Re: TMDA (was: new spam functionality added)

[David Masterson <dmaster@synopsys.com>]

>>>>> Simon Josefsson writes:
> prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) writes:
>> Per Abrahamsen <abraham@dina.kvl.dk> wrote:
>>> If a reliable autoconfirmer were written, some spammers would
>>> start using it.

>> In doing so, they would give up their anonymity.  We'd be able to
>> find them and report them (and blacklist them).

> Is this the problem?  In theory I can track down IP's on the net
> today, but tracking down spammers this way doesn't seem like a
> solution that prevents all spam in practice, as spammers uses hacked
> or incorrectly configured machines.

When the spammer assumes that no one can reply to his message, then
all these things can be spoofed in the email.  All you really know is
the hostname and IP address of the last relayer of the email which is
something that spammers rely upon to maintain their anonymity.  If the
spammer decides to put in an autoconfirmer to get around TMDA, then he
has to supply a good "return address" in his SPAM which now makes him
traceable.  Even if it's only traceable back to a compromised machine,
that machine can be blacklisted and the sysadmin informed to fix it.

-- 
David Masterson                David DOT Masterson AT synopsys DOT com
Sr. R&D Engineer               Synopsys, Inc.
Software Engineering           Sunnyvale, CA