Subject: Re: [Asrg] News Article - Spam on cellphones

From: Florian Weimer <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 20:28:32 +0200

Yakov Shafranovich <[email-masked]> writes:

> There is no reason why cell phone companies around the world could
> not have developed a separate messaging framework NOT based on SMTP
> and email.

SMS (at least in GSM-based networks) differs a lot from email: limited
size, messages may be discarded etc.  It's certainly not similar to
SMTP.

Furthermore, this is not a new problem, it's already quite common in
countries with more pervasive mobile networking infrastructure.

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

---

From: Yakov Shafranovich <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 14:33:06 -0400

>countries with more pervasive mobile networking infrastructure.

I think but not 100% sure, but in the US SMS messages between carriers go 
over SMTP. However, many carriers operate email-to-SMS gateways which are 
probably how the spam gets to the users.

Yakov

---

From: Yakov Shafranovich <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 14:14:47 -0400

This Houston Chronicle article 
(http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/1971965) discusses 
the growing problem of SMS spam on cell phones. Two particular issues 
jumped out at me. The first is the possibility that increased cell phone 
spam will lead to people shuting off cell phones akin to email users 
stopping to use email:

---snip----
Consumers receiving spam, like Merino, are beginning to turn off their cell 
phones -- to the horror of cell phone companies. Companies are worried they 
will lose customers because of spam, and most are taking a proactive stand 
against it by setting up filters and working with federal authorities on 
regulation. "If your customers are receiving messages they don't want, they 
will turn off their phones, and that's bad for business," Larson said. "If 
consumers turn off their phones, they won't be taking calls and they're 
less likely to make calls. The fewer calls they make, the less revenue for 
wireless carriers."
----snip----

The second being that the state of Texas might make SMS spam be covered 
under the state's Do-Not-Call list:

----snip----
So far, the new rules in Texas apply to text spam sent from cell phone to 
cell phone. However, Public Utilities Commission spokesman Terry Hadley 
said the organization will review the new law and determine whether it will 
include text spam transmitted through the Internet.
----snip---

This raises an interesting issue. There is no reason why cell phone 
companies around the world could not have developed a separate messaging 
framework NOT based on SMTP and email. However, they did and you can see 
from this example the far reach of entrenched standards and how hard it 
would be to replace SMTP or create a parallel secure email system.

Yakov

---

From: Craig Cockburn <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 23:46:56 +0100

In message <[email-masked]>, Florian Weimer 
<[email-masked]> writes
>size, messages may be discarded etc.  It's certainly not similar to
And with SMS I don't think there's any way to prevent the sender knowing 
their message was successfully delivered if they sent it with a delivery 
receipt. Ideal for spammers unfortunately.
-- 
Craig Cockburn ("coburn"). SiliconGlen.com Ltd. http://SiliconGlen.com
Home to the first online guide to Scotland, founded 1994.
Scottish FAQ, wedding info, travel, search tools, stop spam and more!