On 11:00 PM 5/19/02, Chuq Von Rospach wrote:
>On 5/19/02 10:21 PM, "JC Dill" <inet-list@vo.cnchost.com> wrote:
>
>> Actually, what they need is better ANI coverage. If you can nail down the
>> individual by the phone number that is used to dial into the ISP (to setup
>> the account, or to login with the computer), that goes a LONG way towards
>> identifying them.
>
>Except for broadband access, corporate lan access and the exploding wireless
>access point environment. Oh, and other public access environments, like
>cybercafes.
All of THAT is trackable back to the IP that injected the email, and the
person/business who paid for the access (who is responsible for the use of
the line). The problem with dial-up is that if the account is opened with
forged info, and the user dials in with no ANI info, there's no way to know
*who* is behind the spam.
Cybercafes usually don't allow you to run the software necessary for a spam
run. Open 802.11 nodes pose a problem, but if you get your DSL shut off
because someone hijacks your open 802.11 to send spam, that will probably
make you more careful about how you setup your home LAN in the future.
>>> And we're basically only talking US here. Globally, life gets even more
>>> interesting -- and when it comes to privacy issues, much, much tougher.
>>
>> The privacy issues are no tougher than the same issues that surround
>> consumer credit.
>
>Do you work on systems that involve privacy issues and non-US consumers?
>
>I'd disagree.
I'm limiting my discussion to US issues only. Once we deal with US issues,
THEN we can explore the international ramifications. One thing at a time.
jc
References:
|
|
