"We found a horse at home, forced to withdraw the automatic transmission Taishi report, the natural is not so serious, but the trouble is Go you three to go. This case if you do open, you Cheng, Ma, family heirlooms are misled his majesty's great sin, Daughter raid. " Zheng faces with touches such as, kowtow as Daosuan, a series of mercy, but Du Yinghao Lang cruel, and he is not Care; other pretended enough, he Yi Tan said: "I had a sake of the heart, persevering, not to sell off the old lady, Insist dry in the end, call me any way.
I love some of the text they used... forced to withdraw the automatic transmission, and not selling off the old lady.
I don't understand the point of creating an account on any site, just to post broken links to a site that is most likely home hosted to obtain IP addresses of unsuspecting users, why can't people like that be banned from the web.
On my site, the only way to contact me is through a form. People actually go through the effort to post long advertizements to me stating that they can give me a number 1 listing on search engines, little do they know that my Hulu video gadget already got me a number 1 rating with over 22,000 downloads, well actually 3rd if you count hulus 2 links. I am about ready to remove the form completely from my site and keep the contact info just in my software.
We need a DoNotSpam.gov like the DoNotCall.gov site but for email website forums and newsgroups. Maybe we could find a site to setup a Petition to Washington for a DoNotSpam.gov site.
EDIT: Just found this on the FTCs site you can directly forward your spam to the FTC see http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/contact.shtm for the address.
The only way to stop spam will be to charge a fee for each e-mail.
As much as I hate to say it, I would welcome a $0.01 fee for each e-mail if it would stop the @%#$ spammers.
The only way to stop forum spam is for every forum on the net to implement a function that automaticaly adds a NOFOLLOW' metatag to links.
Most search engines will not count links with these tags when they 'evaluate' search results, which means linkspamming forums would be worthless.
(They don't care about the readers of the assorted forums, just the page ranking on Google and other search engines)
Personally, I check out most linkspams in my forum, and try to evaluate them.
sometimes, it's a legit company where someone fell for the promises of a 'search engine optimiser', and then it's possible to explain to them how much they F! up.
Other times, I find a less than trustworthy company, and I start investigating the hosting.
If the hosting is 'good', I email them and tell them what their customer is doing...
If the hosting is one of the 'bomb proof' ones, I instead email their uplink ISP...
(This has only worked once, as far as I know, but I really enjoyed reading their reply. Seems I wasn't the first to complain about that hoster... )
I also sometimes check out their payment system, and complain where appropriate...
Selling ROMs or Pr0n, and using PayPal? Like shooting fish in a barrel...
A lot of VISA/AmEx/MC/Whatever-card service handlers will also drop them like hot potatoes at the first complaint.
(But you need to leave the spam on the site for a while, to be certain as they may want to investigate it themselves.)
The only way to stop spam will be to charge a fee for each e-mail.
As much as I hate to say it, I would welcome a $0.01 fee for each e-mail if it would stop the @%#$ spammers.
Bean
A while back I suggested a charge of $0.10 for each outgoing email and a credit of $0.09 for each received email. The difference would be split between the sending/receiving email providers. I bet that would stop most spammers and provide enough revenue for the email providers.
Why?
Because spammers are already using rootkitted PCs to send the SPAM from, so we'd only end up with stupid but otherwise innocent PC users having to pay the bill...
'But if the user risks losing money if someone hacks their PC, won't that make them be more careful'?
Hah! How many computers are hit by keyloggers, WoW-login stealers and so on already?
Besides, the users would most probably just sue their ISP for allowing it to happen to them.
After all, thousands of idiots are surprised each year when they travel abroad, then download he latest episode of 'completely lost', 'Prison Freaks' or just surfs for Pr0n with their mobiles, then are 'shocked and surprised' when they get the bill afterwards.
And even if a 'pay for send' scheme was to be implemented, how would it deal with say... a email group?
(I'm a member of several groups, one of which is for PDAs. Ysterday I got diest nr. 1833 from it. And there are over 500 other members who also got it.)
Also, a 'credited for receiving emails' scheme is just soo ripe for abuse...
The only way to get rid of SPAM is to go after the money. Make it costly to set up hosting(by pressurising the hosters to take them down quickly), taking away their payments, and making it more difficult to reach their sites(kill pageranks).
One thing that also should be done is to make Comcast(and other giant ISPs) 'shape up' as I understand they advises against users putting up routers/Firewalls between their modem and the users PCs.
(t makes their crappy diagnostics tools fall over)
Not having a firewall to protect your PC is asking for trouble...
Also, complaining to Comcast that a PC on their networks is sending huge amounts of SPAM is just a waste of time.
(I've given up on them, and whenever a spammer uses one of their IPs, I just ban a block of IPs in that range. So does a lot of others... )
As Gadgetman says.
Also, there's no central point which distributes email. Email is simply a transmission of data between any two IP addresses, on a handful of agreed port numbers (for sending mail it's typically port 25, or port 587 for TLS-encrypted transmission, for example). So, how would a payment scheme work? Every ISP and major network backbone would have to monitor all traffic on a number of TCP ports, and try to figure out who's going to pay and to where. Won't work.
Interesting point about that 'NOFOLLOW' metatag btw. Wasn't aware of that one.
Its just a matter of forwarding your spam marked mail to the FTCs address that I posted a link to. They are mainly looking for Phishing spam. I still have yet to see it done in a Court, but the FCC governs all communications lines in the US so they have the ability to charge each person committing a crime, transferring viruses, herassing people, bullying, etc... On the same note, the FCC can also charge the service provider for allowing it to happen through there equipment.
Jorge P
Posts: 385
Comments
I love some of the text they used... forced to withdraw the automatic transmission, and not selling off the old lady.
OBC
On my site, the only way to contact me is through a form. People actually go through the effort to post long advertizements to me stating that they can give me a number 1 listing on search engines, little do they know that my Hulu video gadget already got me a number 1 rating with over 22,000 downloads, well actually 3rd if you count hulus 2 links. I am about ready to remove the form completely from my site and keep the contact info just in my software.
We need a DoNotSpam.gov like the DoNotCall.gov site but for email website forums and newsgroups. Maybe we could find a site to setup a Petition to Washington for a DoNotSpam.gov site.
EDIT: Just found this on the FTCs site you can directly forward your spam to the FTC see http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/contact.shtm for the address.
As much as I hate to say it, I would welcome a $0.01 fee for each e-mail if it would stop the @%#$ spammers.
Bean
Most search engines will not count links with these tags when they 'evaluate' search results, which means linkspamming forums would be worthless.
(They don't care about the readers of the assorted forums, just the page ranking on Google and other search engines)
Personally, I check out most linkspams in my forum, and try to evaluate them.
sometimes, it's a legit company where someone fell for the promises of a 'search engine optimiser', and then it's possible to explain to them how much they F! up.
Other times, I find a less than trustworthy company, and I start investigating the hosting.
If the hosting is 'good', I email them and tell them what their customer is doing...
If the hosting is one of the 'bomb proof' ones, I instead email their uplink ISP...
(This has only worked once, as far as I know, but I really enjoyed reading their reply. Seems I wasn't the first to complain about that hoster... )
I also sometimes check out their payment system, and complain where appropriate...
Selling ROMs or Pr0n, and using PayPal? Like shooting fish in a barrel...
A lot of VISA/AmEx/MC/Whatever-card service handlers will also drop them like hot potatoes at the first complaint.
(But you need to leave the spam on the site for a while, to be certain as they may want to investigate it themselves.)
A while back I suggested a charge of $0.10 for each outgoing email and a credit of $0.09 for each received email. The difference would be split between the sending/receiving email providers. I bet that would stop most spammers and provide enough revenue for the email providers.
Why?
Because spammers are already using rootkitted PCs to send the SPAM from, so we'd only end up with stupid but otherwise innocent PC users having to pay the bill...
'But if the user risks losing money if someone hacks their PC, won't that make them be more careful'?
Hah! How many computers are hit by keyloggers, WoW-login stealers and so on already?
Besides, the users would most probably just sue their ISP for allowing it to happen to them.
After all, thousands of idiots are surprised each year when they travel abroad, then download he latest episode of 'completely lost', 'Prison Freaks' or just surfs for Pr0n with their mobiles, then are 'shocked and surprised' when they get the bill afterwards.
And even if a 'pay for send' scheme was to be implemented, how would it deal with say... a email group?
(I'm a member of several groups, one of which is for PDAs. Ysterday I got diest nr. 1833 from it. And there are over 500 other members who also got it.)
Also, a 'credited for receiving emails' scheme is just soo ripe for abuse...
The only way to get rid of SPAM is to go after the money. Make it costly to set up hosting(by pressurising the hosters to take them down quickly), taking away their payments, and making it more difficult to reach their sites(kill pageranks).
One thing that also should be done is to make Comcast(and other giant ISPs) 'shape up' as I understand they advises against users putting up routers/Firewalls between their modem and the users PCs.
(t makes their crappy diagnostics tools fall over)
Not having a firewall to protect your PC is asking for trouble...
Also, complaining to Comcast that a PC on their networks is sending huge amounts of SPAM is just a waste of time.
(I've given up on them, and whenever a spammer uses one of their IPs, I just ban a block of IPs in that range. So does a lot of others... )
Also, there's no central point which distributes email. Email is simply a transmission of data between any two IP addresses, on a handful of agreed port numbers (for sending mail it's typically port 25, or port 587 for TLS-encrypted transmission, for example). So, how would a payment scheme work? Every ISP and major network backbone would have to monitor all traffic on a number of TCP ports, and try to figure out who's going to pay and to where. Won't work.
Interesting point about that 'NOFOLLOW' metatag btw. Wasn't aware of that one.
-Tor
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title47/47cfr80_main_02.tpl
EDIT: Sorry wrong link, meant to post this one http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/cfr.php?title=47&type=chapter&value=1