Shoutbox

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised
the outcome will be the same, designed as DDoS attack or not.

---

well, Lycos intended to control the pinging of websites which seems to have failed, but if they would have managed to stop pinging at 5% - 10% of left bandwith, it couldn't be classified as DDoS attack, because the websites would still be online. DDoS attacks are attacks where the designated goal is to overload the server and to take the website down.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised
The way to fight spam is to report it to the autorities. Many spammers have already been punished by law. This method works (but is not widely know)... If more and more authorities make laws agains spamming, more and more the spam will reduce...

---

Yes, this would definitely be a better way but at the moment it's unrealistic because most servers are located somewhere in Asia or anywhere scattered around the world. It would be extremely hard, and it would take a long time, to get the governments to make laws against spamming and actually take actions against them. And maybe some governments have interests in keeping the spamming business up.

I know that the Lycos' way isn't the best, but the only that would work in in the foreseeable future.
And another problem is that every anti-spam company would be against laws, resolutions against spam and will try to block them. So making laws against spam could be hard and will take a long time. And even when laws against spamming are introduced, many companies will stay underground and continue their work. The Lycos attack would work much faster, but I see that it would hit some innocent people too.

Should we just sit here and wait till some government in Asia makes a law against spamming ?

As we can't influence the law-making process in Asia, we could at least try to make spamming harder by using these "unethical" ways like Lycos introduced.