Spammers Still Using Sender Authentication
from the so-why-aren't-people-stopping-them? dept
Last August, we noted that more spammers than legitimate users were using sender authentication systems. The latest report suggests that it's still being used in a wide variety of spam -- suggesting that it's really not doing very much good. Of course, the counter-argument is that this should let companies track down the spammers and stop them. However, there seems to be very little evidence that this is actually being done. In other words, for all the good sender authentication was supposed to do, it appears that very few are actually following through on the second part of the plan, which is dealing with "authenticated" spammers.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
How can such systems be viable?
Sadly the only viable approaches seem to be to examine the spam messages themselves and to teach people not to respond.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: How can such systems be viable?
You make a good point. Spam wouldn't exist if it wasn't profitable. If we spent as much time trying to get people to ignore/delete spam as we spend trying to stop it at the source, we'd probably be more successful at stoping it forever.
It's the 5% of the population that responds to spam that are the reason it exists.
[ link to this | view in thread ]