More on spamming..

Hi,

At 12:58 01.10.97 -6000, Miroslaw Jaworski wrote:
>On Wed, 1 Oct 1997, Stephan Hermann wrote:
>
>> from the ISPs.
>> I can filter out the relay hosts, ok...but our customers gets e.g. mail
>> from customers of sprint, and I block the incoming connection from
>> customer-mail-relay.sprint.net (e.g.!!!). Well...then I can go and close my
>> business ;)
>> 
>> No, if we want to stop those spammers, the logical idea is, that all ISPs
>> which are housing such spammers must ban them from their servers. They must
>> disconnect every PoP, which is housing such spam customers.
>
>yea... close all PoP's and "I can go and close my business ;)"

Nono..disconnecting, not closing. If any PoPs of an ISP (such as our PoPs),
are housing those spammers, I would disconnect them...if it's an problem
with their smtp server...well I help them to close it for spams :)

>
>I don't know how it is in other countries  but here most of the customers 
>are POP users. Direct lines ? Geee.. Only bigger companies can afford it. 


>So when u get a spam, its from dial-line. most often.try to find who was 
>it ? 

well, in USA the leased lines are very cheap, I think many spammers have
leased lines to cheap PoPs/ISPs.


>> Well, in Germany we have several problems with aol germany and t-online (a
>> service by Deutsche Telekom). What can we do ? Block the connections to
>> aol.com ? block the connections to t-online ?
>
>there is an ISP called Polbox here in Poland. they've got about 50 000 
>accounts ( people says that ). all these accounts are for free. 
>people can get their www for free too... 
>U can imagine what kind of people are on this server ( free.polbox.pl ).

Yes :)

>> We must find an answer, in a quite "commercial sense". Those people, IMHO,
>> stop spamming, if they get an invoice for IP traffic or a letter from our
>> lawyer.
>
>or there is another solution:  
>if all administrators will be consequent ( is it right word ? ), and not 
>to give accounts to people who are on "Great Index of Spammers - year 
>XXXX". :))) 
>> The only way to stop this is, to get a position in the contract between
>> service provider and PoP, or between service provider and customers, that
>> the PoP and/or the customer are billed for such traffic. 
>> You know, "money makes the world go round". 
>
>special fees for spamming ? :) 

Well..."commercial sense" I mean: a letter from my lawyer...increasing the
charges for the connection or something like that. take the money from the
people who are using the net for their unsocialize things, and they are
crying. Money is the only thing they want to make, and money is the only
thing you let them stop. Net Charging Rates for those business (especially
many "hardcore"-businesses) must be high...and metaprovider like sprint,
uunet and of course every isp who is connected through them, must increase
those rates for those customers.
you know what I want to say ?



>> well...we're changing our internal network to a secure server network
>> (SSN). So, my second smtp server is in this SSN and the first smtp server
>> is in front of that network. so, our second smtp can go out, but no one can
>> get in and use my second smtp for relaying :)
>
>yes, but his is solution for a company not for ISP [ when u are at end of 
>line ]. not when u've  got connection to 2 or more AS's.  

Nono..our internal network == my own network to provide access for our
customers. 
For our PoPs we cannot solve the spam probblem, we can help them to stop
this problem, but we're not the parents of our PoPs admins ;) they must
close their smtp themself. only for our internal network (with dial-in
ports and the whole crap you need for providing ;))

ReadU,
	sh
-- 
Stephan Hermann, techn. Leiter Netzwerk u. Telekommunikation	eMail: sh at nwu.de
NWU Gesellschaft fuer Netzwerke und Telekommunikation mbH	Tel.:
+49-231-9860143
Heinrichstr. 51, 44536 Luenen					FAX : +49-231-9860148