Re: amazonaws.com?

[Sargun Dhillon <sdhillon () decarta com>]

Has Amazon given an official statement on this? It would be nice to get
someone from within Amazon to give us their official view on this. It
would be even more appropriate for the other cloud infrastructures to
join in, and or have some sort of RFC to do with SMTP access within the
"cloud." I forsee this as a major problem as the idea of "the cloud" is
being pushed more and more. You are talking about a spammers dream. Low
cost , powerful resources with no restrictions and complete anonymity.

Personally I'm going to block *.amazonaws.com from my mail server until
Amazon gives us a statement on how they are planning on fighting spam
from the cloud.


Tony Finch wrote:
> On Wed, 28 May 2008, michael.dillon () bt com wrote:
>   
> > > I don't see how, in your preferred replacement email
> > > architecture, a provider would be able to avoid policing
> > > their users to prevent spam in the way that you complain is
> > > so burdensome.
> > >       
> > To begin with, mail could only enter such a system through
> > port 587 or through a rogue operator signing an email peering
> > agreement. In either case, there is a bilateral contract involved
> > so that it is clear whose customer is doing wrong, and therefore
> > who is responsible for policing it.
> >     
>
> This is different from Amazon's situation how?
>
> Tony.
>   


-- 
+1.925.202.9485
Sargun Dhillon
deCarta
sdhillon () decarta com
www.decarta.com