More on spamming..

Hi,

At 12:09 01.10.97 +0100, Alex Bligh wrote:

>Long term:
>
>It doesn't solve it, but it helps it. One of the main problems is
>traceability. IE you don't know where the spam has come from. If
>noone third-party relayed, then when my users get spam, I'd know the
>IP address of the machine it came from originally. This would be
>good. Another necessary fix is for ISPs to keep record of which
>user had which IP address at any given time, and to keep contact
>details for all their users (this is desirable for secuirity and
>legal reasons too). If you build these two things together with
>a term in peering agreements that classifies spam abuse in a similar
>manner to the way most agreements currently classify security
>problems (i.e. mutual terms for traceability and action), and
>one hopes that similar terms are already in place in transit
>agreements, then one should be better able to get spammers
>removed.

But what, when there are laws, which disallow such loggins like
IP Address <-> Username at a specific time for a long time ?


Cu,
	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
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 355 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/lir-wg/attachments/19971001/50755ba5/attachment.sig>