Personal tools
You are here: Home → Proceedings → Committee Proceedings → Public Policy Committee → Archive → 2003 → Spam Campaign Proposal 30/08/03
 

Spam Campaign Proposal 30/08/03

— filed under:

ANTI-SPAM CAMPAIGN

Version 1.1 : 18 August 2003
For: Council on 29 August 2003
Status: Public

1. THE PROBLEM

  1. Spam is arguably the biggest threat the Internet, providers and users, face today. It is certainly inarguable that the volume of spam has risen massively in the last couple of years, with many ISPs reporting it now comprises over 50% of all e-mails, and AOL reporting that it discards 2 billion spam messages a day sent to its user, which is 80% of total incoming e-mail
  2. AOL also reported in May 2003 that the volume of spam it receives had doubled in just two months
  3. The economic cost of spam is hard to define, but in the US the estimates range from NZ$20 billion to NZ$170 billion.
  4. The Australian National Office for the Information Economy estimates spam costs enterprises NZ$1,200 per employee. In terms of volume Postini estimate the average user gets 630MB of spam a year
  5. The prognosis is for the problem only to get worse with Radicati predicting the cost of spam (just for US users) to rise to NZ$400 billion by 2007.
  6. Also useful to note is that the US Federal Trade Commission has found that 66% of spam contains obvious indications of fraud

2. IS THERE A ROLE FOR INTERNETNZ ?

  1. As described above, spam incurs major costs for internet users and providers. However this is not the biggest problem caused by spam.
  2. Spam threatens the very nature of the Internet which is meant to be an open communications tool. Users routinely hide their e-mail addresses now, legitimate e-mails get buried in amongst the spam, and anti-spam filters and blacklists block must legitimate e-mail traffic.
  3. The objects of InternetNZ state the society seeks to be the principal organisation representing the interests of internet users and providers in New Zealand. They also commit to "provision of Internet access, services and facilities in an open and uncaptureable environment".
  4. This strongly suggest that it would be well within our objects for InternetNZ to play a major role in this issue.

3. WHAT CAN INTERNETNZ DO

  1. I propose that InternetNZ initiate a two year campaign to run until June 2005 with simple aim "To minimise the volume of spam and the effects of spam within New Zealand".
  2. The excellent paper by Cr David Harris provides a timely and relevant over-view of the problems caused by spam, and some of the current methods used against spam.
  3. There is no one easy solution to spam. If there was, it would have been implemented some time ago. To make progress on this issue, InternetNZ needs to adopt multi faceted approach with six distinct areas of activity, being: · Education · Technical Users · Technical Providers · Industry Self Regulation · Legislation · International Treaty
  4. Each of these areas will be dealt with in more detail later in the paper. A very wide range of skills will be needed to successfully implement any such campaign, but InternetNZ is an ideal body to have such skills and experience within its membership or wider stakeholders.
  5. It is proposed that a Taskforce be set up under the auspices of the Legal & Regulatory Committee to oversee the campaign

4. EDUCATION

  1. DMA, businesses and other potential spammers or customers of spammers on why spam is bad and double opt in is best.
  2. Users on ways to protect their e-mail address, never replying to spam, using forms on websites, having a second address they use in public etc.
  3. Government and Parliament on the problem and cost of spam.
  4. An anti spam website which gains the status as the authority or most reliable source of information on anti spam measures in NZ.

5. TECHNICAL USERS

  1. Provide a guide to pros and cons of leading client side anti spam tools.
  2. Advising on how to minimise or avoid false positives.
  3. Provide information on pros and cons of blacklists and whitelists
  4. Provide information on what anti-spam measures are used by NZ ISPs, to allow informed choice on this basis.
  5. Advise on making sure user technical solutions do not impact on providers or other users (do not bounce e-mails etc).
  6. Provide E-mail discussion group for users to discuss anti spam measures and share information.

6. TECHNICAL PROVIDERS

  1. Survey ISPs to determine variety of solutions used, satisfaction with them and pros and cons.
  2. Rate black-lists by reliability.
  3. Guide to server side anti spam tools.
  4. Provide forum for ISPs to specifically discuss anti spam measures.

7. SELF REGULATION

  1. Anti spam clause in AUPs for all ISPs, either through a CoP or independently.
  2. Best Practice statement developed on dealing with spam complaints.
  3. Ability to share info on repeat spammers.

8. LEGISLATION

  1. Define spam for purposes of legislation (the definition used in David Harris' paper has been formulated with a view to use in legislation)
  2. Does it include just sending spam, paying someone to spam on your behalf, buying or selling a spam list, buying or selling spam software or all of the above?
  3. Does current Privacy Act apply and can it be used?
  4. As most spams are also scams and illegal, are there other laws which can be used (Fair Trading Act, Medicines Act etc).
  5. Define enforcement mechanism - key seems to be to allow users or ISPs rather than Governments take action.
  6. If INZ favours legislation, Lobby Parliament and Government on case for legislation.
  7. Try to influence overseas legislation.
  8. Work with respected groups like CAUCE and CAUBE-AU.

9. TREATY

  1. If necessary look at steps needed for a treaty or multi-lateral action on spam, which may ultimately be the most effective way to eliminate spam.
  2. We understand both the OECD and APEC will be considering spam in the near future, so this provides excellent opportunities for influence.
  3. Also look at how the US FTC and other countries have been co-operating re internet scams and see if this can be applied to spam

10. RESOURCES

  1. While I would hope we will gain the most resources from members of the local internet community, it is highly likely that some professional resource would be needed, especially around the educational aspects and also analysing potentially 200 responses from ISPs etc.
  2. If legislation looks feasible we may also wish to get legal advice to help with drafting a bill, or commenting on a Government draft bill.
  3. The cost of the campaign can not be estimated at this stage, but the initial job of the Taskforce will be to draw up a campaign plan, and cost it.
  4. The plan and budget would then be submitted to Council through Legal & regulatory Committee.

11. RECOMMENDATIONS

Legal & Regulatory Committee recommends to Council:

  1. That InternetNZ initiate a two year campaign to run until June 2005 to minimise the volume of spam and the effects of spam within New Zealand.
  2. That a Taskforce be established to oversee and co-ordinate the campaign, with the Chair of Legal & Regulatory Committee as the Taskforce Chair, Cr David Harris as Deputy Chair, and the following persons as members: Rick Shera, Simon Lyall, xxxxx, yyyyy, zzzzz
  3. That Legal & Regulatory Committee be empowered to appoint additional members of the Taskforce as it sees fit.
  4. That an initial allocation of $5,000 be approved for use by the Taskforce, with the Taskforce detailed to bring back to Council through Legal & regulatory a detailed budget and plan for the campaign.
David Farrar
Chair, Legal & Regulatory Committee

© 2001 InternetNZ
Last updated 22 August 2003

Document Actions