Plan would shut down spam-sending computers

[CShine]

WASHINGTON -- Consumers who allow their infected computers to send out millions of "spam" messages could be unplugged from the Internet under a proposal released today by six large e-mail providers. Internet users also could be limited on the amount of e-mail they send out each day to ensure they haven't become unwitting spammers, under voluntary guidelines proposed to curb unwanted junk e-mail. The proposal was developed by Time Warner Inc.'s America Online, Yahoo Inc., EarthLink Inc., Microsoft Corp., Comcast Corp. and BT Group Plc.

Spam now accounts for up to 83 percent of all e-mail traffic, and large Internet providers say the problem costs them billions of dollars each year in wasted bandwidth, legal bills and additional customer service.

Most of the recommendations issued by the group seek to plug holes used by spammers to cover their tracks. Internet companies should make sure that their equipment has been properly secured so spammers can't route their messages through them, the group said. Security holes in Web-based e-mail forms and redirection services used to monitor online advertising should be plugged, the group said.

But the group also suggested consumers be held accountable if their machines are exploited by spammers.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/2641197

[Mithras61]

1. I'm not a SPAM lover, but...

this smacks of censorship. Maybe if they would actually find a way to fix the real problem, the holes in the protocol and mail server programs, then we wouldn't have to put up with this sh!t.

[shraby]

2. Microsoft would have to do

something for their consumers then and under Bush, that's a no-no.

[trotsky]

6. This isn't a Microsoft problem.

SMTP has been around (with flaws) for longer than MS.

[Mithras61]

7. Well, I've been running MS OSes for several years...

and I've found that running a "tight" system is pretty easy, but you have to spend some time learning how to do it. If you don't "do" computers for a living, you probably don't have the time or desire to learn how.

The fact is that it IS possible to have the installation routine ask about security settings and provide enough info for a reasonably intelligent non-computer user to give good answers. After all, Red Hat/Fedora do it. As for the setting up a secure system from the git go, there are several *nix systems that do this, but once you have the OS installed, you have to start weakening security before you can do anything.

As I said earlier, the REAL solution is to fix the protocol being used (hey, SMTP is about as wide open as it gets) and fix the mail server programs that support this poorly designed protocol.

Beyond that, I have strong opinions about working and useful anti-virus software, firewalls and such being standard components of ALL computer systems that are sold with an operating system (hey, if you buy it without the OS, YOU take responsibility for installation/configuration).

[izzie]

3. That is a big help to the likes of someone like me.

I never took a road test to use this thing and to day my e-mail does not work just right, my printer will not print and the CDrom will not open. God only knows if some one some place is doing some thing to this thing.I am sure I am not the only 1st grader on this thing.

[Loonman]

4. That doesn't make any sense

How does screwing consumers eliminate spam?

Lazy bastards.

[gatlingforme]

5. Yah, I agree, lets try to make sense of this, I can't it's a joke

[BattyDem]

8. So let me get this straight ...

If a spammer ILLEGALLY hijacks my computer and uses it to send spam, I'm going to be held responsible ... even though I had no idea it was happening?! So does that mean if someone steals my car and uses it as the getaway vehicle after committing a crime, I'm going to be held responsible for his criminal activity? :shrug: :eyes:

This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard! I agree that everyone should have virus protection and a firewall, but that doesn't mean I think people should be held accountable if they are the victim of a spammer. That's absurd! What's next ... someone breaks into your home and you get arrested because you didn't have the right kind of lock? :mad:

I know how to protect my computer with various security settings and programs, but the average person hasn't got a clue. I know many people who were infected with a computer virus, even though they had virus protection. Do you know why? They had no idea they had to update the protection on a regular basis. These are the same people that give me a blank stare when I mention the word "firewall".

90 percent of the people I know only use their computers for email, games and word processing. The more "adventurous" ones may actually do their taxes on it as well. They buy a computer, turn it on and "play" - they haven't got a clue about security. They're going to have to go after thousands, if not millions of consumers after the next virus makes the rounds. Are these people going to be permanently "unplugged" from the Internet or just until they secure their computers? This will be fun when businesses lose money not only because they were infected with a virus, but because they are "unplugged" and unable to do business.

New viruses are created every single day. Anti-virus programmers do a good job of combating them, but they can't create an "antidote" before the virus is discovered, so even a computer user who's obsessed with security can get infected. It is impossible for the average consumer to keep their computer 100 percent secure 100 percent of the time.

I think they should file this plan in the "Stupid F**king Idea" category!

[Old and In the Way]

9. I'm for it.

My wife runs a website and e-mail system for our business. She is absoluely innudated with spam. She averages about 500/day. I get at least 50. I'm sure that there are probably a 1000 or so machines that are accountable for the vast majority of these nuisance spams...if this addresses the problem, it's OK by me.