Great Circle Associates List-Managers
(April 2001)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: we aren't the enemy, but it's hard to prove it
From: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui @ plaidworks . com>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 08:37:24 -0700
To: Tom Neff <tneff @ panix . com>, <List-Managers @ greatcircle . com>
Cc: James M Galvin <galvin @ acm . org>
In-reply-to: <787417280.988629895@[192.168.1.100]>
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108

On 4/30/01 8:24 AM, "Tom Neff" <tneff@panix.com> wrote:

> From an ISP standpoint, what really matters about spam is the number of
> recipients.  The really noticeable difference between a legitimate mailing
> list and a spam campaign is that the latter is HUGE.

That's not a safe assumption, Tom. There are huge, legitimate mailing lists
as well. And when you're the gorilla, it can be used as a warning sign to go
take a look, but not as assumed guilt.

> As a matter of 
> practice, if you check your sender's relay and you impose a limit (hard,
> agreed-upon or otherwise) on the number of recipients within your domain,
> you can let real lists through while blocking spam campaigns, or so it
> would seem to me.

That doesn't scale to AOL, I don't think. I wish I could toss some numbers
here to illuminate what I'm doing, but I can't. Just realize there are
really big lists (and then add a couple of zeros) have have really big AOL
subscriber bases...





Follow-Ups:
References:
Indexed By Date Previous: Re: we aren't the enemy, but it's hard to prove it
From: Tom Neff <tneff@panix.com>
Next: Re: we aren't the enemy, but it's hard to prove it
From: James M Galvin <galvin@acm.org>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: we aren't the enemy, but it's hard to prove it
From: Tom Neff <tneff@panix.com>
Next: Re: we aren't the enemy, but it's hard to prove it
From: Tom Neff <tneff@panix.com>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com