You are here: Home > Participate > Join a Discussion > Mailman Archives
<<< Chronological >>> Author Index    Subject Index <<< Threads >>>

Re: Administrative Overheads Arising from UCE

  • To: "G.W. Mills Beebit" < >
  • From: Lars Marowsky-Br�e < >
  • Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 19:39:53 +0100

On 1999-02-15T18:05:28,
   "G.W. Mills Beebit" tmills@localhost said:

> As we gather material to present to Parliamentary committees, etc. there
> are a few issues which ought to be clarified.  Among them, just what are
> the overheads associated with what is sometimes known as a "massmail"
> incident?  
> Scenario 2 - Forged (but deliverable) from:, using any mailserver
>   Mailserver (over)loaded
>   Bounces returned to from:
>   Complaints to from: delivered
>   Complaints to admin?? admin of from: domain has little to say, admin of 
>     originating IP can handle, admin of open relay likewise

I can confirm this is a real problem. A customer of us has been the designated
"blackhole" for quite a few spams now. The spammer put an address from within
their domain into the "Reply-to:" line. The UCE never touches our systems for
relaying or anything.

Every time a spam happens, their mailserver first gets a load of immediate
bounces. Then they get hammered by the lemmings who reply to the spam
directly. Then the complains start and we get a ton of those too.

The problem is we are almost completely helpless here. We forward the
complaints to the ISP from which the spam really originated, but we are
wasting tons of time on this.

And, whats worse, people have threatened to put the customers domains into the

Spamming is a serious DoS attack for everyone but the "clever" spammer.

> ISPs who fail to "rein in" their most obnoxious customers are currently
> subjected to peer pressure.  Most times it is gentle persuasion, some times
> via blocking (MAPS RBL, ORBS, individual blocks and filters).  There could,
> however, be legislative moves to impose "common carrier" obligations on
> ISPs, which would be the other side of the coin by which ISPs are not
> liable for material stored or transported on their networks, as long as
> certain conditions are fulfilled.
> What say ye all?

This "peer pressure" should make sure it is pressing down on the right guys,
thats what I am saying.

    Lars Marowsky-Brie
Lars Marowsky-Brie
Network Management Netzdienste GmbH - DPN Verbund-Partner

  • Post To The List:
<<< Chronological >>> Author    Subject <<< Threads >>>