Man gets nine years for spamming

[martin griffith]

At last

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4426949.stm




martin


Opinions are like assholes -- everyone has one

 

[Pooh Bear]

martin griffith wrote:

At last

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4426949.stm

Yeah but he's appealed.

I have no doubt however that the *only* way to get rid of spam is to
introduce a *mandatory* sentence of not less than 5 yrs.

That'll stop the Bast**ds.


Graham

 

[martin griffith]

On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 13:19:32 +0100, in sci.electronics.design Pooh
Bear <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

martin griffith wrote:

At last

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4426949.stm

Yeah but he's appealed.

I have no doubt however that the *only* way to get rid of spam is to
introduce a *mandatory* sentence of not less than 5 yrs.

That'll stop the Bast**ds.


Graham
or 1 minute per spam sent.....havent done the calcs, should be a long

time though


martin


Opinions are like assholes -- everyone has one

 

[Jim Gregory]

I just wonder how the Virginian statute which was effectively used here is
worded.
Would the punishable offence actually cover or mention spamming or would the
relevant section be composed of more mature, English words with no legal
loopholes?

But engineers are taught it is best to cure /suppress interference at the
*source*.
Why can't /won't the likes of AOL and all other western ISPs curb /ban
/stop the huge salvoes of unwarranted/unsolicited/unfriendly msgs like this
at the start? This is probably why....
Only pre-paid bulk mailing (like discount postage charges) will knock it on
the head.

"martin griffith" <martingriffith@XXyahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:u96f515hmfh1opupk7b14j3dmlkh3mpjpi@4ax.com...

At last

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4426949.stm


martin

 

[Kryten]

"Pooh Bear" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4257C854.3C6548B8@hotmail.com...

martin griffith wrote:

At last

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4426949.stm

Yeah but he's appealed.

I have no doubt however that the *only* way to get rid of spam is to
introduce a *mandatory* sentence of not less than 5 yrs.

That'll stop the Bast**ds.

Only the ones you catch, prosecute and jail.

The article said the 30-yr old made up to $750,000 per month.
I sincerely hope they confiscated that money.

Few people earn that much in a decade.

Sadly there is an unending supply of stupid and crooked people who will risk
it.

I suggest one way to drastically cut spam is to allow receivers the option
of charging senders for receiving their mail. Maybe the cost of a typical
international postage stamp. If we get a welcome email, from friends or
family, we don't claim the stamp. If it is spam, we do.

Having said that, junk mail (paper spam) shows that many places will spend a
stamp to advertise a product. In the UK, the junk mail subsidises the losses
the Royal Mail make on ordinary stamped mail.

In practice, most spammers would have to spend much more on e-stamps than
they would earn from the gullible minority.

 

[Joerg]

Hello Jim,

Why can't /won't the likes of AOL and all other western ISPs curb /ban
/stop the huge salvoes of unwarranted/unsolicited/unfriendly msgs like this
at the start? This is probably why....
Only pre-paid bulk mailing (like discount postage charges) will knock it on
the head.

Don't know but much of the spam originates in countries that have poor
or no enforcement. The only way these countries sober up is by what has
been written in an article in Europe. Seems that instead of hosing off
spam when received some ISPs went to blocking entire countries.

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

 

[Rich The Newsgropup Wacko]

On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 10:59:13 +0200, martin griffith wrote:

At last

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4426949.stm

So What? They got him on a technicality:

"Under Virginia law, sending bulk email using fake addresses is a crime."

They maybe could get him on fraud, but only if he actually defrauded
anybody.

I was just now chatting with a cow-orker about it, and saic, "Heck,
according to this, I could send out ten million spams a day from
neodruid.net here, and as long as I don't spoof the "from", and
stop sending to anybody who says, "Don't send me this crap", I'm
perfectly legal. And if people get product, it's not fraud, right?
So, I'd sell a little pamphlet: "How to make a million bucks with
legal spam on the internet!" with, essentially, this information
in it, but clearly marked: "MSRP: US$5.00" so for their five bucks,
they get a five dollar pamphlet. Postage Paid! ;-)

Laughter ensued. He's only about 30, so it's the first time he's
heard of such a scheme. ;-)
--
Cheers!
Rich
------
Ass, grass or gas... nobody rides for free!

 

[Rich Grise]

On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 13:19:32 +0100, Pooh Bear wrote:

martin griffith wrote:

At last

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4426949.stm

Yeah but he's appealed.

I have no doubt however that the *only* way to get rid of spam is to
introduce a *mandatory* sentence of not less than 5 yrs.

That'll stop the Bast**ds.

No, it won't. It's just like the war on drugs or any other war based
on making people behave the way you want to by inflicting violence on
them.

The way to solve the spam problem is to quit buying crap from the
spammers.

Then, somebody needs to start competing with K-Mart in personal-computer
land, and sell a preinstalled, preconfigured Linux. No, wait - that's
virus immunity. You still need a spam filter.

So somebody should publish a "list of known spammers" and some blocker
software - in Linux it's trivial - just put a "DROP" entry in your
iptables for that IP. If there are other people who would then want
to use that IP number after the spammer goes out of business, tough
toenails.
THESE IP NUMBERS HAVE BEEN TOUCHED BY THE SPAMMERS, AND SO ARE TAINTED!
REJECT ALL INCOMING CONNECTIONS FROM THESE IPs UNTIL THEY ARE REAUTHORIZED
AT MY WHIM!

In fact, I have a pretty good starting list:
warning: it's 142KBytes:
# wc LATEST_BLACKLIST
10099 10099 141998 LATEST_BLACKLIST

10,099 IPs that can't spam me.
http://www.neodruid.net/LATEST_BLACKLIST

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Fritz Schlunder]

"Rich The Newsgropup Wacko" <wacko@example.com> wrote in message
newsan.2005.04.09.20.10.49.107654@example.com...

I was just now chatting with a cow-orker

Hmm... I don't know what a cow orker is but it sounds dubious...

--------
Fritz Schlunder aka RentaCow

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 13:32:26 -0700, the renowned "Fritz Schlunder"
<me@privacy.net> wrote:

"Rich The Newsgropup Wacko" <wacko@example.com> wrote in message
newsan.2005.04.09.20.10.49.107654@example.com...

I was just now chatting with a cow-orker

Hmm... I don't know what a cow orker is but it sounds dubious...

An orker is someone who fills casks. http://www.speff.com/ork.gif

--------
Fritz Schlunder aka RentaCow

Friday is your turn in the barrel, you know.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

[Fritz Schlunder]

"Spehro Pefhany" <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote in message
news:3hhg5117as8ilsq8h06u54bivgb2ajgvnd@4ax.com...

On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 13:32:26 -0700, the renowned "Fritz Schlunder"
me@privacy.net> wrote:


"Rich The Newsgropup Wacko" <wacko@example.com> wrote in message
newsan.2005.04.09.20.10.49.107654@example.com...

I was just now chatting with a cow-orker

Hmm... I don't know what a cow orker is but it sounds dubious...

An orker is someone who fills casks. http://www.speff.com/ork.gif

Well you learn something new everyday. I think I like definition 2 better
(devouring monster/hell devil). So Rich was just chatting with a hell
bovine (for those who play Diablo II, not that I imagine many here do).
That must be it.

--------
Fritz Schlunder aka RentaCow

Friday is your turn in the barrel, you know.

Nah, I think you've got the wrong idea entirely. It's not like that.

http://csmonitor.com/cgi-bin/durableRedirect.pl?/durable/2000/03/28/p21s2.htm

 

[Doug Warner]

martin griffith <martingriffith@XXyahoo.co.uk> wrote:

or 1 minute per spam sent.....havent done the calcs, should be a long
time though

Nah, strap him to a table, attached to a motorized syringe, filled
with suitable poisinous substance.
Set up a new, empty email account, add software to monitor the account
for incoming spam. For each one, push the syringe plunger in one mm.

In effect, he will be killed by his own kind..

To reply, please remove one letter from each side of "@"
Spammers are VERMIN. Please kill them all.

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

Rich Grise wrote:

On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 13:19:32 +0100, Pooh Bear wrote:

martin griffith wrote:

At last

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4426949.stm

Yeah but he's appealed.

I have no doubt however that the *only* way to get rid of spam is to
introduce a *mandatory* sentence of not less than 5 yrs.

That'll stop the Bast**ds.


No, it won't. It's just like the war on drugs or any other war based
on making people behave the way you want to by inflicting violence on
them.

The way to solve the spam problem is to quit buying crap from the
spammers.

Then, somebody needs to start competing with K-Mart in personal-computer
land, and sell a preinstalled, preconfigured Linux. No, wait - that's
virus immunity. You still need a spam filter.

So somebody should publish a "list of known spammers" and some blocker
software - in Linux it's trivial - just put a "DROP" entry in your
iptables for that IP. If there are other people who would then want
to use that IP number after the spammer goes out of business, tough
toenails.
THESE IP NUMBERS HAVE BEEN TOUCHED BY THE SPAMMERS, AND SO ARE TAINTED!
REJECT ALL INCOMING CONNECTIONS FROM THESE IPs UNTIL THEY ARE REAUTHORIZED
AT MY WHIM!

In fact, I have a pretty good starting list:
warning: it's 142KBytes:
# wc LATEST_BLACKLIST
10099 10099 141998 LATEST_BLACKLIST

10,099 IPs that can't spam me.
http://www.neodruid.net/LATEST_BLACKLIST

Cheers!
Rich

No, the way E-mail is transmitted needs a complete overhaul. Any
server handling E-mail has to identify itself by IP address.

EXAMPLE:

Your E-mail server requires a valid "From:" account, no spoofing
allowed.

then it tries to connect to the destination server:

Hello ***.***.***.***! I am ***.***.***.*** I have mail for you.

Hello ***.***.***.***! I am ready to accept E-mail from you.

then it receives exactly one message and signs off.

If someone tries to spoof an IP address it can't get through because the
IP address would be wrong. If someone tries to hid their ISP it
wouldn't matter because you know the IP address of the source. A little
more coding would allow a single address to report all spam. It could
send out a single list to each ISP of spam attempts by user account
number and their server software could automatically block any further
e-mail till they determine if it is a real problem or sour grapes.

A simple way to create a secure e-mail network and keep existing
E-mail addresses would be to change the @ sign to @@ to indicate a
secure message. That way you could tell at a glance if the address is
secure or not while allowing time to convert to a new system.


--
Former professional electron wrangler.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

In <4258A35D.1EA70672@earthlink.net>, on 04/10/05
at 03:55 AM, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> said:

If someone tries to spoof an IP address it can't get through because the
IP address would be wrong. If someone tries to hid their ISP it wouldn't
matter because you know the IP address of the source. A little more
coding would allow a single address to report all spam. It could send
out a single list to each ISP of spam attempts by user account number and
their server software could automatically block any further e-mail till
they determine if it is a real problem or sour grapes.

A simple way to create a secure e-mail network and keep existing E-mail
addresses would be to change the @ sign to @@ to indicate a secure
message. That way you could tell at a glance if the address is secure or
not while allowing time to convert to a new system.

You need to spend a bit more time understanding IP addressing, and the
basics of internet routing, and you will see why that cannot happen, but
it would be nice if something could be done to control people like this
guy.

 

[Pooh Bear]

Kryten wrote:

"Pooh Bear" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4257C854.3C6548B8@hotmail.com...
martin griffith wrote:

At last

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4426949.stm

Yeah but he's appealed.

I have no doubt however that the *only* way to get rid of spam is to
introduce a *mandatory* sentence of not less than 5 yrs.

That'll stop the Bast**ds.

Only the ones you catch, prosecute and jail.

A year or two ago I saw a documentary that suggested most spam originates from
about 200 spammers. Shouldn't be tricky to find. It's simply a question of
having the will to do it.

Once they know they'll end up in clink I suspect they'll take their existing ill
gotten gains and run.


Graham

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Doug Warner
<dwarner22@ccharter.net> wrote (in
<fl0h5199u7l0okmib9pb2gufhbphqba5gj@4ax.com&gt about 'Man gets nine years
for spamming', on Sat, 9 Apr 2005:

Nah, strap him to a table, attached to a motorized syringe, filled with
suitable poisinous substance.

Non-colloidal silver? Works well on werewolves.

Set up a new, empty email account, add software to monitor the account
for incoming spam. For each one, push the syringe plunger in one mm.

Were you the Mikado in a previous life? (;-)
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
There are two sides to every question, except
'What is a Moebius strip?'
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[Fred Abse]

On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 13:32:26 -0700, Fritz Schlunder wrote:

"Rich The Newsgropup Wacko" <wacko@example.com> wrote in message
newsan.2005.04.09.20.10.49.107654@example.com...

I was just now chatting with a cow-orker

Hmm... I don't know what a cow orker is but it sounds dubious...

Maybe it's a misspelling of "cow-orca", ie. female killer whale.
Chatting with one can be difficult ...


--
"Electricity is of two kinds, positive and negative. The difference
is, I presume, that one comes a little more expensive, but is more
durable; the other is a cheaper thing, but the moths get into it."
(Stephen Leacock)

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Fred Abse
<excretatauris@cerebrumconfus.it> wrote (in
<pan.2005.04.10.09.15.33.367689@cerebrumconfus.it&gt about 'Man gets nine
years for spamming', on Sun, 10 Apr 2005:

Maybe it's a misspelling of "cow-orca", ie. female killer whale.
Chatting with one can be difficult ...

They are a large species of dolphin, and share dolphin empathy with
humans to some extent. IIRC, there was one called 'Cuddles' at a
sea-life site somewhere who was (at least at times) very friendly with
his/her human companions. I note that Google throws up a waft of
aggressive anti-captivity sites.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
There are two sides to every question, except
'What is a Moebius strip?'
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[Franc Zabkar]

On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 13:32:26 -0700, "Fritz Schlunder" <me@privacy.net>
put finger to keyboard and composed:

"Rich The Newsgropup Wacko" <wacko@example.com> wrote in message
newsan.2005.04.09.20.10.49.107654@example.com...

I was just now chatting with a cow-orker

Hmm... I don't know what a cow orker is but it sounds dubious...

This should explain it:
http://www.angelfire.com/folk/slcannex/cow_orking.htm


- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.

 

[Frithiof Andreas Jensen]

"Pooh Bear" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4257C854.3C6548B8@hotmail.com...

martin griffith wrote:

At last

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4426949.stm

Yeah but he's appealed.

I have no doubt however that the *only* way to get rid of spam is to
introduce a *mandatory* sentence of not less than 5 yrs.

That'll stop the Bast**ds.

Or forced labour: correcting grammar and spelling mistakes in a years crop
of Nigeria letters using "edlin"