Subject: [Asrg] How charging for spam (or mis-labeled messages) might actually work...

From: Amir Herzberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 09:27:42 +0200

Devdas Bhagat replied to der Mouse who replied to Gordon Peterson:
(I've changed the subject to reflect the actual content - which I 
believe helps recipients - I think users of this list, of all people, 
should try to adhere to this simple Net-etiquette :-)

 >>> > 2)  billing infected users for the spam their zombie-ized machine
 >>> >     sends will drive users off the Net (which ultimately helps
 >>> >     nobody).
 >
 >>
 >> I'm not convinced - that it would help nobody, that is.
 >>
 >> It's reached the point where I would consider disconnecting everyone
 >> with a zombied machine an acceptable price; I believe every such person

 > I would agree with this. However, for most ISPs in the US, the cost of
 > dealing with support calls is likely to be higher than the savings from
 > the subscriber. Far cheaper is blocking port 25 wholesale across
 > non business customer connections, which does result in tanglible
 > benefits to the Internet.

I agree with both of you, and I don't think there's a contradiction. 
Actually, I think charging for spam may actually work quite well... In 
particular when we focus on messages which contain objectionable 
contents (e.g. ads) without appropriate warning label (the type of spam 
that SICS focuses on).

What I think could work is a voluntary mechanism for mail servers and 
users, which ensures penalties for mislabeled mail. This mechanism would 
allow different customers and their outgoind mail servers to pick the 
best agreement for their needs, among:

1 - Not labeling outgoing mail - no penalties, but this mail is more 
likely to be rejected by recipients (and MTAs).
2 - Labeling only by the sender and/or third party, sending mail server 
not involved - this allows clients to use such a solution even if using 
a mail server that does not, or if they can get better terms.

and now to the more intersting cases where the sending MTA _does_ label 
the mail (or approves the label from the customer):

3 - Customer is charged on every mis-labeled message (and server imposes 
some limit on amount of messages sent which may yet turn out to be 
spam). If your machine became a zombie, it's your lack of responsibility 
and you pay for it (but at least you know pretty soon about this!). Same 
as if your pet goes biting people...

4 - Customer is charged a `flat fee` which typically will include also 
filtering his incoming and outgoind mail for spam, and anti-virus 
support (to reduce chance of his machine becoming a zombie). Same as 
buying liability insurance...

5 - existing model: customer is not formally charged, but pays (in some 
way) for each account and accounts are terminated on detecting spamming...

Best, Amir Herzberg

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg