TELECOM Digest OnLine - Sorted: Re: Anti-Spam Tool Going Out of Business

Re: Anti-Spam Tool Going Out of Business
31 Dec 2006 11:38:22 -0800

Gordon S. Hlavenka wrote:

> Many times I have had emails I sent bounced, just because someone else
> at my ISP had an open relay or was infected with something, or perhaps
> was actually evil. But why is that _my_ problem? Yet these lists
> make it my problem; I get my emails bounced back, through no fault of
> my own. I don't choose my IP address, nor do I choose my IP
> neighbors.

I hate to sound cold and heartless, but you did choose your ISP, and
your ISP has to do more to control open relays or infections on
sub-systems it serves.

I don't understand how a home computer could be used as an "open
relay". Why isn't protective software included when the home computer
was sold?

In any event, it seems to me that the ISP, as the front line in
providing service, has the responsibility that its customers are clean.
I understand some large ISPs do provide protective software for their
customers. Further, a home customer receiving or sending a large
amount of traffic indicates an error condition that requires

If that results in an addtional expense to the ISP and customers, so be
it. That might be more than made up by all the wasted bandwidth and
server storage accomodating SPAM and viruses.

I can't help but wonder that ISPs are hiding their heads in the sand on
this problem and could be doing more, but don't want to spend the
money. Some work would involve a intelligent human going through error
reports and contacting subscribers; and they seem to have aversion to
hiring people. If it can't be automated they're not interested.

> ... I'm losing a handful of emails _every_ _day_ which did not
> happen when I was getting all the spam.

My employer has spam filtering but gives the recipient the option of
rejection. Interestingly, some messages it flags are what I call
"semi-SPAM"--messages that were indeed "legitimate" and sent from
someone I know, but broadcast to a great many people and unsolicited.
I really don't care for such messags. Some individuals feel compelled
to use their PC to broadcast their religious and/or political beliefs,
but I don't want to hear them. Some businesses I have dealt with feel
the need to send me near daily ads. (I bought a bathing suit on-line.
How many freakin' bathing suits does one person need, yet the vendor
emails me sales info all the time!)

[public replies, please]

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do understand what Gordon is
complaining about. I feel almost positive that some mail for this
Digest is lost each day midst the mountains of spam which are
received, and I am at a loss as to what more I can do about it. The
problem is _so many_ different hands are processing 'my' spam. In
addition to looking at it and disgarding what they feel
is spam, of course the server looks through the
mail as well. Then my own anti-spam tool (my local copy of spam
assassin) picks through the remains, and even with all that picking
over it, quite a bit of spam still gets through each day and no doubt
some valid mail gets lost, probably because one of the intermediate
points along the way takes a disliking to the sending ISP or host
or whatever. There has to be a better way, somehow. PAT]

Well, Happy New Year 2007 to all of you! Tomorrow we will start
Volume 26 of the Digest if I am still around. PAT]

Post Followup Article Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply
Go to Next message: Associated Press News Wire: "The Largest Telecom Merger in History"
Go to Previous message: Fred Goldstein: "Re: AT&T 'Family' Reunion: Merger Approved"
May be in reply to: Anick Jesdanun, AP : "Anti-Spam Tool Going Out of Business"
TELECOM Digest: Home Page