[IP] Porn Spammers Thumb Noses At FTC, CAN-SPAM
Begin forwarded message:
From: EEkid@xxxxxxx
Date: May 29, 2004 8:00:07 AM EDT
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Porn Spammers Thumb Noses At FTC, CAN-SPAM
Porn Spammers Thumb Noses At FTC, CAN-SPAM
Thu May 27, 7:00 PM ET
Gregg Keizer, TechWeb News
Spammers pitching pornography are largely ignoring the Federal Trade
Commission's recent requirements, message-filtering firms said
Thursday.
Fewer than one in six pornographic unsolicited e-mails scanned by MX
Logic complied with CAN-SPAM's new rules, said Scott Chasin, the
Denver-based company's chief technology officer.
As part of the implementation of the CAN-SPAM Act, which went into
effect Jan. 1, the FTC ruled last week that all pornographic e-mail
must carry the label "SEXUALLY-EXPLICIT" in the subject head. The
notice is intended to warn recipients that a message contains
sexually-oriented material, as well as to make it easier for users,
businesses, and Internet providers to block such messages.
"We're not seeing a huge compliance with the new rulings," said
Chasin, whose company scanned a sampling of 12,000 pornographic
messages during the seven days since the FTC began requiring the label.
Only 15.3 percent of the porn spam was properly labeled.
The result isn't surprising, said Chasin, since the porn industry
makes even more use of underground spamming techniques -- including
proxies and zombies, hijacked computers that spew spam unbeknownst to
their owners -- than the spam business overall.
"Porn spam is usually the dirtiest, no pun intended, from the
distribution method perspective," said Chasin.
What did make Chasin pause was that early compliance by the porn
industry was significantly higher than general compliance with the
CAN-SPAM Act.
"What really was surprising was that we're seeing less compliance with
CAN-SPAM than with porn's new labeling."
In fact, compliance with CAN-SPAM slipped last month for the first
time since the act was made law at the beginning of 2004. After a slow
ramp-up, compliance with the anti-spam regulation plateaued around
three percent, said Chasin, but in April, it dipped to an even more
disappointing one percent.
"There's a decline in compliance across the board," he said, and added
that it was "stating the obvious" to call CAN-SPAM a failure in its
effort to stem spam. "Most consumers can recognize that just by looking
in their inboxes."
Although it's difficult to tell why porn spammers are following the
rules 15 times more often than other spammers, Chasin put forward
several theories, ranging from the more specific FTC requirements for
pornographic e-mails to the porn industry's habit of trying to follow
the law knowing that if they don't, the hammer will fall.
Other messaging filtering firms have also done preliminary research
into porn spam compliance with CAN-SPAM, but have come up with
different results.
Brightmail, an acquisition target of security firm Symantec, reported
that its analysis of mail during a 40-hour post-FTC ruling period
showed about 40 percent of pornographic e-mail used the
SEXUALLY-EXPLICIT label, or a variation of it. (MX Logic only counted
those messages that used the exact label required by the FTC.)
However, Brightmail pooh-poohed the idea that porn spammers were
making a sincere effort to comply. "This is an attempt by spammers to
make their messages look as though they are in compliance with the law,
when in most cases they are not," a Brightmail spokesperson said in an
e-mail.
Whether more porn spammers, or spammers in general, will follow the
letter of the law is unclear, added MX Logic's Chasin, and will likely
depend on how aggressively the government continues its crackdown on
spammers.
Last week, the FBI claimed it had identified over 100 significant
spammers, and would target half of them for possible prosecution after
investigations conclude.
"We've already seen some of the first prosecutions under CAN-SPAM, but
I don't see any real deterrence aftershock," said Chasin.
"Maybe if the FBI (news - web sites) leads a more aggressive
investigation and prosecution, we might see some additional deterrence,
but that's not likely until later in the year."
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=74&ncid=74&e=3&u=/cmp/
20040528/tc_cmp/21400244
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/