North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: "Make love, not spam"....

  • From: Brett McCully
  • Date: Thu Dec 02 15:53:55 2004
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta;; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=qHZHhTK7Z5HphU3xJFPMF6bQtkabHarpZI99pEREKvAzad08VXcBKJczj7OjTAcEh5ZZFmVbr/p0+S9/p9BvssopbisaUpyyXCBCaqSb/7PRzCSV1XrS7u0FKUqhnCVk7HN1GNRvAE76aMz4l9DUY6eAwuohe4FGXjjAY7kbXkY=

The point behind the initiative is not to attack the email senders,
but the source of money.  If the spam websites are never up, then the
recipients cannot buy products advertised.  Without the sales, there
are not finances to support the spamming.  If spammers can't make
money sending email, then they will find something else profitable to
do . . . . like phishing :-)

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 10:52:22 -0500, Rich Kulawiec <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 02:14:01PM +0000, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote:
> > Techdirt has an article this morning that discusses how
> > Lycos Europe is encouraging their users to run a screensaver
> > that constantly "pings servers suspected to be used by
> > spammers" and also suggests that "In other words, it's a
> > distributed denial of service attack against spammers by Lycos."
> Already noted as unbelievably stupid and dissected on Spam-L, but:
> getting into a bandwidth contest with spammers is a guaranteed loss, as
> they have an [essentially] infinite amount available to them for free.
> Apparently Lycos is unaware of zombies (including those hosting web
> sites), HTTP redirectors, rapidly-updating DNS, throwaway domains,
> and other facts of life in the spam sewer.
> ---Rsk