General discussion

  • Creator
  • #2290393

    Making the case for registered e-mail servers


    by debate ·

    What’s your take on requiring the registration of e-mail servers? Do you agree with Jonathan Yarden that this might help stop the unsolicited commercial e-mail problem? Share your comments about how registered e-mail servers might be able to stop spam, as discussed in the Aug. 30 edition of the Internet Security Focus e-newsletter.

    If you haven’t subscribed to our free Internet Security Focus e-newsletter, sign up today! Click this link to subscribe automatically:

All Comments

  • Author
    • #2710330

      Registered email servers – Taxing institutions rub their hands in glee

      by jevans17 ·

      In reply to Making the case for registered e-mail servers

      First of all, may I say that I always read Jonathan Yardley’s articles with respect and interest. In this case however I am reluctant to agree. The strategy seems sound and the aim is laudable. Consider this however: Each sender will be traceable back to source, easily taxable (to whatever limit).
      Another easy way to extract money to keep the post office in the manner it has become accustomed to?
      I know the authorities can trace most people now, IP address etc but to make it so easy?

      I would need more convincing before I embraced such a radical approach.

      Some people like junk mail thru their doors. I dont mind a certain amount. I have sometimes found it useful. Everyone should handle their own spam intake themselves. INCLUDING Businesses who want it done and paid for by someone else!

      flame me if you need to.

      John Evans

      • #2710303

        I Disagree

        by kevin ·

        In reply to Registered email servers – Taxing institutions rub their hands in glee

        Your point of view is wrong. People who send spam out are invading your privacy. If i needed to pay taxes for this i would not mind. But i dont think it will come to taxation. Pushing anything on anybody is just wrong. The internet is fast approaching the point where the disadvantage is balanced with the advantage.

      • #2717484

        Paranoid or just greedy?

        by bdulac ·

        In reply to Registered email servers – Taxing institutions rub their hands in glee

        Why is everyone so paranoid about the government taking your money? If you enjoy living in this country why complain about how much taxes you pay? Go move to Britain and see how great it is.

    • #2710320

      this is a great idea

      by rocket_scientist ·

      In reply to Making the case for registered e-mail servers

      I like reading this guy…he makes sense. Registering email servers is a great idea to combat the spam problem. It means an extra layer of red tape to set up an email server… but for those of us who are involved in legitamite email communications, it’s way worth it if it contributes to eliminating the problems plaguing the existing SMTP communications.

      • #2710290

        Not such a great idea

        by jheaton ·

        In reply to this is a great idea

        Until of course, someone relays messages through a registered e-mail server, making it look legitimate anyway… I like the idea, but as people have said, companies pay millions in advertising every year. All this will do is “Hopefully” cut down on some of the porn, prescription, etc. spam, until, as I’ve said above, someone relays through the legitimate servers.

        • #2716619

          Already registered

          by roger99a ·

          In reply to Not such a great idea

          Mailservers are already registered. It’s called an MX record. If we had server software that would check these records to make sure the IP address and return address matches, half the spam would go away. Then we get the dsl/cable/dial-up ISP’s to block port 25 and we we eliminate most of the other half, plus most of the viruses.

        • #2717483

          Then stop the relaying….

          by bdulac ·

          In reply to Not such a great idea

          There are ways to block relaying of mail servers. Most nowadays require some type of authentication (I know mine does) and if I were found to be relaying spam through it I’m sure I’d be banned!

          How about instead of creating a lot of reasons why registered servers would not work you think of some ideas that would??????

    • #2710298

      Not sure

      by g… ·

      In reply to Making the case for registered e-mail servers

      I don’t think it will stop spams. Surely some but not that much. I think there will be people paying to send anyway. There are people paying millions in ads. Why not pay for the mails anyway. I get around 50 pages everyday in the paper mail and they pay for it. Why not pay for e-mail?

    • #2710291

      Might help for awhile

      by tundra gregg ·

      In reply to Making the case for registered e-mail servers

      It will help for a few weeks until some hacker or hackers figure out how to spoof the registration process. 🙁

      Gregg Harcus

    • #2710289

      The “Information Infrastructure” must become a work of engineering

      by dc_guy ·

      In reply to Making the case for registered e-mail servers

      The so-called Information Infrastructure looks like something that was thrown together by medieval craftsmen rather than engineers. And that’s an insult to those craftsmen.

      The pyramids are still standing, and some of their tombs have never been cracked, four millennia later. The Roman aqueducts are still bringing water to customers, two millennia later. The internet barely works at all after just a couple of decades. It is coming to be dominated by anti-social opportunists who prey on legitimate users, like the highwaymen of the middle ages.

      It is long past time for the internet to be ENGINEERED, like a modern arcology, rather than to grow without oversight or planning like a favela in the Third World.

      As a libertarian I am extremely sensitive to the argument that order and disclosure are an invitation to the tax collector. But the way to solve that problem is to rein in our too-big-for-their-britches value-subtracting governments, not to stunt the maturation of what is rapidly becoming the human race’s lifeline.

      We’ve learned to live with caller-ID in the phone system. Only recluses opt out of it and the only numbers they can get through to are emergency services and other recluses, which ironically seems to be okay with them.

      We can learn to live with registered e-mail servers. It’s admittedly the lesser of two evils, but welcome to the Paradigm Shift. As if spam weren’t bad enough, I’m now being inundated with a second tier of unwanted e-mail coming in every day: strangers scolding me for sending them virus-laden e-mail — which of course did not really come from my computer at all.

      • #2717848

        missing the point

        by jevans17 ·

        In reply to The “Information Infrastructure” must become a work of engineering

        SPAM is hardly an invasion of privacy, This is pure rhetoric.
        the person sending it does not see anything you are doing by sending an email. The same as putting mail thru my door is not an invasion of my privacy. I can choose to read it or dump it. I do not get a lot of spam, because I use a spamkilling program to filter it out. I pay for mine but SOME are free.

        We have someone wanting re-create the internet structure. One of the net’s STRENGTHS is that it IS so piecemeal. It is HARD to control. Governments would love to shut down some of this information so they could keep us in the dark once more. Companies want to control it so they can monopolise it.


        • #2717840

          And spyware/virus issues with spam dont count?

          by kevin ·

          In reply to missing the point

          Having anything that takes my time and energy, that someone thinks i need to see, like a telemarketer call a 8:00pm. Yes, i believe spam is an invasion of my privacy, i think a lot of the spam contains trojans, spyware, you name it.
          Your daughter is watching while you check your email, “Want a bigger penis” very bold comes right in. Isn’t that invasive. There are others much worse than that.

        • #2716732

          I will concede regarding the DANGERS of spam

          by jevans17 ·

          In reply to And spyware/virus issues with spam dont count?

          not trying to belittle fear of the dangers of spam. I have a trojan killer program and firewall and AV software, but everyone wants a big nanny to do everything. Commercial spam IS a problem as is the malicious sort.
          registration and whole caboodle that comes with it does in my mind is not the answer.

          I never said however that NOTHING should be done.

          but a good spamkiller program can make the residue that slips through manageable.
          The problem that comercial companies face is lack of education of staff. Allowing them to exercise their curiosity and infect the network. Going to dodgy sites that have insidious little trojans waiting.
          Emailing staff about the dangers of the internet as my company does is not enough. Its just another email. They should hold seminars or meetings to push the message home.

          Enough from me


        • #2716716

          Good Point

          by admin17 ·

          In reply to I will concede regarding the DANGERS of spam

          jevans makes a good point. Education is the key. I personally do not use spam filters on any of my three e-mail addresses. However, I still do not get any UCE. My reasoning for this is that I don’t give out my e-mail address to just any site, I use A/V software, and I throw in a personal firewall just for good measure.

          In response to the author of the article, I believe that registering e-mail servers is not such a great solution. However, I can’t think of another good way to solve the problem. Registration of servers, similar to registration of DNS domain names, public IP addresses, and corporations (in a business sense), is the most effective way to solve the problem without a major overhaul to the way e-mail is transported (IPv4 vs. IPv6 anyone?).

        • #2717672

          Indeed it is a good point

          by kevin ·

          In reply to I will concede regarding the DANGERS of spam

          Education on the user end would be effective for an organization. Unfortunately the malicious people will always have a target in the everyday home user who can barely check there email. I think it will be some time before any real solutions are developed, after all, its (the internet) technically still in its infancy.


      • #2716714


        by admin17 ·

        In reply to The “Information Infrastructure” must become a work of engineering

        The Internet is unlike any of the projects listed (e.g. The Pyramids, The Roman Aqueducts) in that it is designed by having a flexible framework in which others may build upon and interconnect. In both cases listed in DC_GUY’s statement, the projects were controlled by a relatively small group of engineers. These engineers were able to dictate, at their desire and recoginition of need, the placement of every brick.

        In the case of the Internet, there is no relatively small group of engineers that can dictate the placement of every brick (node). The engineers that DID design the Internet designed a framework that could be built upon as needed, could dynamically change to meet various situations, and could be interconnected with a myriad of platforms.

        The above also does not take into account the fact that the Internet has grown much larger than anyone in the 1980’s could have imagined. History tells me that what we know as the Internet started as a private or semi-private network connecting educational and government organizations. The original plans did not account for E-Commerce, UCE, or many of our modern uses.

        P.S. Please forgive any inaccuracies in the above.

        • #2716560

          Yes of course, I’m being a bit dramatic.

          by dc_guy ·

          In reply to What?!

          I know that the internet is not like any of those other projects. But by the same token its requirements for reliability and security are much more complicated, and I believe that the modern generation of engineers are not giving us, their customers, the service we deserve.

          There are other contemporary enginering disciplines that were unthinkable at the time of the pyramids and aqueducts, that also make them look like child’s play. Aeronautics and chemical engineering, to pick two obvious examples. Those engineers have managed to hew to standards that qualify what they do as true “engineering” rather than “craft.” Regardless of how difficult that obligation may be for software engineers to fulfill, they nonetheless are required as professionals to fulfill it. At some point you have a professional obligation to tell your customers that they can’t have what they want until what they already have can be used safely.

          The subsequent post to yours says it all. It is not professional, and it is arguably not even engineering, to leave your customers with a mess and run off with their check.

          As a libertarian I am second to none in my regard for government as the resource of last resort. In many cases I would vote to do without something if the only other choice is to get it from Big Nanny. I will be delighted if the software industry itself could just grow up a little bit and recognize its obligations to its hapless users.

          But when you see a melodrama like SP/2 unfolding in the 21st century, it doesn’t engender a lot of hope that this will happen. Unless the world is willing to take a big step backward in order to take a huge step forward, i.e. “upgrade” the Information Infrastructure by replacing millions of PCs with Macintoshes which will drag the entire software industry kicking and screaming into the 21st century and shake out the Neanderthal project managers that got us here, we’re faced with picking the least of several less than wonderful choices.

          No matter what we do, we simply can’t afford to leave things as they are. The pecadillos of the hackers, spammers, and phishers are nothing compared to what computer-literate terrorists are waiting in the wings to do to us courtesy of our tinkertoy-architecture Information Infrastructure.

          Review the TV series “Dark Angel.” It would NOT require a neutron bomb to create that world. Very interesting that the show vanished from the airwaves after 9/11. Wouldn’t want to frighten the proletarians.

    • #2717831

      Let’s not play to pass the buck

      by rjsmithmcps ·

      In reply to Making the case for registered e-mail servers

      C’mon, let’s get real.

      I recommend that end users start demanding more from their ISPs, security managers and enterprise architects who are responsible for establishing and maintaining the front lines of defense to UCE/SPAM matters.

      Technology is available to track where UCE/SPAM originates, but more often than not, ISPs, EAs and security managers don’t, or won’t, invest in the additional technology nor commit enough manpower resources to combat the problems effectively.

      I would rather encourage legislation that would make ISPs, EAs and security managers be more responsible by requiring them to enforce stricter privacy standards regarding commercial UCE/SPAM. Requiring additional registrations of e-mail servers would be a totally beaureaucratic measure that would ultimately amount to nothing more than allowing the already irresponsible ISPs, EAs and security managers to pass the buck at the end user’s expense.

    • #2716673

      it’s all about POWER

      by batmang8 ·

      In reply to Making the case for registered e-mail servers

      There was a time when the net was relatively free and open, but it keeps getting worse and worse all around.

      They want us to engage in e-commerce, buy over the net, but heaven forbid we have strong encryption so that the transactions have any semblance of security.

      Along the way, the intense discussions on usenet were supplanted with these claustrophobic moderated web-based “boards”, “communities”, etc., where our discussions can more easily be abused for advertising and monitoring.

      Now, they want to control who can have a server and how it can be used.

      I’ve disliked spam since that first blast from whatnot, whozit and Green, advertising their legal advice to prospective immigrants, but the easy way to crush spam is simply to delete it and move on. And I really do have trouble imagining idiots who would actually give business to any of these scum.

    • #2717210

      Sender ID Framework does this

      by jasonaaa10 ·

      In reply to Making the case for registered e-mail servers

      Check out Sender ID (

    • #2717485

      Why Not?

      by bdulac ·

      In reply to Making the case for registered e-mail servers

      Why not require e-mail servers to be registered. I’ve even thought of regulating Internet use by requiring evry computer online to register for something like a driver’s license. The only people who would object are the ones wreaking havoc!

Viewing 8 reply threads