Re: off-topic - spam was Re: ads done well

by Kathy Wheeler <kathyw(at)home.albury.net.au>

Date:	Thu, 31 Jan 2002 12:14:27 +1100
To:	"Barlow, Maureen (REI)" <maureen.barlow(at)reed-elsevier.com>, "'hwg-techniques(at)hwg.org'" <hwg-techniques(at)hwg.org>
References:	binbosexc001
	todo: View Thread, Original

On Thursday 31 January 2002 11:41, Barlow, Maureen (REI) wrote:
> I know what spam is, my question was more about why it seems certain ISPs
> have problems with spam and others don't.  Is it because, using Earthlink
> as an example, they are a huge ISP and their security measures for
> preventing people fraudulently using the 'earthlink.net' domain are
> failing?

Quite possible, although I do know from two associates (one an ex-earthlink 
subscriber, the other an ISP) that earthlink don't respond well to email 
complaints about spam or account irregularities, so I don't know how much 
they really care. The bigger the company the harder it is to be heard ...

Anyway ... (http://spam.abuse.net/overview/spambad.shtml):

"Many other spammers use `'hit and run' spamming in which they get a trial 
dial-up account at an Internet provider for a few days, send tens of 
thousands of messages, then abandon the account ..."

I guess the big providers with lots of accounts (and therefore lots of 
traffic and very busy) would be prime targets for 'hit and run'.

Cheers,
KathyW.

HWG hwg-techniques mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA