On Nov. 22, the U.S. House of Representatives voted 392 to 5 to pass the Can Spam Act of 2003, which is designed to put controls on the distribution of spam. For once, the House and Senate saw eye to eye, . . . . On Nov. 22, the U.S. House of Representatives voted 392 to 5 to pass the Can Spam Act of 2003, which is designed to put controls on the distribution of spam. For once, the House and Senate saw eye to eye, more or less: The House version is an only slightly modified version of the Can Spam Act (S.877) passed by the Senate in October, and it's expected to be signed by the president early next year. But the word can may be interpreted in two ways--obliterate spam, or allow it. And that pretty much sums up how the legislation can be interpreted. It puts some limitations on unsolicited commercial e-mail, but it doesn't disallow spam completely. It allows for creation of a Do Not Spam Registry, equivalent to the successful Do Not Call Registry, but it trumps stronger laws that have been passed by state legislatures--California's spam law, for example, has an opt-in requirement and gives individuals the right to sue spammers. The link for this article located at NetworkComputing is no longer available. . On Nov. 22, the U.S. House of Representatives voted 392 to 5 to pass the Can Spam Act of 2003, which. house, representatives, voted, which. . LinuxSecurity.com Team
The most annoying thing about spam - unsolicited email - is that people feel powerless to do anything about it. They see their inboxes filling with an ever-rising tide of trash and have to wade through it, hitting the 'delete' key . . . . The most annoying thing about spam - unsolicited email - is that people feel powerless to do anything about it. They see their inboxes filling with an ever-rising tide of trash and have to wade through it, hitting the 'delete' key until they reach a real message. Most email programs have spam filters, but they vary in effectiveness. I've been running one for a year and although it is supposed to be 'learning' as it goes, it still misses 20 per cent of the invitations to enlarge various parts of my anatomy, win incredible prizes, earn $2,000 a month without leaving my armchair and other brain-dead wheezes. The problem with conventional spam filters is that they attempt to solve a system-wide problem by fixing only one component of the system. As James Gleick argued eloquently in these pages a few weeks ago, spam is no longer just a private nuisance. It has become a systemic threat, choking the communications channels of the internet with pernicious dross. It will have to be dealt with. But the only approach that will eradicate it will have to address the problem at a systemic level. The link for this article located at MediaGuardian is no longer available. . Tackle unwanted email spam by comprehending its pervasive characteristics and implementing practical control methods.. Email Filtering, Spam Management, Effective Solutions. . LinuxSecurity.com Team
Get the latest Linux and open source security news straight to your inbox.