|
1
|
- Edward W. Felten
- Dept. of Computer Science
- Princeton University
|
|
2
|
- About 60% of all email is spam
- Much is fraudulent
- Much is inappropriate for kids
- 5% of U.S. net users have bought something from a spammer
- Billions of dollars of sales
- Spamming pays
- Will talk about email; but affects other communication technologies also
|
|
3
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
5
|
- Email that the recipient doesn’t want.
- Problems:
- - only defined after the fact
- - ban raises First Amendment issues
- (2) Unsolicited email.
- Problem: lots of unsolicited email is desired
|
|
6
|
- (3) Unsolicited commercial email.
- But what exactly does “unsolicited” mean?
|
|
7
|
- Law sometimes allows speech, even when the listener doesn’t want to hear
it.
- Commercial speech less protected than political speech.
- At the very least, let’s not block a message if both parties want it to
get through.
|
|
8
|
- Any commercial, non-political email is spam, unless
- (a) the recipient has consented to receive it,
- (b) the sender and receiver have an ongoing business relationship, or
- (c) the message relates to an ongoing commercial transaction between
the sender and receiver.
- Note: just looking at a message won’t tell you whether or not it’s spam.
|
|
9
|
- Enforce laws against wire fraud, false medical claims, etc.
- Require accurate labeling of origin; allows filtering by origin
- Big spammer just sentenced to nine years in VA state prison for
mislabeling
|
|
10
|
- ISP sends spammer cease-and-desist letter
- Spammer keeps sending spam
- ISP files suit
- Claiming cyber-trespass
- Seeking money damages
- Seeking injunction against further spamming
- Some success so far, but mostly useful as deterrent
|
|
11
|
- Make list of known email addresses, or known IP addresses, of spammers
- Discard email from those addresses
- Problems
- Spammers try to mislead about message origin
- Spammers move around a lot
- Innocent users sometimes end up sharing addresses with spammers
- False accusations
|
|
12
|
- Make list of people/places you want to get email from
- Impractical to accept email only from these people
- But still useful
- Make other anti-spam measures more stringent
- Exception for people on whitelist
|
|
13
|
- Try to raise cost of sending email
- Ideally, raise more for spammers than for normal senders
- Pay in the form of:
- Money
- Wasted computational resources
- Human attention
|
|
14
|
- If using real money, involves the banking system
- If paying in resources, waste of resources
- Resources are cheap for spammers anyway
- Deters some legitimate email – especially big (legitimate) mailing lists
|
|
15
|
- Various schemes
- Make sure that mail comes from the right place, given the (claimed)
sender
- e.g. my mail comes from a Princeton IP address
- Works okay, but
- Complicated in presence of forwarding etc.
- Doesn’t address spambots on stolen machines
|
|
16
|
- Classify incoming messages based on contents
- Apply fixed rules (e.g. SpamAssassin)
- Machine learning, based on user labeling
- Word-based Bayesian learning
|
|
17
|
- Fairly accurate, but not foolproof
- Trade off false positives vs. false negatives
- Still need to look at suspected-spam messages
- Spammers using countermeasures
|
|
18
|
- In CAN-SPAM Act, Congress asked FTC to study a National Do-Not-Email
(DNE) list
- Like Do-Not-Call list for telemarketing
- Congress asked:
- Should we have a DNE list?
- If we have one, how should it work?
- FTC hired experts (including me) to give technical advice.
|
|
19
|
- Users can put their email addresses on the DNE list.
- Domain owner can put whole domain (e.g. washington.edu) on DNE list.
- Illegal to send spam to anybody on the list.
|
|
20
|
- Give spammers the list
- Very bad idea: “whom-to-spam” list
- Can seed each spammer’s list with “telltale” addresses? (Interesting CS theory problem.)
- Spammer submits their mailing list to DNE service; service returns
“scrubbed” list
- Spammer still learns about some valid addresses
- Might be able to limit this by limiting access, charging for access,
etc.
|
|
21
|
- Spam-forwarding service
- Spammer must direct all spam through a DNE service
- Service forwards email to addresses not on DNE list
- Silently drops if address is on list
- Doesn’t leak information about list
- Irony: as an anti-spam measure, the government is forwarding spam
- All approaches: risk that list will leak
|
|
22
|
- Biggest problem for DNE List is outlaw spammers
- Ignore the law
- Send spam from stolen machines
- Very hard to catch them
|
|
23
|
- Spam will be with us, as long as people buy stuff from spammers.
- People will keep buying the kinds of products that spammers sell.
- At best, we’ll fight to a stalemate.
|