[ILUG] [Fwd: I fought the scammer... and I won.]

[Stephen Mc Guinness]

Crime prevention reduces prosecutions, which is a bad thing?


Stephen *off to remove all those locks*


On Tue, Apr 06, 2004 at 10:05:55AM +0100, Lee Hosty wrote:
> David Murphy wrote:
> 
> >On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 10:59:12AM +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> >
> > 
> >
> >>(1) Wouldn't it be fairly simple to restrict the number of email
> >>messages sent out by each customer, to say 10 or 20?
> >>Or 5 per hour, or whatever.
> >>   
> >>
> >
> >You could do that, but remember, spam and anti-virus tools can examine
> >outbound mail too! If I were running a cybercafe, I'd redirect all SMTP
> >traffic to a local mailserver, and scan all the mails for spam and
> >viruses, saving copies of suspicious traffic for later inspection. This
> > 
> >
> The only drawback being  that there'd be no grounds to prosecute any 419 
> scammers who abused your system. Their emails don't delivered; no one 
> gets scammed; no grounds for prosecution. Is it better to let the 419ers 
> have their fun for a bit so they can be caught and locked up? Or stop 
> them in their tracks so that they only send mails where they can't be 
> caught / prosecuted ?
> 
> -- 
> Irish Linux Users' Group
> http://www.linux.ie/mailman/listinfo/ilug/