Nickname: Silva

Review: I don't see people doing anything relevant to innovate on this area. There's just too much money to earn with spam--on both sides. The only promise I see so far is EmailXT. It is led by a small, private group of individuals, so I guess no corporate agendas here. EmailXT has a quite promising set of features, without needing an infrastructure change. http://www.emailxt.com for those interested. -AS

Date reviewed: Sep 24, 2006 11:29 AM

Nickname: Steve

Review: The answer to spam is to have a filter function that allows you to list addresses that you will accept e-mail from, excluding all others. This way the sender must have prior consent to send e-mail to the receiver. The receiver has to iniate the willingness to accept e-mail before it is allowed to pass.

Date reviewed: Sep 22, 2006 9:58 PM

Nickname: art101

Review: Thanks, Catherine. We're burdened by the "Can-Spam Act" (aka "Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act - Public Law No. 108-187; S.877). It's worse than useless. It legalizes spam. This convoluted, fatally flawed legislative crap was bought and paid for by morally challenged lobbyists. Its nickname is a stunning example of Orwellian doublethink. Australia passed an anti-spam law that works. Australian ISPs were a major conduit for spam. The postini.com website offers comprehensive real-time maps that pinpoint where spam originates. Australia used to be lit up like a Christmas tree. But now it's mostly dark and quiet. Mission accomplished. The Internet is easily the most important advance in human communication since the invention of the printing press. Money-grubbing thugs highjacked it. The USA Can-Spam act helps criminals pollute the 'Net. We're not apathetic, Catherine. We're resigned-- and still really pissed off. art101.com

Date reviewed: Sep 21, 2006 2:52 AM

Nickname: BiteMan

Review: I think what will work better is to educate Internet users not to open any e-mail unless they know who it is from and they are expecting it. As far as penalizing the spammers that are in the USA--that might help but the good ones use servers that are outside the USA.

Date reviewed: Sep 20, 2006 4:16 PM

Nickname: Tom

Review: Your article was great as far as it went. Maybe include some Anti-spam software programs for us users; that would have been very helpful and appreciated. Over the past months I too have noticed spam on the rise. Mostly the spam is filled with chaff text (part of a novel) plus encrypted coding. I have sent the spam to the spammer's ISP using McAfee Neo Trace and/or www.whois.com. Using the spammer's IP Address (taken from the Message Details, (Internet Headers), one can identify the Internet Service Provider (ISP). I always include the Original Message, Message Details, (Internet Headers), and Message Source in the E-Mail to the ISP. In addition, commercial e-mail should be sent to the following: The Federal Trade Commission uce@ftc.gov spam@uce.gov and The Internet Fraud E-Mail Watch Group nfic@internetmci.com If there is any other place that this spam should be sent I would appreciate knowing. Thank you.

Date reviewed: Sep 19, 2006 11:02 PM

Nickname: rimshot

Review: The government controls so much of our life. I don't understand why the spam senders cant be prosecuted. I never open any e-mail when I don't recognize the sender. We all need to do that.

Date reviewed: Sep 19, 2006 10:07 PM

Nickname: David Hart

Review: Don't lump Blue Security into anti-spam advocacy. They were trying to fight abuse with abuse and had a flawed business plan. Most of the anti-spam community was opposed to Blue's efforts. See: http://tqmcube.com/bluefrog.php

Date reviewed: Sep 19, 2006 9:23 PM

Nickname: Tim

Review: Interesting and probably very accurate persepctive. While e-mail users and businesses love to complain about spam and the garbage in their inboxes, we don't exactly do a ton to stop it. However, as this threat of phishing increases, I believe that we will be forced to deal with the issue. http://www.essentialsecurity.com/news_business.htm?id=136 As the article describes, phishing is not going to stop, and we must take action and become more aware consumers to fight it off.

Date reviewed: Sep 19, 2006 6:44 PM