Re: [tlug] Using autoresponse

[Sigurd Urdahl <sigurdur@??>]

Godwin Stewart wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 11:48:28 +0100, Sigurd Urdahl <sigurdur@??>
> wrote:
>
>   
> > Why would you assume that people/spammers/bots would send emails with
> > forged headers to an address like this?
> >     
>
> Your naïveté is touching.
>   
Cute.

> If spammers know of an e-mail address, they will spam it. They neither
> know nor care whether the e-mail address in question is read by a human
> or a robot, or even if it is at all valid. They just spam it.
>
>   

Let me clarify; "Why would you assume that people/spammers/bots would 
_target_ such a service?"

I'm awfully aware of the non-discriminating, automated nature of spam. I 
administrate an email service provider with ~2.5M mails incoming a day, 
~65% of  it is spam. I see my share of spam-hell.

Of course such a solution will "spam" by backscattering. But, I believe 
the amount of backscatter will be quite insignificant in a global 
context. It would comparable with a closed email account, and I hope 
noone really believes it's a good idea to keep accepting (and possibly 
/dev/null'ing) emails for closed accounts.

> > If the system accepts any emails, but drops the incoming email body
> > and just sends a response back I don't see how it can be used to spam
> > for anyone else than the system owner.
> >     
>
> That's the whole point. The system in question is going to be sending
> out piles of "you've won a prize and are subscribed to our mailing
> list" messages in response to spam. Such notifications are unsolicited,
> they're definitely bulk and they're e-mail. They're unsolicited bulk
> e-mail. Do the math.
>   
Each one is a response to an incoming email. That makes it non-bulk in 
my book.  But I agree, the backscatter will be unsolicited and email. 
Though, it does not make it any more spam than other backscatter.

Most of that problem could probably be removed by dropping emails with 
bodies bigger than a given limit, possibly also by adding a spam-filter 
in front of the script, or both, to reduce the amount of backscatter, 
and probably more important in Andres' context, improve the quality of 
the collected data.
> > If there is no affiliate program connected to this I can't see any
> > sensible incentive for forging addresses onto the list at all, except
> > for pure vandalism.
> >
> > What do you think spammers are? Angels who abide by rules? They *are*
> > vandals.
> >     
No. Maybe some of them are, but the bulk (pun intended) of the spammers 
run businesses and are into this for money.

> > This seems like twist on a quite normal way of building a list of
> > email addresses,
> >     
>
> The *ONLY* acceptable way of building a list of e-mail addresses is
> closed-loop opt-in. People have to say that they want on the list and
> then they must *confirm* that they asked, otherwise anyone can
> force-subscribe anyone else.
>   
Personally I agree. That does not mean that the marketing department or 
boss will agree.

But this too is easily done within the framework Andre sketched up. Let 
any respone email from the system have an activation link or code that 
is valid for a day or something like that.
> Please wake up and smell the coffee. This is 2007. The climate has
> changed radically since that first spam run for DEC went out back in
> 1979.
>   
You are right. And I think the way to deal with it is to accept that we 
will have spam and backscatter as an unwanted component of email for the 
overseeable future. If everyone played on team it shouldn't be a problem 
to limit spam, but IMHO that is not going to happen any time soon. 
Unfortunately.

The premier, and most effective, frontier against spam is in the 
recieving end.

> > but the technology used to collect the addresses can not be blamed
> > for that.
> >     
>
> It can today, in a climate where 95% of e-mails floating around the
> 'Net are fraudulent.

I disagree. If Andre's solution is implemented in a sensible way it 
should not be considered bad technology. You might dislike it (I do), 
but building lists of potential customers is an important part of modern 
business, and there is no reason to not expect it to be part also of 
Internet business. As long as there is money to made from it, companies 
will make lists, sell lists, buy lists. my hope is that customers make 
companies realise that using that info responsibly is good for business.

kind regards,
-sig

--
I managed to cut away my signature.