<<< Chronological >>> | Author Index Subject Index | <<< Threads >>> |
Re(2): Explaining spam to policians (was: test message)
- Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 12:59:17 +0100
[email protected] a écrit: > >>Don't we have any stats on the number of spam received by people? >>That might be simpler to convince them of the severity of the problem. >The number of spam received by *individuals* probably isn't going >to say enough. Figures about entire *organisations* may well say >a lot more. I've done so on various occasions for CWI in the past >couple of months. Although CWI is a relatively small organisation >(some 250 people), the figures I got ranged from some 750 to some >3000 *per day*. Part of this can be explained by the fact that we >have quite a few people whose (present of past) activities cause >their e-mail addresses to be known in the entire Solar System, >and thus to become "prime targets" for spam. But even so... > > > Piet > Good Morning It might be better to look at SPAM as we know it today as just a passing phase whose window of operation is limited to effective roll out of DNS SEC in an IPv6 environment in a context where recent legislative attempts such as the European Parliament's directive on Privacy banning non opt in cookies Best Regards, Jonathan Robin ____________________________________ Life : A finite succession of infinite opportunities ______________________________________ ISOC France 17 rue Hamelin 75016 Paris Tel : +33 (0)1 4505 9680 Liaison Internet Society UNESCO OECD & NGOs Co-Founder IPv6 Forum Societal Impact & NGO Relations Working Group Steering Committee : Internet Societal Task Force http://www.istf.org ISTF Privacy and Security Working Group http://istf-docs.norrnod.se/tpd/wg_privsec-2.2-tap.html _____________________________________ UNESCO/UNITAR Scientific Committee Festive Committee Internet Fiesta http://www.internet-fiesta.org Vice President Association Francaise de Télétravail http://www.aftt.net Vice President European Student Vote http://www.eu-studentvote.org
- Post To The List:
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Explaining spam to policians (was: test message)
- From: Jan Meijer
- Re(2): Explaining spam to policians (was: test message)
- From: Piet Beertema
- Re: Re(2): Explaining spam to policians (was: test message)
- From: Koos van den Hout
- Re: Explaining spam to policians (was: test message)
- References:
- Re: test message
- From: Piet Beertema
- Re: test message
- From: Piet Beertema
- Re: Explaining spam to policians (was: test message)
- From: Piet Beertema
- Re: Explaining spam to policians (was: test message)
- From: Piet Beertema
- Re: test message
<<< Chronological >>> | Author Subject | <<< Threads >>> |