Subject: [Asrg] News Article - Editorial on spam by Bill Gates

From: Yakov Shafranovich <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 16:27:42 -0400

The following is a Wall Street Journal Editiorial written by Bill Gates of 
Microsoft (http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110003662):

--snip---
MAIL CALL
Why I Hate Spam
And what we're doing about it.

BY BILL GATES
Monday, June 23, 2003 12:01 a.m.

SEATTLE--Like almost everyone who uses e-mail, I receive a ton of spam 
every day. Much of it offers to help me get out of debt or get rich quick. 
It would be funny if it weren't so irritating.

But spam is worse than irritating. It is a drain on business productivity, 
an increasingly costly waste of time and resources that clogs corporate 
networks and distracts workers. Among consumers, it spreads scams, 
pornography and even computer viruses. Worse, spammers prey on less 
sophisticated e-mail users, including children, threatening their safety 
and privacy. And as everyone struggles to sift spam from their inboxes, 
valid messages are sometimes overlooked or deleted, which makes e-mail less 
useful and reliable as a channel for communication and legitimate 
e-commerce. In short, spam threatens to undo much of the good that e-mail 
has achieved.

As part of our drive to create a more trustworthy computing environment, 
this month, Microsoft filed 15 lawsuits in the U.S. and U.K. against 
companies and individuals alleged to have sent billions of spam messages in 
violation of state and federal laws. In addition to filing civil lawsuits 
and taking other enforcement actions, we are significantly stepping up our 
efforts to fight spam through technological innovation and cooperation with 
government and industry leaders. We are developing more effective anti-spam 
filters and other technologies that build on our research into fields such 
as machine learning--the design of systems that learn from data and grow 
smarter over time. These "smart" systems are vital to the fight against 
spam because every defensive action causes spammers to change their 
tactics. Technology, to be effective, must continuously adapt too.

Already, spam filters built into MSN and Hotmail servers block 2.4 billion 
messages a day before they reach subscribers' inboxes. We have assembled a 
vast and fast-growing database of spam, which will be used by a forthcoming 
version of our Outlook e-mail software to block spam more effectively. And 
a new version of our Exchange e-mail server will include advanced anti-spam 
features. Our goal is to do everything possible to secure e-mail systems 
with servers that monitor and control the points of entry.

But a single company can't stem the tide of spam alone. So we are working 
with other industry leaders such as AOL, Yahoo! and Earthlink on a range of 
joint initiatives. For example, we are battling spammers who set up 
numerous e-mail accounts and move from service to service to avoid 
detection. To put an end to this shell game, we are sharing information so 
that we can keep tabs on roving spammers and shut them down more 
effectively. Spammers also go to great lengths to conceal or "spoof" their 
identities, so we are partnering with other service providers to identify 
and restrict mail that conceals its source. And we are creating a system to 
verify sender addresses, much as recipients' addresses are verified today.

A key to eliminating spam is establishing clear guidelines for legitimate 
commercial e-mail. With industry and consumer groups, we are developing 
best-practice guidelines to help responsible companies understand how to 
reach their customers without spamming them. Congress could help by 
providing a strong incentive for businesses to adopt e-mail best practices. 
Our proposal is to create a regulatory "safe harbor" status for senders who 
comply with e-mail guidelines confirmed by an FTC-approved self-regulatory 
body. Senders who do not comply would have to insert an "ADV:" 
label--standing for advertisement--in the subject line of all unsolicited 
commercial e-mail. This would enable computer users either to accept 
ADV-labeled mail or to have it deleted automatically.

As less junk mail reaches recipients--and violators face stiffer sanctions 
for illegal activities--the financial incentives for spammers will 
decrease, and spamming will lose its appeal.

Then maybe we can all focus on the e-mail that's actually worth reading.

Mr. Gates is chairman and chief software architect of Microsoft Corp.

Copyright © 2003 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
---snip--- 

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

---

From: Barry Shein <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 23:04:18 -0400

>And what we're doing about it.

      ...

>But a single company can't stem the tide of spam alone...

Ironically, it may well be that a single company can stem the tide of
spam alone and, remarkably enough, it's Mr Gates' company.

Apparently much of the spam is forwarded via computers which have been
infected by viruses turning them into unwaitting mail slaves for
spammers.

Reviewing the most common of these viruses, such as Jeem, sobig.a and
Proxy-guzu, indicates that they all target Microsoft's winows
operating system. Versions up to and including their latest XP and ME.

There's a reason for this: Microsoft's operating systems are
vulnerable to viruses.

Other operating systems, or at least late-releases (e.g., Max OSX),
are not susceptible to viruses.

The technology for immunizing OS's against viruses has been known for
about 40 years (before viruses even existed!) It's been commonly used
in other OS's for about 20 years. And it's been available on
consumer/desktop PC-class machines for at least 10 years.

So why does Microsoft continue to provide opportunity for spammers
unnecessarily?

And why does Mr Gates act like he does not know this?

-- 
        -Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die    | [email-masked]           | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202        | Login: 617-739-WRLD
The World              | Public Access Internet     | Since 1989     *oo*

---

From: "Bob Wyman" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 15:35:29 -0400

I'd like to focus for a moment on the substance of Gates'
editorial and avoid the Microsoft bashing going on in other threads...
Gates says:

  "Our proposal is to create a regulatory "safe harbor" 
   status for senders who comply with e-mail guidelines 
   confirmed by an FTC-approved self-regulatory body."

	Personally, I think this sounds like a terrible idea. While it
may be well-intentioned, the reality is that any "safe-harbor" will
probably simply establish a privileged class of spammers. Given the
tremendous lobbying pressure that will undoubtedly be applied by direct
marketers, companies, etc. it is likely that the requirements for
receiving "safe harbor" status will be fairly easy to meet.
	But, no matter how well the qualifications for safe-harbor
status are set, it seems to me that this sort of proposal is focusing
attention on the wrong part of the problem. A safe-harbor is really just
a way of identifying some set of senders whose traffic should be let
through whatever filters an ISP may put in place. But, the ultimate
decision concerning what traffic should and should not be accepted
remains with the actual owner of the mailbox. We can't let a focus on
the ISP's needs distract us from continuing to improve the ability that
users have to control what goes into the inboxes.

		bob wyman

---

From: mathew <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 21:11:58 -0400

> So why does Microsoft continue to provide opportunity for spammers

Maybe there's a clue in recent news headlines...

Microsoft aims to offer anti-virus products, services
BY REUTERS

[Seattle | Reuters News Service, 11 June 2003] -                     
Microsoft will acquire anti-virus technology from GeCAD Software, a 
Romanian software company, to develop its own software to protect users 
against malicious software programs, the world's largest software-maker 
said yesterday

[...]

mathew