[One quibble: I got a russospam sent to an address that I've never used.
So it's not always sent to a "real address." --Declan]
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Politech] Weekly column: Political spam, the new national
pastime? [sp]
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 20:17:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Dean Anderson
To: Declan McCullagh
I'd rather have the email than the postal mail.
1) I can more easily quote it in email. If you are for the candiate or
against, this is a good thing.
2) I can save it and search it. Nothing helps keep a politican honest than
their old promises.
3) It is more cheaply stored.
4) Of course, there's always Sanford Wallace's old 'save trees' benefit.
I don't really know what the problem is with political email. This isn't
truly unsolicited in the sense of broadcast to bogus addresses, which is a
bane to ISPs. Rather, it is broadcast to a list of real addresses. I
think the anti-spam radicals must be succeeding in getting people
conditioned against getting email. This is a good segue into noting that
in January, 56% of the bulk emailers fully complied with CAN-SPAM, and
90something percent partially complied. I haven't seen more recent
statistics, but there have also been some suits against real commerical
operators who haven't complied with CAN-SPAM. So why is almost none of the
spam compliant in my email box? Could it be that someone is just sending
abuse in the hopes that it will annoy people? (I think the answer is yes)
But, I read a book recently on "Crypto-virology", which presented the
premise that by sending a lot of email from one infected host to another
and encrypting or encoding it at each hop, it was possible to create an
anonymous communication system that the author called a "mix-net". It went
on to describe the utility of mix-nets in extortion and information theft
via virus infection. Whether this non-commercial junk mail represents a
mix-net or not I think is a testable hypotheses. One just needs to go
back through the viruses that have been released or captured sending junk
mail, and see if they resend messages after some encyption steps. If they
do, then a mix-net is possible. If they don't, then this is just so much
hypothesizing.
But assuming that this 'mix-net' theory is true, then it certainly means
that we need to have much more attention from law enforcement on viruses
and virus operators. Not only will this halt extortion and information
theft, but it will halt the deluge of junk email that isn't a real
commercial offer. My expectation has been that these non-commerical
messages coming from viruses are just anti-spammers trying to annoy people
into banning spam. Many of these messages appear at first glance to be
commercial, and appear unlikely to be coded. But some messages contain
random words and character strings. It had been supposed that this is to
confuse Bayesian anti-spam filters, though I doubt it, because bayesian
filters shouldn't be confused--they are trying to distinguish wanted from
unwanted, not spam from non-spam. But there is some increasing portion of
spam that could be suspected as containing coded messages in the random
words and characters.
But this is somewhat academic, though interesting. In either case, it is
imperative to have more law enforcement attention on viruses and virus
operators. There really isn't any question of that. And that is the road
to spam solutions. Just ignore what the anti-spammers tell you.
Dean Anderson
CEO
Av8 Internet, Inc
On Tue, 18 May 2004, Declan McCullagh wrote:
http://news.com.com/2010-1028-5213287.html?tag=nefd.acpro
Political spam as national pastime
May 17, 2004, 4:00 AM PT
By Declan McCullagh
Aaron Russo wants your vote so badly, he's willing to spam you for it.
Last week, Russo, a Hollywood producer who is running for president as a
Libertarian Party candidate, fired off thousands of unsolicited e-mail
messages announcing his campaign and asking recipients to "help support
Russo financially" with "automatic monthly contributions."
Russo, whose films include "The Rose" and "Trading Places," is not
alone. Political spam has become a thoroughly nonpartisan communications
technique, with Democrats, Republicans and third parties alike turning
to bulk e-mail in numbers that are still small but steadily increasing.
Two percent of all spam is political, according to statistics compiled
by antispam vendor Brightmail.
Since Jan. 1, a federal law has regulated spam. But if you look at the
law's fine print, you'll find a telling exemption: Our elected
representatives made sure the restrictions don't apply to them. As a
result, the Can-Spam Act covers only e-mail promoting "a commercial
product or service," which lets political spammers off the hook.
[...remainder snipped...]
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Politech mailing list
Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)
--- end forwarded text
--
-----------------
R. A. Hettinga
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
