By Alan Gahtan - November 10, 2003
The problem of unsolicited email (or “spam” as its commonly referred to) continues to grow. For many people, the number of junk messages they now receive promoting sexual aids, get rich quick schemes or pleas to help fictious deposed African leaders, has overtaken the number of legitimate messages they receive. Not only does the arrival of such messages create a distraction during the work day, but the apparent increase in the last few months has been overwhelming many email delivery systems, causing a general slow down in the transmission of legitimate messages.
Some US states, such as California, have passed anti-spam legislation. There is also a US federal bill being considered, The Can Spam Act of 2003. These legislative responses typically prohibit senders from disguising their identities or including deceptive subject lines. Penalties can include huge fines or even prison terms.
The California law, due to take effect on January 1, 2003, takes an “opt-in” approach, similar to what the European Union as adopted. This is the contrast to the “opt-out” approach taken by the proposed federal bill. The California bill makes it illegal to send an email to an email address utilized by a resident of, or accessed from California unless the sender has a preexisting relationship with the sender or has been given direct consent. Violations allow recipients to sue for damages of US$1,000 per unsolicited message. Legitimate businesses all over North America are scrambling to vet their email lists before the end of the year.
Some of the outsourced antispam services hold onto any messages identified as potential spam, requiring the customer to periodically log in and review the list of captured messages. Other services insert a special flag in the header portion of such messages and then forward them onwards to the recipient. The recipient can then run a filter in their email program to automatically move any such flagged messages into a designated folder on their on system for periodic review. The later can be easily accomplished by setting up a rule in Microsoft Outlook.
In either case, it is prudent to not simply automatically delete messages identified as spam but rather to set up a once a day routine to skim through them. This 30 second process can help ensure that legitimate messages are not inadvertently ignored. Most antispam filtering services and software will also usually provide the user with the ability to define how aggressively they want the system to filter the incoming messages.
Based on personal experience, the above approaches can help eliminate 80-90% of the unwanted emails. An option offered by some programs is the ability to require verification of any message coming from a sender who is not in the recipient’s address book. The program sends back an email to such senders asking them to confirm that they sent the original message. Unless such a confirmatory email is received, the original message is flagged as spam and not delivered. This step, which only needs to be done once per sender, is effective because most spam messages are sent with forged or non-existent return addresses or by automated systems which cannot respond to such requests.
An important rule to follow for junk email is to delete such messages without opening them. This also means turning off any automatic preview functionality provided by email programs such as Outlook. A trick used by many spammers is to send their messages invisible embedded codes (called Web bugs) that “call home” when the message is viewed. This technique is used to tell the spammer that the email address is valid and can be used again (or sold). Outlook 2003, which was just recently released, has been updated to block such code.
Related Sources: Canadian Legal Resources | Cyberlaw Encyclopedia | Entrepreneur Resources | Canadian Technology | Precedents | Alan Gahtan
© 2005 Alan M. Gahtan. All Rights
Reserved | Use is subject to these Legal
Terms
Disclaimer: Not all materials may be applicable in your jurisdiction. Not intended to be a
substitute for professional advice. No implied endorsement of, or affiliation with, any
linked sites. Path to individual pages may change - please link to home page only.
Linking Info