] The Anti-Spam Technical Alliance (ASTA) is a
] collaborative effort between six leading Mailbox
] Providers and the Internet community to establish
] technical and non-technical solutions for handling
] unwanted and unsolicited e-mail (spam). ASTA founding
] members include America Online, British Telecom, Comcast,
] Earthlink, Microsoft, and Yahoo!. We came together
] because we share a common set of experiences and problems
] associated with spam. It is our intent to promote an
] inclusive process that embraces a broad range of ideas
] while ensuring that all proposals and recommendations
] address economic, technical, user, and resource impacts.
] To that end, we have involved representatives of state,
] federal, and international governments, consumer advocacy
] groups, marketers, large commercial e-mail senders,
] enterprises of all sizes, technology providers, industry
] standards groups, and trade groups representing other
] interests.

Postmaster.Info: The Proposal

] Internet mail suffers from the fact that much unwanted
] mail is sent using spoofed addresses %u2013- "spoofed" in
] this case means the address is used without the
] permission of the domain owner. This document describes
] mechanisms by which a domain owner can publish its set of
] outgoing MTAs, and mechanisms by which SMTP servers can
] determine what email address is allegedly responsible for
] most proximately introducing a message into the Internet
] mail system, and whether that introduction is authorized
] by the owner of the domain contained in that email
] address.

Here's the internet draft. This is the merger of Microsoft's "Caller ID for email" and SPF.

I-D: MTA Authentication Records in DNS

This has become a major mess for AOL; you'd think Google would have
come up with a better answer.

UserFriendly on GMail's Namespace Problem

Here's SPF for qmail-smtpd. It adds Received-SPF:
headers to inbound messages and can be configured to reject
messages under various circumstances, e.g. when SPF says that
the source IP isn't allowed to MAIL FROM: the address in question.

qmail SPF patch

] Four large Internet service providers agreed yesterday to
] a partial truce in their battle with one another over
] potential technology to stop junk e-mail in hopes that
] they can devote their united energy to fighting spam.

SPF is starting to get some traction...

4 Rivals Almost United on Ways to Fight Spam

]
] Is the internet on the verge of a meltdown? A non-profit
] organization, People For Internet Responsibility (PFIR),
] is concerned that there is the risk of "imminent
] disruption, degradation, unfair manipulation, and other
] negative impacts on critical Internet services..." PFIR
] believes that the "red flag" warning signs of a potential
] meltdown include "attempts to manipulate key network
] infrastructures such as the domain name system; lawsuits
] over Internet regulatory issues... ever-increasing spam,
] virus, and related problems..."

Thank you, chicken little...

Internet Meltdown?

]
] It appears that BT (British Telecom) intends to move its
] current phone network to an IP-based network by 2009
] thereby sending the circuit-switched technology off to
] the attic.

Phone Always Busy? Must be DDoS on VoIP Network

Micro Fuel Cells Inc has a new "direct methanol" fuel cell that
is small enough for cell phones and is expected to last
2 to 10 times longer than batteries.

(Tom: there's some javascript badness on this page that makes
the bookmarklet not work)

New technology could aid fuel cell manufacturing

Decius wrote:
] ] SPF is harmful. The architectural ramifications of it
] ] are so extensive and will have such significant changes
] ] on the ways that people can access and can use Internet
] ] mail, that it would actually be less costly to switch to
] ] an entirely new architecture such as IM2000 Internet mail
] ] than it would be to switch to SPF and deal with all of
] ] its consequences properly.
]
] Hrm. This website makes a compelling case that the rush to
] adopt SPF is premature.

This guy seems like a sort-of Dan Bernstein wannabe ...

The IM2000 stuff is interesting. I think it would help with the
"spam clogging mail servers" problem but not directly improve
the garbage in my inbox that I have to wade through.

RE: FGA: SPF is harmful. Adopt it.

Decius wrote:
] ] we've heard confident assertions that there are really
] ] only a dozen or so "kingpins," and equally confident
] ] assertions of 200, or 1000. Frankly, I think the number
] ] is probably larger, because cases against allegedly large
] ] spammers don't seem to affect the overall volume of spam
] ] out there. If there were only a few, those cases should
] ] make a noticeable difference. Or, it could be true that
] ] there really are only 200 at any one time, but it's very
] ] easy for others spammers to enter the business.
]
] The FTC is looking at authentication systems like SPF to
] address the spam problem. They don't believe law enforcement
] can do it.

I believe the FBI dude at SummerCon said that they had
"quite a few" spam investigations underway and wouldn't unseal
the indictments until the cases were airtight.

I think a few (hundred) high-profile prosecutions and people
doing hard time for this shit might make a dent. Then firewall
any country that doesn't come onboard.

Squeeze the spammers from 2 directions:
1. If you get caught sending spam, you will face stiff criminal
penalties.
2. Fix the mail system so that its easier to catch spammers.

RE: The FTC's View on the Spam Problem (washingtonpost.com)