Audit Linux privileges now to limit compromise, escalation, and system-wide damage. Review Linux Privileges×

Alerts This Week
Warning Icon 1 428
Alerts This Week
Warning Icon 1 428

Stay Ahead With Linux Security News

Filter%20icon Refine news
X Clear Filters
X Clear Filters
View More

Get the latest News and Insights

Get the latest Linux and open source security news straight to your inbox.

Community Poll

Should Linux servers automatically install security updates?

No answer selected. Please try again.
Please select either existing option or enter your own, however not both.
Please select minimum {0} answer(s).
Please select maximum {0} answer(s).
/main-polls/157-should-linux-servers-automatically-install-security-updates?task=poll.vote&format=json
157
radio
0
[{"id":506,"title":"Yes \u2014 critical security patches should install automatically.","votes":0,"type":"x","order":1,"pct":0,"resources":[]},{"id":507,"title":"No \u2014 every update should be tested before deployment.","votes":3,"type":"x","order":2,"pct":60,"resources":[]},{"id":508,"title":"Only critical vulnerabilities should auto-install.","votes":0,"type":"x","order":3,"pct":0,"resources":[]},{"id":509,"title":"I patch when Reddit starts panicking.","votes":2,"type":"x","order":4,"pct":40,"resources":[]}] ["#ff5b00","#4ac0f2","#b80028","#eef66c","#60bb22","#b96a9a","#62c2cc"] ["rgba(255,91,0,0.7)","rgba(74,192,242,0.7)","rgba(184,0,40,0.7)","rgba(238,246,108,0.7)","rgba(96,187,34,0.7)","rgba(185,106,154,0.7)","rgba(98,194,204,0.7)"] 350
bottom 200
Loading...

Explore Latest Linux Security news

We found -4 articles for you...
81

Analysis of CAN-SPAM Act Compliance Dramatically Decreased

LS: Some of you may remember that we at LinuxSecurity confidently predicted that the CAN-SPAM act was bound to fail. We might congratulate ourselves for this foresight, if only it weren't so obvious. No serious security or privacy expert thought that it stood a chance of reducing the volume of spam. Our question still remains: was CAN-SPAM really just a cover for Congress, so that they could pretend to be legislating against spam while instead doing the bidding of the Direct Marketing lobbyists? . . .. The numbers don't lie: CAN-SPAM is a bust. Compliance with CAN-SPAM has fallen to a new low, according to recent data collected by MX Logic. In July, compliance fell for the first time under one percent to a measly 0.54 percent of all unsolicited commercial mail the company sampled during the month. The Denver-based firm has been tracking compliance with CAN-SPAM since the federal law went on the books in January. Through April, MX Logic's numbers remained stable, with about three percent of spam messages complying with the law's requirements, which range from verifiable return addresses to measures consumers and businesses can use to opt out of mailing lists. In May and June, however, the number slipped to one percent. "Now it's been halved," said Steve Ruskin, a senior analyst at MX Logic. "No one's really sure what's going on, but it's clear that CAN-SPAM isn't a threat to spammers. They're just ignoring it." Although hardcore spammers -- the relatively small number who account for the bulk of the world's spam -- were never likely to toe the line, said Ruskin, it's possible that some spammers who were complying have stopped. The blame, he said, could be laid on law enforcement, which hasn't exactly been successful in tracking down on spammers. Some individuals have been stymied -- most recently a Boca Raton resident whose assets were frozen by the courts -- but enforcement is the exception rather than the rule. The link for this article located at techweb.com is no longer available. . The numbers don'tlie: CAN-SPAM is a bust.Compliance with CAN-SPAM has fallen to a new low, accordin. remember, linuxsecurity, confidently, predicted, can-spam. . LinuxSecurity.com Team

Calendar%202 Aug 06, 2004 User Avatar LinuxSecurity.com Team Privacy
News Add Esm H340

Get the latest News and Insights

Get the latest Linux and open source security news straight to your inbox.

Community Poll

Should Linux servers automatically install security updates?

No answer selected. Please try again.
Please select either existing option or enter your own, however not both.
Please select minimum {0} answer(s).
Please select maximum {0} answer(s).
/main-polls/157-should-linux-servers-automatically-install-security-updates?task=poll.vote&format=json
157
radio
0
[{"id":506,"title":"Yes \u2014 critical security patches should install automatically.","votes":0,"type":"x","order":1,"pct":0,"resources":[]},{"id":507,"title":"No \u2014 every update should be tested before deployment.","votes":3,"type":"x","order":2,"pct":60,"resources":[]},{"id":508,"title":"Only critical vulnerabilities should auto-install.","votes":0,"type":"x","order":3,"pct":0,"resources":[]},{"id":509,"title":"I patch when Reddit starts panicking.","votes":2,"type":"x","order":4,"pct":40,"resources":[]}] ["#ff5b00","#4ac0f2","#b80028","#eef66c","#60bb22","#b96a9a","#62c2cc"] ["rgba(255,91,0,0.7)","rgba(74,192,242,0.7)","rgba(184,0,40,0.7)","rgba(238,246,108,0.7)","rgba(96,187,34,0.7)","rgba(185,106,154,0.7)","rgba(98,194,204,0.7)"] 350
bottom 200