Re: [Asrg] Point of information...

["Alan DeKok" <aland@freeradius.org>]

Barry Shein <bzs@world.std.com> wrote:
> Virtually all proposals here imply a legal aspect. For example, RMX
> implies prevention of identity fraud, a crime.

  ... in some jurisdictions.  RMX is more about establishing a consent
framework for use of a domain name, than of preventing legal "fraud".

>  RMX (and related) is always proposed as a way to thwart those who
> are trying to fraudulently identify themselves as having some
> affiliation with another, usually readily recognizable,
> institution. That's illegal,

  ... again, in some jurisdictions.

  Let's remember: the entire world doesn't have the same laws as your
local area.

> What we haven't seemed to converge on is what is the root of the
> problem, where are efforts best expended, etc. Even if some are
> anxious to just get on with proposed solutions lacking any foundation
> in reality.

  Ah, so the people proposing solutions are incompetent and/or
ignorant.  That's a pretty wide brush you've got there.

> Yet those aspects get virtually all the attention here, primarily
> because they're easily understood by dabblers who haven't really come
> to understand the problem and believe they can work entirely from two
> pieces of information: what spam messages usually look like, and some
> mental model of how SMTP works.

  Again, you claim that people proposing solutions are incompetent.

  I find it *very* instructive, Barry, that while you've repeated
claimed we should be working towards "weapons of mass destruction" to
fight spam, and you've insulted and put down anyone proposing a
solution; in turn, you have proposed *nothing*.

  Your entire position, then, is that you have zero contributions to
getting anything done, and that you stand in frank opposition to
anyone else getting anything done.


  I'll be honest here, and admit my actions in this group haven't been
above board.  My support of RMX was not out of an honest belief that
it would solve all of the spam problems.  Instead, my support of a
proposal (ANY proposal) was to see what kind of crazies it would pull
out of the woodwork.

  So far as that goal goes, my support of RMX has succeeded beyond my
wildest dreams.

> The problem is how spammers amplify their distribution channels while
> keeping costs nearly at zero. Without this, they would virtually cease
> to exist.

  A significant percentage of the spam to my domain has North American
content, but comes from IP's in China.  My contacts at the Chinese
embassy say that they've looked into it, and the spam problem isn't on
the governments radar.

  So far as "weapons of mass destruction" to fight spam go, the one
with the single largest effect would be to get the government of China
to crack down on spammers.  That involves political-layer discussions,
which are outside of the scope of this group.

  What *is* in scope for this group is collecting the data to prove
that a large percentage of world-wide spam originates in China.  But
in keeping with the traditions of ASRG, there has been significant
opposition to any proposal to collect such data.

  Alan DeKok.

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg