Re: Re[2]: [dvd-discuss] EFF opposes blacklisting spammers

[Ole Craig <olc(at)cs.umass.edu>]

On 10/19/01 at 03:13, 'twas brillig and Jeme A Brelin scrobe:
> On Fri, 19 Oct 2001, carey wrote:
> > Thursday, October 18, 2001, 7:05:14 PM, you wrote:
> > 
> > > Imagine that someone made a list of suspected child molesters.  Also
> > > imagine that your name was put on it by mistake.  Would it really 
> > > matter that the only people who use the list are the ones who
> > > voluntarily chose to use it?
> > 
> > Your analogy fails for a key reason:
> > The RBL list does allow you to have the address removed once you've
> > proven  you're no longer an open - mail relay.
> 
> Um, so modify his analogy so that you can have your name removed from the
> "child molestors" list if you can prove you're not a child molestor.
> 
> Yay.  It's still "guilty until proven innocent".
> 
> > I've had my local ISP have this problem a few times.  Also, unlike
> > what theEFF article says, at least in my case, there was
> > identification that the message was blocked by the recipient ISP,
> > notably that the recipient blocked my mail due to the fact that my ISP
> > was an open-relay.
> > 
> > The molestor case exists (thank you meghan's law) and unlike RBL
> > doesn't allow for an individual to be removed.
> 
> No, but it requries CONVICTION, doesn't it?  Whereas the RBL just requires
> REPORTS of spam.
> 
> Believe me, I'm no friend of the spammer.  And I worked for YEARS at a
> major telecommunicatios carrier where we were constantly battling with our
> own customers to prevent spam and keep our network clean.
> 
> But a prescriptive solution does not exist that does not cause the undue
> restriction of legally protected speech.

	When was the last time you got a junk fax? 

> And, unfortunately, due to the easily forged nature of SMTP, no system of
> punishment after the fact can be enforced, either.

	Bullshit. Sure, you can forge SMTP headers -- but anyone who
has enough intelligence to read and understand RFCs can track
"Received: " headers and identify the insertion point -- the first
"real" SMTP transaction. Then it's simply a matter of telling the
admin at that site that either A] s/he has a customer who is forging
headers, or B] s/he has an open mail relay. (Or C], s/he is a spamhaus
-- an ISP that exists to relay spam -- but that business model isn't
exactly the best in the industry, and most spamhaus operations have
died an unregrettable death.)

> Spam is a painful reality... like bad manners or crude language.

	Spam is cost-shifting. Transmission and storage costs are
borne by the recipient and the ISPs; the latter pass the expense on to
the former, so in essence we are all funding spammers by paying the
internet bill.

> We can teach against it, but some people are just going to do whatever
> they please and we must respect their right to do so.

	Bullshit. The flipside of a right to free speech is a right to
not listen.

		Ole
--
Ole Craig * olc@cs.umass.edu * UNIX; postmaster, news, web; SGI martyr *
CS Computing Facility, UMass * <www.cs.umass.edu/~olc/> for public key 

perl -e 'print$i=pack(c5,(41*2),sqrt(7056),(unpack(c,H)-2),oct(115),10);'