Make no mistake: this is serious.

A court in illinois has ordered ICANN to kill the Spamhaus domain name because a spammer sued to have their name removed from a list of spammers, and got a default judgement, and Spamhaus won't comply.

This made me angry at first, because clearly the plaintiff here is a spammer and is using the legal system as a means of harrassment, but the attitude of Spamhaus toward the court is also a problem. What if Spamhaus did illegitimately list someone and then acted like this when issued a TRO?

SecuriTeam Blogs - The Spamhaus case, a spam-savvy Illinois lawyer perspective

AOL Postmaster on stopping spam. He's not wrong. ISPs ought to police their networks for security issues, and I think that the government ought to be greasing the wheels for this through liability limitation and possibly tax incentives. Its in the public interest.

I also think his proposal for a private network isn't entirely unreasonable at this point, but the devil is in coming up with a social contract that everyone is happy with and finding a way to govern it effectively, and you can see how well ICANN is doing with that. It would be hijacked to serve special interests just like ICANN has been.

How to Stop Spam

] 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.

FGA: SPF is harmful. Adopt it.

] 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.

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

] But the FBI told Congress on Thursday that it has
] "identified over 100 significant spammers" so far and is
] targeting 50 of the most noxious for potential
] prosecution later this year.

My oped on this law has been "we'll see" mostly because:
1. There is no reason why these 100 people weren't prosecuted years ago.
2. Some that have still seem to be spamming.

If they actually enforce this law, and the penalty is actually significant in relation to the profits, and a large number of people are prosecuted, it might have an impact on spam. It will change spam from a "legitimate business" to something you look over your shoulder if you do. That should actually deter some of these people.

Then again, it hasn't seemed to have any impact on the availability of drugs.

FBI plans spammer smackdown - News - ZDNet

] LOAF creates and maintains a database of all your
] correspondents, defined as people to whom you have sent
] email at least once. Every time you send an email
] message, LOAF appends this information to the email
] message, using a format described further below.
] LOAF-enabled correspondents collect and store this
] information in their own local databases.

Shared hashed white-lists. Interesting idea...

loaf

] Your post advocates a
]
] ( ) technical ( ) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante
]
] approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work.
] Here is why it won't work.

Well, personally I think that whitelists suck less then spam, so I would add two more checkboxes to this form:

( ) People's complete unwillingness to make even the smallest change to their established routine.
( ) People's general expectation that their problems should be solved by other people.

Standard form for responding to anti-spam proposals

] The new law hasn't had an effect on the amount of spam
] being sent, either. "There's been no reduction in the
] volume of spam," says Scott Chasin, MX Logic's chief
] technology officer. "In fact, the exact opposite--our
] spam rates are actually going up."
]
] MX Logic classified 77 percent of its customers' e-mail
] as spam on Monday, up 6.5 percent from January 1.

SPAM continues to grow exponentially. At these rates I think there is about a year left before people will start exiting SMTP in favor of closed systems.

PCWorld.com - Is the CAN-SPAM Law Working?

] Fed up with e-mail scams purportedly from Nigeria, the
] country's government will soon announce new plans to trap
] and prosecute cybercriminals.

Why jurisdictional arbitrage will not protect spammers...

IHT: Nigeria targets spam that taints its image

] A spam-free world by 2006? That's what Microsoft chairman
] Bill Gates is promising.
]
] "Two years from now, spam will be solved," he told a
] select group of World Economic Forum participants in
] Davis, Switzerland. Gates said his company is working on
] a "magic solution" based on the concept of "proof" -
] identifying the sender of the e-mail.

Microsoft plans to solve a problem