who has no .plan has small finger. ~ Confucius on UNIX
  20. Fake email by Cassander · · Score: 2, Informative

    My standard email address for sites I dont wish to give my real details to is bill@microsoft.com

    I like to use nospam@foo.com or abuse@foo.com, where "foo.com" is the actual domain of the site I am entering my info to. (For example, microsoft gets nospam@microsoft.com).

    --
    Knowledge != Intelligence
  21. I love freenode by myspace-cn · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Every time someone asks a question on how to stop spam, there's always some smartass expert that say's, "This is the year 200X, you should be able to filter it." Yet the reality is not everyone can lock down their exim, sendmail, etc. It is complex, and spam is still a vector for hell of problems.

    A sysad could have all the orbs, dnsbl, spamhouse, etc filters in their system, and still the spam will make it through.

    There's a lot of reasons the "volunteer" experts in irc on #debian, #ubuntu, #suse advice is bunk.

    A user who has an exploitable web form mail script.
    Outdated server software on unmanaged server. (ex: Fedora Core Version 4 running)
    cPanel exploits.
    Rootkits.
    Broken SMTP server.
    No Iptables firewall. (Don't laugh I've seen servers like this, with no firewall at all!)
    Financially impossible.
    Multiple binaries. killall -9 exim exposing extra binaries running.

    Unless your willing to sit down 24/7 and monitor your /var/log looking for patterns, and flushing the /var/cache/mail to see what came in, searching through all your users directories for exploits, the chances are these experts advice will not work. Many hosting companies, individuals, have no idea how to deal with email servers, in fact they should just shut the port off and remove the server. Having hundreds of spam connections to your email server every second, doesn't make grepping the logs any easier. CIDR blocking networks of the top 100 spam connections, can ease it some. Blocking entire countries can help also.

    I have watched spam destroy a hosting company financially. From trying to get off blacklists to forced outsourcing.

    Frankly, the free advice and elitist attitudes for help isn't working.

    At the same time, people should be able to send anonymous mail --IMO
    And furthermore, the same volunteer experts are helpful with nearly everything else linux.

    Anyway what works for you in your setup may not work for others.
    CAN-SPAM has not worked. (if you ask me it's a place for a spammer to build a list)

    In my final opinion here, I am not going to leave you without a potential solution.

    My solution is, put your fucking unmanaged server behind a firewall. For example ipcop.
    Somebody from germany hitting your FTP server every morning at cron time? iptables their ass and never see a packet again.

    This goes contrary to the popular APF, BFD scripts. You could get a user complain they can't get mail from some server in china or .br but ...... You can always OPEN that back up for them, as opposed to the hundreds of hits every second, taking your entire server (with low ram) into PEGGED HIGH CPU, with the fucking exim/processing/var/mail snafu.

    truth be told, I have not personally ever found a way to stop spam from a server, except by CIDR'ing their entire network's ass up until they behave. Not a fucking packet from them after that. Yeah hundreds of thousands of other piddly ass fucking servers IP from countries on the entire planet still come in. Get rid of the TOP ones though...

    The other thing is, even if you do catch, or ping some fucking server in the USA, you can't stop them. Or get paid. I was told I could get paid for each spammer I caught. Problem is there's no way to legally stop them and prove you caught them. (That's a LAW problem) Or I would be doing this every day, as my primary source of income!!!

    On one server, I blocked, .Cn, .Ru, .BR, .FR Some germans..um, the bogans, and using log statistics to sort the top spam sources . I managed to get the CUSTOMERS HAPPY, and the CPU from 99% to 2% idle. Not one complaint about an email not reaching the Falun Gong.

    A user who fucks up and hits an email list accidentally is not spam. (though assholes out there try to make it like it is, with solicitors and lawyers) But at the same time ANONYMOUS should pass though, and at the same time the real spammers need LIFE in prison.