Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

   


   


   















      :: Inet-Admins
Inet-Admins mailing list archive (inet-admins@info.east.ru)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[inet-admins] FYI Fw: ANNOUNCEMENT: Spam Cancel Moratorium




>Path:
...!nrchh45.rich.nt.com!zcarh46f.bnr.ca!despams.ocunix.on.ca!not-for-mail
>Message-ID: <980332153824.AA@ferret.ocunix.on.ca>
>Newsgroups:
news.admin.net-abuse.bulletins,news.admin.net-abuse.usenet,news.admin.net-ab
use.misc
>Date: 31 Mar 1998 21:19:24 EST
>Followup-To: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
>From: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)
>Subject: ANNOUNCEMENT: Spam Cancel Moratorium
>Organization: Despams 'R Us
>Approved: news-admin-bulletins-request@math.psu.edu
>Lines: 128
>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>
>[Cc'd to relevant newsgroups and mailing lists.  Separate copies to
>news.admin.net-abuse.policy and news.admin.announce]
>
>Usenet Spam Cancel Moratorium
>
>As many of you are aware, the volumes of Usenet spam are
>ever-increasing.  Latest statistics show about 1.3 million or more
>spams per week.  Fully 40% of all Usenet traffic is spam, 40% spam
>cancels, leaving 20% non-spammed.  In other words, 4/5ths of all Usenet
>traffic is spam or spam cancels.
>
>Many groups still look pretty good from the perspective of not being
>too spam-filled, but this is largely due to Herculean efforts on the
>part of a relatively small number of spam cancellers, or the handful of
>sites that have good filters.
>
>Recently, we're seeing other trends, such as more and more sites
>turning off cancels altogether, yet, implicitly relying on the spam
>cancellers to get much of the spam before it arrives at their systems.
>Many systems are doing this not because they don't want the spam to go
>away, but the sheer volume of cancels is causing technical problems
>with their servers.  In contrast, many other sites have not taken any
>measures of any kind to protect their own systems, users or the rest of
>Usenet for that matter, and they rely on the spam cancellers to clean
>up spammers on their own site, keep their Usenet services useful to
>their customers and, in many cases, to keep their servers from
>collapsing.
>
>The situation is clearly getting out of hand, and it's time for us to
>temporarily change tactics.  It has always been our intention that we
>should be aiming towards putting ourselves out of business by making
>spam cancels unnecessary.  As this doesn't appear to be happening on
>its own, it is becoming necessary to force the issue.
>
>What we need:
>
> - We need users to become more vocal in their complaints
>   to ISPs, and sites that host spammed web URLs.  Accurate
>   targetting of complaints can sometimes be diffcult.  Here are
>   some hints: http://www.sputum.com/sputools.html, and the
>   links to the SPIT/SPITE tools.
>
> - We need ISPs to become more proactive in ensuring that
>   spam doesn't originate on their own systems.  Too many
>   ISPs are sluggish, and rely on us to clean up their
>   messes.  The filters mentioned below, as well as
>   spamfind on http://spam.abuse.net are useful in this
>   area.
>
> - We need ISPs to become more serious in providing high
>   quality service to their customers, whether it be the
>   implementation of inbound spam filters, installing
>   NoCeM-on-Spool, or, encouraging the development of
>   spam-free feeds.
>
>   See:  http://www.cm.org for NoCeM information
> http://spam.abuse.net for filtering tools and
> other links
>         http://www.exit109.com/~jeremy/news/antispam.html
> Cleanfeed filters
>         http://www.spamhippo.com Spamhippo filters.
>         http://www.nntp.sol.net/patches/diablo Diablo anti-spam
> filters
> http://rtr.xpat.com/~jem/cyclone Cyclone anti-spam
> filters
>
>The status-quo is not accomplishing these ends - the despammers are
>cleaning up the mess, so where's the incentive?  It's time to
>demonstrate in inarguable terms what Usenet is facing, and force the
>hands of ISPs.  It's like trench warfare: years of moving the line back
>and forth a few yards, and what do we have to show for it?  A
>tremendous waste of resources and no significant progress towards
>ending the war.
>
>Therefore, effective April 3, we are calling for a full spam cancel
>moratorium.  For an indefinate period after this date, no spam cancels
>should be issued.  This includes "classic spam", "broken gateway spews",
>"newsgroup bombing" (ie: alt.religion.scientology, alt.pagan, and even
>news.admin.net-abuse.* bombs), third party forgery cancellations, in
>the big 8, other global top-level hierarchies such as alt.*, and
>regional hierarchies.
>
>You'll notice that we said "indefinate period".  This is because
>we don't want ISPs to implement short-term solutions.
>
>NoCeM notices will continue being generated.  We believe that NoCeM has
>some technical/scalability problems, but, NoCeM-on-spool is one of the
>easiest filters to install and the most effective.
>
>Most of the major anti-spammers have participated in the discussions
>leading to this, and will participate in the moratorium.  We would hope
>that the despammers who've not been involved in this discussion will
>also decide to participate.
>
>Any despammer wishing to confirm this can email me directly at
>clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca.
>
>The only cancels that we will generate will be cancels that we're
>required to issue (ie: administrators issuing cancels of their own
>users), or forgeries of our own names.
>
>It is expected that some spam cancellers (particularly ones limited to
>specific regional hierarchies) will not participate either due to not
>seeing this notice, or deciding not to go along with the rest.  So,
>some cancels will undoubtably continue.  However, it is anticipated
>that the cancel volume will drop by at least 95%.  Any "broad-coverage"
>despammer attempting to continue will be more than a little busy... ;-)
>- --
>All postings to news.admin.net-abuse.bulletins are unconfirmed and
>unverified unless stated otherwise by the moderators.  All opinions
>expressed above are considered the opinions of the original poster
>not the moderators or their respective employers.
>
>For a copy of the guidelines to this group, see
>http://www.math.uiuc.edu/~tskirvin/home/nana/
>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: 2.6
>
>iQCVAgUBNSGlwJ3FmCyJjHfhAQGJtQQA0+tSOBgB5sEQsCdhmHOp5zb5eDfPiYfR
>GXwtpL/7EBM/lEEiJUHRFctKzbxTpt4906BaBjRroQibXWoesnaUUb/CggJXkD+K
>+NbQ8Ue+tckH3i5DzQT9uLk6MuDMNWaraHVBXz/PncDVRXLC+iDSJaD/aI49Yoz6
>GhXo4RNCr+g=
>=VJH4
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>

------
Ilya Shulman   ish@east.ru        +7-095-956-4951 ISH-RIPN
East Connection ISP, Moscow, Russia. http://www.east.ru


=============================================================================
"inet-admins" Internet access mailing list. Maintained by East Connection ISP.
Mail "unsubscribe inet-admins" to Majordomo@info.east.ru if you want to quit.



 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.