Home Blog Page 8338

Rethinking spam

– By Robin “Roblimo” Miller
My email address (and several email aliases that feed into my primary email account) are on a number of popular Web sites, so I am a prime spam target. I get literally hundreds of pieces of unsolicited bulk email every day. And yet, I can understand the impulse that makes people become spammers, and I feel a certain amount of sympathy for businesses that use unsolicited email as a marketing tool. I also think spam has created at least one business opportunity that hasn’t yet been exploited properly.

The “900” number problem

The original purpose of 900 phone numbers, where services you access through your telephone could be charged on your telephone bill instead of separately, was to deliver information like sports scores and stock prices. I remember a telco pitch, more than 20 years back, for poetry and music 900 services. But almost as soon as 900 numbers became readily available, they were co-opted by entrepreneurs who used them to provide sexual content, and the $3 per minute psychics jumped onto the 900 train shortly thereafter. From then on, any normal business that tried to provide legitimate information through a 900 number was tainted by association with the shady crowd using the same information delivery method.

The same thing has happened with direct email marketing. It is not that the idea of sending email asking Internet users to buy a product, join an association or vote for a candidate is inherently evil (in small doses), but that the idea has been misused so badly that it is tainted — in many cases by people who have the same business mentality as the worst 900 number operators.

The positive side of bulk email marketing

Marketers who claim email is more ecologically sound than postal mail are right. No trees are killed and hardly any fuel is used to deliver spam.
Spam is less intrusive than telemarketing. It offers small businesses a chance to reach new customers at a fraction of the cost of older promotional tactics, and, in my opinion, anything that gives small businesses a chance to compete effectively with big ones is a good thing, because small businesses are the lifeblood of capitalism.

The negative side of bulk email marketing

This complaint as been done to death, but my largest personal pet spam peeve has to do with the serial nature of email delivery. Example: I am in a hotel room, hooked to the Internet through a dialup modem that only gives me a true connection speed of 28KBPS, and I am checking my email because it is my primary means of communication with both readers and co-workers. Freelance writers submit story pitches by email, and some of those pitches are time-sensitive and need to be answered as close to immediately as possible. Then there are the DMCA complaints. Part of my job at OSDN is to field DMCA and copyright infringement complaints, and these must be handled promptly. So I log in to get my email, and it takes an hour for all of it to download because 90% of it is not just spam, but spam sent as bandwidth-sucking HTML or in some other non-ASCII format. Damn spammers!

Yes, I can and do filter spam once it hits my laptop, but the download time is the killer.

There are many other bad things about spam, but you already know them, so there’s no point in me doing a rehash here.

The business opportunity

Let’s face it: today’s most typical email pattern, where we use POP to download emails one at a time, in sequence, then sort our email on our client machines, is going to be killed by spam overload. Email handling must move almost entirely to corporate or ISP servers. IMAP is now a decent standard. There are Web email interfaces available, although most of them are clunky (slow and hard to use) compared to clientside POP or IMAP utilities.

I thought about using SpamCop’s email filtering service, which costs $30 per year, but I had trouble getting its signup utility to accept multiple accounts, and I do not like Paypal, which is the only direct, online payment method SpamCop offers. Quite frankly, the SpamCop signup problems made the company look amateurish enough that I did not want to trust it with my email.

My roblimo.com Web site hosting and email services are currently provided by NTT/Verio, but I will probably move to Hostway before long because Hostway offers several services I need that NTT/Verio does not. Neither of these companies offers “built in” spamtrap or virus-elimination email utilities to small-time users, at least that I have been able to find. I would pay extra for these services because they would save me time and money. If you know a hosting company that can reliably provide the equivalent of Hostway’s Gold Plus account plan (minus the FrontPage extensions, which I do not need) that also includes spam and virus filtering service, please let me know. I will probably patronize that company. I suspect that many others would, too.

This would not necessarily be an expensive service to provide; SpamAssasin is a mature, respected solution that (I suspect) could easily be added to a user’s email servers as as point/click option by a technically competent ISP or hosting service provider.

Yes, I know many ISPs provide spam filtering, but this doesn’t help commercial users like me who use email aliases and may have multiple ISP accounts. Not only that, SpamAssasin uses the widely respected Vipul’s Razor to determine what is and isn’t spam, which means neither the user nor the hosting service need to devise filter criteria, which can be extremely time-consuming.

In a business as competitive and commoditized as Web hosting, server-side spam and virus filtering could become a powerful differentiator. Would I pay a premium price for it? Of course! I would happily pay the price of my current Hostway service plus the price of SpamCop. Remember, price — $30 per year, plus $15 per year for each additional account in the same household — was not the reason I have not signed up with SpamCop. My concern with SpamCop has to do with its management practices.

Killing legitimate email marketing

This article will probably help me find a hosting service that includes SpamAssasin email filtering. Suddenly I will be immune to virtually all email marketing efforts. Eventually spam filtering at the server level will become overwhelmingly popular, and marketing email will only be seen by new users or users of free email services like Yahoo and Hotmail — which will no doubt start offering spam filtering options as part of their pay-for premium packages.

Members of the Direct Marketing Association and its spinoff, the Association for Interactive Marketing, probably won’t like widespread spam filtering. To them, this is as bad as the Post Office offering a “deliver no solicitation mail to this address” option to postal patrons.

I feel little sympathy for (potentially) legitimate email marketers at this point. Their trade groups have consistently fought anti-spam legislation, even though removing the nastiest spammers from the Internet would make people like me less likely to block all email marketing efforts.

“As ye sow, so shall ye reap” is an appropriate quote in this context, is it not?

Hard disk will have hackers seeing double

From PC World: “Hackers will be unable to attack Web sites protected by a new security system unless they can change the laws of physics, according to Naoto Takano,
chief executive officer of Scarabs, a Japanese company.”

PEAR(.php.net) Weekly News for week ending July 21 2002

Alan Knowles writes “In This weeks PEAR weekly news, 3 new releases both beta and development versions, ready to be tested, Along with news on the PEAR Package Installer, Smarty and Developers Birthdays.”

Category:

  • Open Source

Open-source .Net inches closer to fruition

Info World: “The Open Source effort to create a freely available version of Microsoft’s .Net development environment is set to take a leap forward
Wednesday, when developers from the effort known as the Mono Project detail its latest accomplishments at a conference dedicated to open-source
software.”

Category:

  • Open Source

NetBSD 1.5.3 released

An Anonymous Reader writes “The NetBSD Project released a maintenance release for its stable 1.5 branch. In the ten months since the last release of the NetBSD 1.5 branch, various improvements, new hardware support, and a few security fixes have been integrated.

More information can be found
at www.BSDnewsletter.com.”

Category:

  • Open Source

PHP scripting flaw threatens web servers

From CNet news:
“A flaw found in newer versions of the PHP Web server scripting language could allow attackers to crash, and in some cases control, computers over the
Internet, an open-source developer group announced Monday.”

Category:

  • Security

Linux in Education report #75

Seul.org has released Linux in Education report #75. From the report:
“If we were to run a Linux in Education one- or two-day miniconference before LCA2003 (Tuesday and possibly also Monday, in parallel with the Debian
mini-conference) who here would be interested in attending? Who would be interested in doing a presentation? The main LCA2003 pages are at
http://conf.linux.org.au/ and http://linux.conf.au/, it is being held in sunny Perth, Western Australia, at the end of January (-: AKA `winter’ in
the USA and Europe :-)”

Category:

  • Linux

Mozilla.org releases Mozilla 1.1 Beta

Asa Dotzler writes: “Today mozilla.org released Mozilla 1.1 beta. New to this release are full-screen mode for Linux, XBM image display, BiDi Hebrew improvements, Arabic shaping improvements for Linux, and significant improvements to Venkman, the best cross-platform JavaScript debugger on the planet. Binaries and release notes available at http://www.mozilla.org/releases/. You can read more about this release at mozilla.org and mozillazine.org.”

Internet extends long arm of the law

CNN: “Police in Italy didn’t care that five Web sites they deemed blasphemous and thus illegal were located in the United States, where First Amendment protections apply. The police shut them down anyway in early July, simply by sitting down at the alleged offender’s Rome computer. Talk about the long arm of the law.” You can read more in this CNN report, as well as join the Slashdot discussion taking place.

Category:

  • C/C++

Perens on the RealNetworks release of Helix

Author: JT Smith

by Bruce Perens
RealNetworks is announcing today that some of their software will be
released as Open Source or Free Software. While RealNetworks is making a
significant contribution to Open Source, today’s release does not include
the “crown jewels” — their “codecs,” the encoding and decoding software
for their proprietary RealAudio and RealVideo formats. I will go into more
detail regarding what they are proposing to release, and when, in this
message.
I’d also like to say what my role is in this. It is not to endorse, but
to explain what’s going on from an Open Source perspective. Some of the
pieces announced today will be Open Source, but many will not be. Thus,
I can’t fully approve of what is going on. I will continue to lobby
RealNetworks to follow today’s step by going fully open, and I urge you to
continue to use fully open codecs in preference to the RealNetworks ones.

It was entertaining to see the first sentence of the invitation that
RealNetworks sent to some of the press:

> On Monday at 10am in SF, Eric Raymond, Bruce Perrins, Brian Bellendorf
> etc. will all be attending a press conference with Real Networks and 30
> other top industry companies for a significant industry announcement.

I am flattered by their enthusiasm, especially since I’d told them
repeatedly that I’d not be making an endorsement. This shows that
RealNetworks may actually be able to deal with the Open Source community
on the community’s own terms. That will be essential if a real partnership
is to come of today’s announcement.

So, what is RealNetworks proposing? They plan to release code in 90
days. Some of the details of that code, including what parts are included
in the release and how they are licensed, may change before then.

RealNetworks “client engine,” the thing that lives in the desktop or the
web browser and drives the client half of their codec, will be available
under a license that is derived from the Apple Public Source License, but
with goals much closer to the GNU General Public License. The license text
includes a patent grant. Like the APSL and the NPL licenses, it grants
RealNetworks a right to relicense your code under any license of their choice.
So it is unlike the GPL in that it gives one party more rights than all
others. This license has yet to be approved by the Open Source Initiative
board, or accepted by the Free Software Foundation, or even fully reviewed by
yours truly. It may have to be modified before it is worthy of acceptance by
the community.

The Open Source client engine will probably include:

> – RTSP/RTP/RTCP/SDP network playback
> – UDP support
> – Local file playback
> – Single source A/V
> – A/V data type interface
> – file format interface
> – some A/V codec support (TBD; standards-based, probably MP3 and 3GPP
> codecs)

I have an even longer list of other features that the Open Source client
_may_ include, which I can’t show you until they decide. On the list of
functions that most likely won’t be included, besides the codecs, there’s
a lot of utility and user-interface code.

So, we’re getting some network protocols that go on top of IP and UDP,
and do their best to provide continuous playback despite the fact that
the Internet doesn’t guarantee throughput or latency. On top of that are
file formats and data objects, and other pieces necessary to make an Open
Source player for some already-open file formats. It is likely that many
of the client pieces will be applicable to servers and encoders as well,
although RealNetworks is not placing their server and “encoder engine”
in Open Source. Combining the Open Source player with RealNetworks
proprietary codecs will produce a player for the RealAudio and RealVideo
formats on new platforms where no player existed before.

Perhaps the greatest beneficiary of RealNetworks contribution could
be the Ogg Vorbis audio format. Ogg is a fully Open Source codec,
unencumbered by patents or royalty payment requirements, which
offers audio quality comparable to, or better then, its proprietary
competition. The Ogg encoder and servers, not just the client, are
available as Open Source. The addition of RealNetworks network protocols
and other utilities might make Ogg even better, and might facilitate the
inclusion of Ogg as an option in RealNetworks proprietary products.

RealNetworks server and “encoder engine”, without the actual codecs,
will be under a “community source” license. This means that source code
will be disclosed to people who sign an agreement, and those people will
get a lot less than the full set of rights that come with Open Source
licensing. Since other streaming servers and encoders are already fully
Open Source, we can’t expect the Open Source community to have much to
do with this part of RealNetworks code. However, community source does
make life easier for RealNetworks partners, whose business depends on
this code and who might not have had source code until now.

The RealAudio and RealVideo codecs will be available in compiled form, as
proprietary software that can be linked into a larger product. Again, no joy
in the Free Software camp. However, these codecs will be available for use
along with various Open Source pieces that Real is releasing, and thus it will
be easier to for third parties to produce a half-proprietary Real-format player
under Linux and on other operating systems where one is not supported today.

Why is Real doing this? Obviously, they are under pressure from
Microsoft’s Media Player, and would like to prevent that product
from achieving market domination. Increasing open-ness is a weapon in
that battle, because a perception of open-ness will make more people
consider RealNetworks products as standards rather than just products.
But RealNetworks may not be able to afford to be open enough — their
revenue today depends on licensing fees for the use of their software, and
unless they can change their business model somewhat, it will be difficult
for them to achieve a real partnership with the Open Source community.
That community has little to gain by replacing Microsoft’s proprietary
audio format with RealNetworks still-proprietary audio format. The Free
Software folks will continue to develop Ogg Vorbis and other solutions,
although perhaps in a way that is more compatible with RealNetworks
proprietary software. Thus, I consider todays announcement to be only a
first step for RealNetworks, with additional steps necessary if they are
to succeed. On behalf of the Open Source and Free Software developers, I
hope to be able to help RealNetworks take those additional steps.

Respectfully Submitted

Bruce Perens

Category:

  • Open Source