random thoughts on how I can prevent spammers from using my net
I have been trying to figure out ways to prevent spammers from using my net as a sending location (even once). If most spam is sent from throwaway dialup accounts, how would a daily limit of #arbitrary-number of emails sent, with a charge of $0.05 (or other number) per excess e-mail...? The arbitrary-number might be 1000 or so, plenty for most legitimate uses. Since we get credit card numbers from our dialuo customers, if we do get a spammer, and they send, say 100,000 emails in a month, we subtract their allowance of 30K or so and bill them $3,500 (70K * $0.05) for excess.... If we make the terms and conditions obvious, and get a signature before activating the account, it won't take very many occurrences before word would get around that SPAM can ocst as much as paper junk mail to send Thoughts? -Dorn
Sounds like a good strategy. I'm not sure whether it will handle the case where a spammer uses existing mailing lists (such as this one). Won't they send one message to the list's host machine, which propagates it for them? Do spammers often use this technique? -- | Peter Hunt | Phone: +1 408 990 2093 | Ipsilon Networks Inc. | Fax: +1 408 743 5677 | 232 Java Drive, Sunnyvale CA 94089-1318 | Email: hunt@ipsilon.com
On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, ALAN DORN HETZEL JR wrote:
I have been trying to figure out ways to prevent spammers from using my net as a sending location (even once). If most spam is sent from throwaway dialup accounts, how would a daily limit of #arbitrary-number of emails sent, with a charge of $0.05 (or other number) per excess e-mail...? The arbitrary-number might be 1000 or so, plenty for most legitimate uses. Since we get credit card numbers from our dialuo customers, if we do get a spammer, and they send, say 100,000 emails in a month, we subtract their allowance of 30K or so and bill them $3,500 (70K * $0.05) for excess....
If we make the terms and conditions obvious, and get a signature before activating the account, it won't take very many occurrences before word would get around that SPAM can ocst as much as paper junk mail to send
Thoughts?
-Dorn
Sounds like Bob Metcalfe's recent column in Infoworld on E-postage. Hank Nussbacher
participants (3)
-
ALAN DORN HETZEL JR
-
Hank Nussbacher
-
Peter Hunt