|
Imagine A Future Without the Internet
The
spam plague is upon us.
“Spam
has grown into a major plague affecting the
digital world,” announced Dr. Robert Horton,
acting chair of the Australian Communications
Authority (ACA) and chairman of the recently
concluded conference organized by world governing
body, the International Telecommunication Union
(ITU).
Dr.
Horton added that the global epidemic that is
spam should be fought through “a global
and concerted action,” with the ultimate
aim of protecting and preserving the Internet,
which now has a growing effect on human life
as a medium of communications and commerce.
Unfortunately,
much like any other human invention, the Internet
has become most susceptible and vulnerable to
human abuse. Turning a blind eye, moreover,
for many years to the dark side of the Internet
has now resulted to its most harrowing effects
– including even its own probable death.
The
growing global disinterest in the Internet largely
due to spam could ensue the death of the Internet
itself, as reported by Robert Gellman, a privacy
and information policy consultant in Washington
D.C., in his article “Future History Reports
on Internet’s Demise.”
He
pointed out in his article that contributing
factors to the likely demise of the Internet
also include viruses, worms, government filters,
phishing, and security issues like spyware,
advertising and URL redirection. Because of
the proliferation of spam and these other “death
factors,” people who use the Internet
as a key tool in business and personal matters,
are starting to shy away from email and e-commerce
related activities. This, at a time when people
from all walks of life the world over have already
developed a growing dependence on the Internet.
And spam is becoming to be the major spoilsport.
So,
where are we at this point as far as fighting
spam and other illegal practices on the digital
world?
Dr.
Horton stressed: “I am convinced that
we can curb spam within the next two years if
we act on a number of fronts simultaneously
and make sure that there are no havens for spammers
anywhere in the world.”
As
we’ve always hinted at in previous editions
of this newsletter, there is no such thing as
“silver bullet” to end the spam
plague. However, a large consensus at the ITU
conference pinned down “the need to adopt
a multi-track approach to incorporating strong
legislation, combined with technical solutions,
consumer education, industry self-regulation
and international cooperation.”
We
do agree, indubitably. But, while any intervention
from the technology industry and the government
sector is most welcome, we, consumers, are calling
for speedy and more concrete results of whatever
actions are currently being taken. Prolonging
the spam plague will only make the death of
the Internet one horrific reality we have to
put up and live with in the very near future.
Will
human life be the same without the Internet?
Spam
Taking a Toll on Corporate Productivity
Ferris
Research, a messaging and collaboration consultancy
firm, has estimated that spam cost U.S. corporations
over $10 billion in 2003. In a report written
by Rawlson O’Neil King for the WHIR.com,
this was due to the “profound effect spam
has on corporate productivity.”
David
Ferris, president of Ferris Research, said,
"Spam-related costs are increasing rapidly
for both corporations and ISPs, mainly as a
result of lost productivity, consumption of
IT resources and help desk support. Based on
interviews of corporate messaging managers,
it is clear that spam is a major problem for
corporate IT departments. We estimate the total
costs for spam in corporations were $8.9 billion
in 2002, and increased to $14 per user per month
in 2003."
The
volume of spam, in early 2003, was estimated
around 15 to 20 percent of all inbound emails
at corporations and 30 percent of inbound emails
at service providers. Spam volume has climbed
today to over 60 percent of all emails.
Back to top
Pop-up
Ad Spammers Settle FTC Charges
D Square Solutions LLC, charged with
using marketing methods that violated federal
laws, has agreed to settle with the Federal
Trade Commission (FTC).
According
to the FTC report, D Square Solutions used a
feature called the “Windows Messenger
Service,” which is part of the Microsoft
Windows operating system, to barrage consumers’
computers with pop-up ads for the pop-up blocking
software they sold.
The
FTC alleged that the defendants’ pop-up
ads appeared as frequently as every 10 minutes
in the forefront of consumers’ screens,
caused consumers to lose data and work productivity,
applications to freeze, and some computers to
crash.
The
settlement bars the defendants from sending
Windows Messenger Service pop-up advertisements,
selling Windows Messenger Service pop-up blocking
software, or selling Windows Messenger Service
pop-up sending software. It also prohibits instant
message advertising, requires an opt-out mechanism
for other kinds of Internet advertising, and
bars them from using deceptive return addresses
in their email and other advertisements.
In
November 2003, a U.S. District Court temporarily
halted D Squared Solutions LLC’s pop-up
advertising at the request of the FTC. The agency
charged that the defendants used the Windows
Messenger Service feature, typically used to
provide messages about such things as completed
print jobs or system shut-downs, to unfairly
harass consumers with ads for their Windows
Messenger Service pop-up blocking software.
The
message barrage advertised software costing
$25 to $30 that would supposedly block future
pop-up ads.
This
settlement ends that litigation against D Squared
Solutions, LLC, and its principals, Anish Dhingra
and Jeffrey Davis.
The
settlement will bar the defendants from sending
Windows Messenger Service pop-up advertising
and from sending instant message advertising.
It bars them from advertising, promoting, marketing,
or selling Windows Messenger Service pop-up-blocking
software or Windows Messenger Service pop-up-sending
software. It requires the defendants to provide
an opt-out mechanism for electronic advertising
and bars them from using deceptive return addresses
in their e-mail.
CAN
SPAM Shuts Down Florida Spammer
A federal court in Chicago has issued
a court order halting illegal spamming and deceptive
product claims, and has also frozen the assets
of Creaghan A. Harry, a resident of Boca Raton,
Florida.
Harry
sells bogus “human growth hormone”
products over the Internet through spam.
The
Federal Trade Commission alleges that Harry
is responsible for what likely amounts to millions
of illegal spam messages. From January 1 through
May 31, 2004, consumers have forwarded approximately
40,000 complaints to the FTC concerning spam
messages linked to Harry.
The
text of the illegal spam messages contain hyperlinks
to various Web sites that market Harry’s
products, “Supreme Formula HGH”
and “Youthful Vigor HGH.” The Web
sites claim that the products stop or reverse
the aging process, causing a veritable laundry
list of effects like weight loss, muscle gain,
hair regrowth, wrinkle removal, and higher energy
levels.
Experts
for the FTC have concluded that the claims are
wholly false and that Harry’s products
had no discernible effect on the body. Harry
charges $79.95 for a one-month supply of the
bogus products. The FTC alleges that these false
product claims have defrauded thousands of consumers
of hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The
FTC’s complaint specifically charges that
the deceptive product claims violate the FTC
Act, and the spam email messages violate the
Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pronography
and Marketing Act of 2003 (CAN-SPAM Act) by:
1) disguising their source; 2) failing to provide
a clear and conspicuous notice for consumers
to opt-out from further e-mail; and 3) failing
to provide a valid physical postal address in
the message text.
On
July 27, 2004, a U.S. District Court Judge issued
a temporary restraining order prohibiting illegal
spamming, prohibiting false product claims,
and freezing Harry’s assets to preserve
the funds for possible redress to consumers
who bought his bogus products.
Spam
King Agrees to Play By the Rules
Self-proclaimed
Spam King and ladies underwear seller Scott
Richter has agreed to play by the rules of the
CAN SPAM Act and escaped a $20 million fine,
Jo Best reported for Silicon.com.
New
York attorney general Eliot Spitzer has been
hunting down Richter since last year, vowing
to put the alleged spammer out of business.
Richter has been allegedly breaking the terms
of the 2003 CAN SPAM Act using spoofed addresses,
deceiving email accounts and subject lines,
including sending messages to people who have
not opted-in.
Spitzer,
in an agreement, dropped the penalty against
Richter to $40,000. Richter will also have to
pay $10,000 for the costs.
The
report said that Spitzer vowed to bring Richter
back to court “facing greater penalties”
should the alleged spammer violate the CAN SPAM
Act again.
Back to top
Paris Court Convicts Football Spammer
A
businessman from Aix-en-Provence, who heads
a firm called K-Foot, has been found guilty
by the Paris commercial court of flooding internet
users with messages pushing football merchandise
from K-Foot and Kasport.com sites, Estelle Dumout
reported for ZDNet France.
“Monsieur
K” will now have to pay 5,000 Euros, in
damages, each to Microsoft and AOL France, the
complainants. Including interest and numerous
court fees, the convicted spammer will have
to pay a total of 22,000 Euros.
In
the complaint lodged with the court, AOL France
and Microsoft accused the spammer of having
used numerous AOL subscriptions and created
different Hotmail accounts to send a million
advertising messages through bulk mail.
According
to the report, both AOL and Microsoft said that
“Monsieur K” breached contract rights
or the general terms and conditions of the use
of their services.
Amsterdam Court
Acquits 13 Email Fraud Suspects
Thirteen
suspects were cleared by the Amsterdam’s
District Court of charges of email fraud in
three separate cases for lack of hard evidence,
Planet News reported. The cases were filed by
the public prosecution service based on complaints
by UPC, a Dutch cable operator and Internet
service provider.
The
suspects, all of West African origin, were accused
of having used UPC facilities illegally and
committing email fraud of the “Nigerian
scam” variety (so-called Advance Fee Fraud
or Spam 419).
They
were arrested in a joint action by UPC and the
Ministry of Justice.
The
report explained, “[T]his type of swindle…is
usually initiated with a genuine-sounding email
containing stories of hardship and windfall,
but also alluring baits of huge sums of money
to be made.”
Back to
top
Aussie Anti-Spam
Law Enjoying Initial Success
The
Australian Communications Authority (ACA) claimed
that with the Spam Act 2003 a number of major
spammers based Down Under have shut down operations,
Lisa Simmons wrote for ZDNet Australia.
In
fact, Spamhaus, the international anti-spam
watchdog, confirmed the closure of these spammers.
After the spammers received a warning from the
ACA in late March about the new law coming into
force in April, there has been little or no
activity at all by these major Australian-based
spammers.
"The
ACA’s initial focus was on spammers allegedly
sending high volumes of offensive unsolicited
material including pornography and marketing
for products such as herbal Viagra," said
acting ACA chairman Dr. Bob Horton.
Anyone
caught violating the Spam Act may face a prosecution
penalty of up to AU$1.1 million per day for
repeat offenders, or pay hefty fines amounting
to thousands of dollar.
The
Australian government has already reached anti-spam
agreements with Korea, the USA, and the United
Kingdom.
Japan Gov't
to Work with IT Firms to Fight Spam
Recognizing
the hazardous effects of spam on Internet-connected
computers and mobile phones, Japan’s Public
Management Ministry has launched its own anti-spam
drive.
It
will be working closely with IT firms, inviting
mobile phone companies, software development
firms and Internet service providers to form
an anti-spam panel to be established in October,
the Yomiuri Shimbun reported.
The
panel’s primary function will be to firm
up regulations over operators that send out
these unwanted emails and look into technical
measures to stop spam.
Thailand
Inks Pact with Australia to Combat Spam
Thailand
has signed a joint telecommunications and information
technology agreement with Australia targeted
at fighting spam, news.com.au reported. The
Australian Communications Minister Daryl Williams
and his Thai counterpart Surapon Suebwonglee
signed the agreement.
The
report said that this memorandum of agreement
is aimed to encourage cooperation on international
telecommunications organizations and implementation
of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC)
group’s telecommunications and information
working group mutual recognition agreement.
Back to top
MyDoom
Variant Attacks Popular Search Engines
MyDoom.M,
or MyDoom.O, the newest variant of the MyDoom
worm continued to clog email accounts worldwide,
and four popular search engines, namely, Google,
Yahoo, AltaVista and Lycos, David Becker and
Michael Kanellos wrote for CNETNews.com
This
variant was discovered to have flooded many
mailboxes with hundreds of messages, and slowed
down the four search engines.
The
report said that once installed, this variant
automatically searches for email addresses on
the host computer’s hard drive and performs
running queries on all the four search engines.
Ranked
as one of the worst email pests ever, the original
MyDoom first broke out early this year and has
since spawned numerous versions, including one
programmed specifically to attack Linux antagonist
SCO Group.
Back to top
 |
Opinions From Inspector Mails
| Inspector Mails is the AI entity for Bigfoot's
Anti-Spam
Solution. He will be
giving regular updates and opinions
on current anti-spam trends. |
|
What
Can We Do to Curb Spam at the User Level?
“The
CAN SPAM Act was never designed to be an antidote
for spam,” announced MX Logic CTO Scott
Chasin. True enough, figures say that compliance
with the federal anti-spam law fell below 1
percent in July, said to be the lowest monthly
compliance since the law took effect on January
1 this year.
In
the first place, we never thought that the law
was intended to scare off spammers (and put
them to the slammers), bring down the volume
of junk emails, turn the (digital) world around,
and pluck us out of this spam plague.
“The
law,” Chasin continued, “provides
a definition of legally unacceptable email marketing
practices and empowers consumer protection agencies
and ISPs to go after hardcore spammers.”
Thus,
the law exists not to give us reason to stay
complacent about the spam problem and let the
law work for us (which doesn’t actually
happen). However, it is here to provide us the
right and legal battleground wherein we can
combat spam and its culprit head-on.
While
we deem continued technological innovation,
cooperation among industry players, end-user
education, and a more concerted global effort
most necessary to control or stem the onslaught
of spam, we, as end-users, must pull our act
together and do our share. If you give it really
serious thought, we are the primary reason why
spam and their perpetrators continue to exist
in the first place – if there would be
no recipients to spam there would be no one
to send it to.
We
believe our own individual efforts will matter
most in this battle. But what can we exactly
do?
Consumer
Reports recently released several suggestions
as to how we can protect ourselves online. It
stated that we could help curb spam at the end-user
level through 8 ways, thus:
“Don't
buy anything promoted in a spam message. Even
if the offer isn't a scam, you are helping to
finance and encourage spam.
“Don't
reply to spam or click on its “unsubscribe”
link. That informs the sender that your email
address is valid.
“If
your email program has a preview pane, disable
it to prevent the spam from reporting back to
its sender.
“If
you receive spam that promotes a brand, complain
to the company behind the brand by postal mail,
which makes more of a statement than email.
“Use
one email address for family and friends, another
for everyone else. Or pick up a free one from
Hotmail, Yahoo, or a disposable forwarding-address
service such as SpamMotel. When an address attracts
too much spam, abandon it for a new one. Instead
of an address like janedoe@isp.com, select one
with embedded digits, like jane8doe2@isp.com.
“If
your Internet service provider is filtering
your email and you still get lots of spam, the
ISP may not be filtering effectively. Check
its filtering features and compare them with
those of competitors.
“Report
spam to your ISP, so that it can do a better
job of filtering. To help the Federal Trade
Commission control spam, forward it to spam@uce.gov.
“Don't
post your email address in its normal form on
a publicly accessible Web page. Post it in a
form, such as “Jane AT isp DOT com,”
that can't be easily read by the harvesting
software many spammers use to collect e-mail
addresses.”
Back to top
|
Is
Bigfoot Able to Pass On Junk Emails
to Authorities?
After
almost 10 years of “low end”
home computer usage, I am fortunate
not to have received many spam emails.
However, more recently, I have been
receiving an average of up to 10 [junk
emails] a week. The emails are recognizable
and subsequently deleted.
While recognizing the process of eliminating
spam from coming into the inbox is
my personal responsibility as a home
user, my question is: If the spam
email and addresses are collected
and sent to Bigfoot, is the organization
able to act or pass on to the relevant
authorities this unsolicited mail?
Philip Crouch
PO Box 511
Rosny Park, Tasmania 7018
Australia
philipfc@iinet.net.au
|
The question here is centered on
the issue of reporting spam through the
email addresses from which the spam mail
itself comes.
The
answer is we could not identify the
spammer based on the spam mail sender's
address. These "senders" [the
sender’s address] are most probably
spammer victims themselves. This is
because spammers spoof a valid email
address, which is often illegally obtained.
Thus, spammers are able to hide their
identities.
How
would you know that your email address
is being spoofed? Well, have you received
an email lately with "undeliverable"
in the subject and something like this
in the body:
Your message did not reach some
or all of the intended recipients.
Subject: Any bogus subject
The following recipient(s) could not
be reached:
someuser.you.dont.know@someisp.com on
8/12/2004 7:06 AM
If
the recipient of the said email is somebody
you don't know, or have never sent an
email to you at all, then most likely
a spammer must be using your email address
for spoofing.
On
reporting spam, there are a lot of online
resources, to mention a few:
-
http://spamcop.net/
- http://spam.abuse.net/
- http://www.cauce.org/
- http://www.ordb.net
For
legal matters, you may report to:
-
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/alerts/doznalrt.htm
- http://www.cdt.org/spam/
|
We
appreciate all of the comments and responses
we have received about the newsletter. We will
be addressing your concerns in the next issue.
You may send your comments to antispam.review@bigfoot.com.
Since we print some of the comments we receive,
please advise us if you want your complete name
and email address withheld. You may provide
us with a first name, city and state, as an
alternative.
Back to top
 |
The following message was sent to you as
a subscriber of Bigfoot.com. We will continue
to bring you valuable offers on the products
and services that interest you most. If
you wish to unsubscribe, click
here. |
|
