Re: Off topic: developers/project manager needed

[Gary <vex555@gmx.net>]

On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 17:24:03 -0500
Chuck Yerkes <chuck@snew.com> wrote:

Hi Chuck, 

Thanks for your comments, they are well taken.

I don't want to start a flame war because I'm just trying to do a good
thing here but your points are valid and probably other people will
think the same thing so allow me to respond (the web-site needs some
work)...

> > The main difference is one of stance. Vipul Razor seeks to react to
> > spam by providing a blacklist for filtering. Karmic seeks to hit
> > spammers where it hurts - in their pockets.
> 
> Nice words, but rhetoric.

Sorry for the cliche but its true. I think that the best way to kill
spam is for everyone in the world to stop responding to it (shame that
one's a bit hard to pull off), and the second best way is to destroy the
spammers profit margin. Anything else is a game of cat and mouse.

> > 
> > Vipul Razor..
> > a) does not provide for mass moderation of database entries.
> 
> Well, it does.  enough people with enough "karma" provide a sig
> and it's viewed as spam.

Thanks, I didn't realise that.

> > b) contains only spam mail signatures
> > c) only provides filtering
> > 
> > Karmic intends to...
> > a) Create a DB of URL's in addition to the e-mail signatures
> 
> Ok, so spammers counter by filling messages with URIs.

Assuming a spam is attempting to make a commission for the spammer from
the sale of a good or service or even a scam, there has to be a direct
link for the customer/mark to be able to pay whether it is a URL, valid
return e-mail address or toll-free number. 

> > b) Provide a client program which allows users to add/moderate
> > entries, set URL crawling prefs, view stats on such URL's response
> > times and the database size/number of users
> > c) Fights back at spammers by increasing their bandwidth costs.
 
> >From the clients?  so the spammers know which addresses
> are valid?  And *MY* bandwidth gets used to pull down
> pages?

I would only want the karmic client to visit each website a limited
number of times perhaps lets say 5 times per hour or less? At present
the maths all work in the favour of the spammer. If he sends 100 million
e-mails and he gets 1000 web-site visits then by definition those
visitors are motivated customers. As you know corporations invest
millions of dollars to "target" customer demographics. Those people who
respond to spam are already now targeted. This means that the spammer
does not have to pay for bandwidth for un-targeted visits. By
significantly diluting the quality (as well as increasing the number) of
web-site hits, his business model is instantly destroyed.

The client would be user-configurable so you could opt out or adjust
this activity with bandwidth or cpu cycle allocation.

> > I would be happy to collaborate with vipul, perhaps just
> > concentrating on the client / URL side. 
> 
> That might be the best call.

I've contacted Vipul....

> I like the idea of a distributed webpage hurter, but pulling down
> pages will KILL isps.  Perhaps a spamd notion of "connect to web
> server.  wait N minutes.  make a minor request.  keep connection alive
> as long as possible without pulling data."

Interesting. As for the ISP's this would certainly encourage lax ones to
get their house in order. That's the beauty of the model, ISP's who
continue to host for clients whom they know utilise spam would be served
their justice. This would solve the spam problem on so many levels
including indicating to ISP's which clients are using spam and
making hosting for spammers harder to find.

A note on denial of service..
A DOS (or DDOS) is a small number of individuals sending millions of
requests to a single webserver to bring it down = illegal and immoral.

A Karmic flood ( ???) is the millions of people who have been sent an
unwanted spam email requesting that they visit a website actually doing
so (even though they aren't actually reading the site) = legal and
moral.

There are many other issues, many of which I've thought of but not
communicated on the website.

--- 
regards
Gary

"The cosmos is all it is, all it ever was and all it ever will be" -
Carl Sagan