Another Nutty Idea about SPAM

[Igor Chudov @ home]

Omegaman wrote:
> Igor Chudov wrote:
> > Another nutty idea: to create a database of people who do NOT want to
> > receive unsolicited advertisements, and make it widely available.
> 
> Of course.  But this does not address the issue of "unscrupulous 
> spammers" which is what Steven was commenting upon.

Surely, you are right. See below, however.

> > The obvious problem is that some very uncsrupulous spammers would want
> > to grab this database and use it as a source of email addresses. 
> > 
> > This problem has a solution, however: instead of distributing people's
> > email addresses, distribute MD5 checksums of their addresses. For 
> > example, an entry for ichudov at algebra.com would be 
> > 
> > 	b51175dae78f25427351d5e3ff43de30
> > 
> > There is no way to guess the original text from an MD5 checksum.
> > 
> > Spammers should be advised to exclude all addresses with MD5 checksums from
> > that database from the recipient list, and include instructions on how
> > to get one added to the database into their spams.
> 
> Okay fine.  The spammer is "advised" but if he is unscrupulous in the 
> first place, he'll simply ignore the advice and continue bulk-mailing 
> to every address he can grab.  

In which case the spam-fighting mob will harass him.

> > Database maintainers could even provide a email filter-bot that would
> > accept recipient lists by email and send back the same lists, but
> > WITHOUT addresses that wish not to receive spam. This way stupid
> > low-tech spammers (who make up the majority) will be able to process
> > their email lists quickly and easily.
> 
> Indeed, stupid low-tech spammers would benefit from such a service if 
> they wish to honor "do not send" requests.
>  
> > This database may be maintained centrally. Users may be able to sign up
> > for inclusion into that database by email or by filling out a Web-based 
> > form. Identity verifications may be done by using cookie protocol.
> 
> I like the idea and if I had the resources, I would do it personally. 

I think that a regular unix account would have enough functionality
to implement it.

> Optimistically, many bulk e-mailers would sign on to the plan.  
> (Ironically, one would probably have to solicit bulk e-mailers to 
> sign up).  However, many, being unscrupulous, ignorant, etc. will not 
> be involved.
> 
> The only way I see to get bulk e-mailers to utilize this service is 
> to offer a positive and/or negative incentive for usage of the 
> service.  ie. "What do I gain by elminating people from my bulk 
> mail-outs?  What can be done if I don't follow this protocol?"
> 
> Ideas?  Comments?

I think that the incentive for spammers to actually use this service is
that spam-fighters can agree not to yank their accounts and not to
go after them if they use that "no spam please" database.

This arrangement basically makes everyone happy, for obvious reasons.

	- Igor.