Microsoft Vs. open source fighting Spam

[globalhostinggroup]

Microsoft Spam filtering declined by IETF
The Internet Engineering Task Force, an international standards body flat out declined Microsoft’s approach to tackling spam.
Microsoft wants to identify where e-mail comes from and they have devised a system to do this. Having a source from its sender would allow for better filtering biased on spam sources.
Unfortunately Microsoft has included some restrictions like making people agree to a license agreement which has upset some people.

[mikmik]

Open source fans attack Microsoft on Caller ID: Going too far?

It seems to me this goes way beyond anything remotely reasonable - the open-sourcers and anti-Microsoft crowd have clearly reached a point where there is no pleasing them. How is this any different than me offering you software for free under the condition that you acknowledge a EULA stating that I retain rights to the software and you agree not to alter or reverse engineer it? How is it different from Google offering me access to their API at no charge but requiring that I enter into an agreement not to flood their servers with requests?

Put Up Or Shut Up Time For Microsoft on Spam

I decline to be inspired by this call to action. The free software movement has been notably useless in the fight against spam. The members of the 9/11 commission are going around advocating their report's recommendations saying, "If you don't like them, come up with something better, because something has to be done now." That's how I feel about SMTP authentication. Nothing useful can be done about spam until some form of SMTP authentication is in place, and I would also argue that RFC2822 authentication—what the Caller ID part of the spec does—is a necessary part of it. If you don't like the spec, come up with something better.

If you don't like microsoft, use Linux or MAC.

[lanlocked]

<rant>

Mikmik, I think you are missing the main part of the problem here. Something like 80% of the internets email is handled by Open Source Software. The reason the internet works as well as it does is because it is based on Open standards. In other words, a companys products will have to compete based on their implementation of that standard; not because they have a standard that is locked up with patents. No standards should be controlled by a single corporation, especially one with that has a history of being a monopolist. Yes, in its original form you could implement the standard freely (as in no cost, not as in freedom) however don't fool yourself into believing that Microsoft would continue being altruistic; It does not make good business sense.

Quote
"The Internet Engineering Task Force, an international standards body flat out declined Microsoft’s approach to tackling spam.Microsoft wants to identify where e-mail comes from and they have devised a system to do this."

You are referring to SPF here, and Microsoft did not develop it (though they would have you believe that they did). SPF (Sender Policy Framework -- http://spf.pobox.com/) is Open Source and is what most of the Sender-ID (Microsoft's contribution) implementation is based on. The biggest problem that MARID (http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/marid-charter.html) had with Microsofts patent is that Microsoft themselves could not really define what they were patenting -- the language is that vague.


Qoute
"On the issue of ignoring patent claims, the working group has at least rough consensus that the patent claims should not be ignored. Additionally, there is at least rough consensus that the participants of the working group cannot accurately describe the specific claims of the patent application. This stems from the fact that the patent application is not publicly available. Given this, it is the opinion of the co-chairs that MARID should not undertake work on alternate algorithms reasonably thought to be covered by the patent application. We do feel that future changes regarding the patent claim or its associated license could significantly change the consensus of the working group, and at such a time it would be appropriate to consider new work of this type." -- http://www.moongroup.com/index.php?o...id=25&Itemid=2

Microsoft is one of the major participants in MARID so I find this clip of the statement particularly disturbing -- "there is at least rough consensus that the participants of the working group cannot accurately describe the specific claims of the patent application". It would seem that Microsoft is either intentionally trying to muddy the water or they really don't know what they are trying to patent.

Please keep in mind that while Microsoft still maintains a large majority of desktop share, that is not the case in the server room.

Also, in closing, the Open Source Community is protecting your interests; why are you so quick to blame them for a problem that rests almost entirely on Microsoft's shoulders (in an attempt to gain control in an area they have historically not been able to flex their monopolistic muscle; and for very good reason). </rant>

[mikmik]

Mikmik, I think you are missing the main part of the problem here. Something like 80% of the internets email is handled by Open Source Software. The reason the internet works as well as it does is because it is based on Open standards.

LOL

where do you get 80%?

AND, now open source advocates want free access to everything? How about google? Should they give all their technology away, no questions asked? Yahoo? Everybody?

So, between hotmail and yahoo and OE and Outlook, that is only 20%?

News Story
Jun 25 2004
The Anti-Spam Technical Alliance (ASTA) recently released a policy proposal in an effort to fight the scourge of spam.

The proposal provides recommended actions and policies for Internet service providers (ISPs) and e-mail service providers as well as large senders of e-mail including governments, private corporations and online marketing organizations. These recommendations primarily focus on two key issues: helping solve the e-mail forgery problem by eliminating domain spoofing through Internet Protocol-based and signature-based solutions; and best practices to help prevent ISPs and their customers from being sources of spam.

ASTA was founded in April 2003 to bring together key industry stakeholders to drive technical standards and promote collaboration in the development of industry guidelines to address the spam problem. Current members include America Online, British Telecom, Comcast, EarthLink, Microsoft and Yahoo!.

That last paragraph says it all.
Oh, Are red hat, Mandrake, Unix Free BSD, Solaris all open source? GNU?
Is this the 'open source' initiative you talk about?

$999 (Red Hat Enterprise Linux subscription required)

* Red Hat Enterprise Linux subscribers can download a free unsupported copy of Red Hat Application Server via Red Hat Network
* Download a free, unsupported version via FTP

Only a $999 dollar subscription?

Look, I don't like monopolies, I am anti big business, I am sure that Bill Gates, Donald Trump etc., etc, get where they are because they are ruthless and with little remorse when it comes to business decisions. I am all for open source, I love it, I never pay for software and I am trying to learn to use Suse so I don't ever have to relly on Windows.

I also want to become an adept programmer because I dream of writing good software and giving it away because I like to help. I am just not the best businessman in the world LOL, I guess.
But I alsdo believe in getting paid for work, and I also believe in Copyrights and trademarks and patents.
The open source alternative as what?????????? Has the 'community come up with an answer?

First, if Open Source wants to be taken seriousely, certain uotspoken proponents have to quit whining all the time about Microsoft protecting their interests as a matter of business. And quit exaggerating. (Using arguments like rough agreement - what does that mean exactly - in whos opinion, because they can't see it, so they don't know what they are talking about anyways?????)
And second, come up with something better. How about something period.

Don't forget, you then have to make sure everyone complies with a standard, or it falls apart into chaos eventually.

BTW, have you noticed Yahoo has implemented 'Domain Keys ID'?

Finally here is an article that defines what is all going on with the development, from February, so that you get an idea of how all this started. The one quote I picked out of the whole article will serve as a giant rebuttal to your 'handles 80% of e-mail' claim...

However, of all the domains currently advertising Sender Policy Framework records in their DNS, the one that really matters is Aol.com. With Microsoft implementing the Caller ID plan and Yahoo touting its own Domain Keys proposal, the good news is that all three of the largest mail providers in the United States are committed to SMTP authentication.

The bad news is that they are committed to three different implementations

MS Caller ID Plan Boosts SMTP Authentication

Yes, I don't like Microsoft and I never want to be dictated to, or not have choices!!!!

But MS is a business, and they are doing it the 'Free Market' way, which we all subscribe to, unless everyone has started working for free, and money has no meaning :O)

[globalhostinggroup]

Ok

I’m a bit of an internet buff being a CCNA and all packed with other certifications no I am speaking loosely and if you want to talk specifics we can go that route.
The internet (I assume you refer to TCP/IP using HTML and such standards) was not designed open source it was developed under DOD contracts this is far form open source. And it is the very structure of TCPIP that is its downfall it was designed with military communication intentions and thrust not node reliant and self routing. This structure leaves many loop holes. The internet has not improved much at all we just look at different GUI we still use the same protocols as we did last year and the year before. When you think of 640k or a roll over digit from 1999 to 2000 what do you think ? well the IP is in the same boat as more and more IP’s are required the pool has run out.

The problem is this branch of topic could take hours to talk over and weeks to type over. Open source is great and would be a great development to man as a hole but our economies is not biased on this philosophy and the richest man in the world last I checked is still bill gates and most still chose Microsoft over Linux.

It is null point if Microsoft developed any substantial part of the system if they even wrote one line of code in the purposed standard it will stop the deal unless they give their ok or someone else makes it from scratch without any involvement from Microsoft.

[mikmik]

Hey!

Strengthening Anti-Spam Defenses with Message Authentication
Sponsored by Mirapoint

Peter Coffee, Technology Editor - eWEEK

Cameron Sturdevant, Senior Analyst, eWEEK Labs - Ziff Davis Media

John Veizades, Product Manager - Mirapoint

The most promising new weapon in the fight against spam e-mail is message authentication, which holds spammers' feet to the fire and will likely slow the growth of spam to corporate e-mail boxes.

Join eWEEK and a panel of technology experts for this 60-minute eSeminar, and explore how e-mail authentication can benefit (and cost) the enterprise. This anti-spam eSeminar will help you get a leg up on:


Sender Policy Framework
Domain Keys and other authentication proposals, including when systems using these techniques will become available and how to evaluate them when they do

sign up at Ziff Davis for free seminars.