nanog mailing list archives

RE: anybody else been spammed by "no-ip.com" yet?


From: Randy Neals <rneals () gt ca>
Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 19:34:30 -0400



An example of challenge/response email authentication.
http://www.myprivacy.ca/

-R
-----Original Message-----
From: Ralph Doncaster [mailto:ralph () istop com]
Sent: May 6, 2002 7:32 PM
To: Scott Francis
Cc: Forrest W. Christian; measl () mfn org; Eric A. Hall; nanog () nanog org
Subject: Re: anybody else been spammed by "no-ip.com" yet?



On Mon, 6 May 2002, Scott Francis wrote:

On Sat, May 04, 2002 at 06:01:49PM -0600, forrestc () imach com said:
[snip]
Passing laws and putting on filters don't work.  Depending on each mail
server admin to do the right thing doesn't work.  We need to find
something else that will.

I'm beginning to think that fighting the spam itself is futile. What we
should perhaps be focusing on is removing access to whatever is being
spamvertised (frequently a get-rich-quick website, porn site, diet site,
etc.
- but generally a website somewhere, that can have the plug pulled).

Actually, my analysis of spam seems to indicate authentication of remote
SMTP servers through a process similar to joining this list would remove
99+% of SPAM.  i.e. the first email from a particular remote server that
is received, requires the sender to take some action (respond with a
password, click on a URL, etc.) before the mail gets through.  One of
these days I hope to write the procmail rules to do it (if I don't find
someone that has done it already)

-Ralph


Current thread: