Motion for a new POST NSF AUP

From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@MIT.EDU>
I disagree, strongly. I think anti-spam messages, sent to the
postmasters of the respective ISP's that provide service to the
spammers, is perfectly acceptable. Otherwise, there is no cost to the
ISP's for providing service to the spammers.

Good idea! I've only been sending to the perpetrator (which sometimes

As a matter of course, whenever I receive a spam, I will generally send
a complaint to postmaster at the originating site, or perhaps to the
ISP, if I can determine it. In fact, I'm thinking about automating this
procedure, to decrease the amount of time that it takes for me to send
the complaint.

I also have a template file which I use to save time.

How do you automate finding the postmaster and ISP? I cannot seem to
figure it out.

In the case of the "Janet Dove" spam, the two different months included
different headers:

        Received: (from news@localhost) by (8.6.12/8.6.10) id SAA06849; Fri, 8 Sep 1995 18:27:50 -0400
        Newsgroups: info.ietf.isoc,info.ietf.njm,info.ietf.smtp,info.inet.access,info.isode,info.jethro-tull,info.labmgr,info.mach,,info.nets,info.nsf.grants,info.nsfnet.cert,info.nsfnet.status,info.nupop,info.nysersnmp,info.osf,info.pem-de
        Organization: Association of Overseas Students, Eastern Region
        Message-ID: <>

        Received: from [] ( []) by (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id EAA02068; Wed, 11 Oct 1995 04:28:53 -0400
        X-Sender: (Unverified)
        Message-Id: <v0153050baca1267766ab@[]>

Heres a better solution: Only send to the postmasters. I was involved
(from the "bouncing site" perspective) with a spam in which the
perpetrator would have been charged with felonies in at least two
states. However, the internet community tipped the individual off by
determining his email address and sending him email cc'd to the
postmaster of the site. As a result, the perpetrator wasn't caught in
the act, and a case could not be built.