Re: Constant Guard - Combating Bots

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood () cable comcast com>
> Date: October 11, 2009 20:37:32 EDT
> To: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>, ip <ip () v2 listbox com>, rsk () gsp org
> Subject: Re: [IP] Re:    Constant Guard - Combating Bots

> For IP if you like (or not, if the topic is getting stale).
>
> > From: Rich Kulawiec <rsk () gsp org>
> >
> > So I think an important (and as yet unanswered) question is: why  
> > didn't
> > Comcast immediately address this critical problem, instead of  
> > allowing
> > it to get steadily worse for 6+ years?
>
> In response to that problem we started a program of targeted port 25  
> blocks
> where customers were identified as having sent very large volumes of  
> spam.
> We also made a number of anti-spam technology changes on our own email
> platform, among other tactics. This moved us from what was probably  
> #1 on
> the Senderbase volume list to somewhere around #8 to #10 or better  
> recently,
> with volume of about 20% of what it was in 2005 if my memory serves
> correctly.
>
> In 2005 we also joined the Messaging Anti-Abuse Working Group  
> (MAAWG), see
> http://www.maawg.org.  We continue to participate at MAAWG to a great
> extent, we continue to invest in anti-abuse technology, and we  
> continue to
> grow the teams that focus on this challenge.
>
> > But just so it's clear that I'm not only bashing Comcast for this:
> > I could say (and have said) the same things about Verizon, Charter,
> > AT&T,
> > Roadrunner, and a host of others.
>
> Many ISPs and other companies continue to work to combat the problem  
> via
> MAAWG and other industry groups.
>
> Regards
> Jason



-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com