[CLUE-Tech] Brute force attack from host 208.188.115.21

[Charles Oriez]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

At 09:20 AM 8/6/2004 -0600, Collins Richey wrote:



>Much of what you say is valid, and I've heard it all before, but there
>has to be a better mechanism than blanket discrimination directed at all
>users who share a common isp.

Of course there is a better way.  There are several better ways.

1) uu.net, and every other ISP that claims to have an anti-spam TOS, should 
actually enforce them, and throw off spammers.  I am blocking INFLOW right 
now not because they have a bad TOS, but because they don't enforce that TOS.

2) Drop the provision of can-spam that says that there is no right of 
private action, or right of ISP action, or right of state AG action, to 
enforce section 6.  That is the section that says that uu.net can be sued 
for profiting from its spamming customers, but only the FCC can enforce 
section 6.  I'd be in court on Monday without that restraint, as would 
dozens of others, and the spammers would be shut down by Thursday.

3) When a uu.net or an inflow takes spammer money to ignore their TOS, 
their legit customers can vote with their feet.  SPEWS and I each have a 
similar policy. I just told the Denver Museum of Natural History that the 
Sierra Club will not whitelist their server on inflow until they publish a 
scheduled departure date from their pro spam ISP.  Publish a firm departure 
date, and I'll poke a hole in the boycott.

Each of those has a common thread.  When hosting spammers becomes a path to 
bankruptcy for ISP's, spam will cease to be a reasonable business 
model.  When hosting spammers causes legit customers to walk, most ISPs 
will decide that hosting spammers is a bad business decision.  Those that 
don't make that determination fast enough will find themselves in chapter 
11 proceedings.  Either will cause the spam to stop.

>You only need to extend this into the
>political realm to see just how objectionable this approach is.

Nope. We decidedly part ways there.  I had no problems with that approach 
in the political realm.

1) the farm workers' grape and lettuce boycott
2) the South Africa anti-apartheid boycott
3) The Shell Oil boycott over the murder of Ken Sara-Wiwa

Not only did I find them not objectionable, I actively participated in some 
of them.


- --
coriez at oriez.org 39  34' 34.4"N / 105 00' 06.3"W
Lazlo's Chinese Relativity Axiom: "No matter how great your triumphs or how 
tragic your defeats, approximately one billion Chinese couldn't care less." 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
Comment: created 6/26/04 expire 6/25/05 stored MIT & PGP.COM

iQA/AwUBQROz07iLNnC0cMkdEQKh3wCgyexDpo86j18gCuIryV5wLbvL3aIAoP5D
zG/1/4fvkXIUNNLpQQby9p5c
=R0gL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----