Tobias DiPasquale on 10 Dec 2004 12:35:04 -0000 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Dec 10, 2004, at 1:18 AM, Pat Regan wrote: You are making it sound like 2 million emails would chew up an expensive
1. Most spam is small in size. 2. 2 million emails is not really a lot. Having said that, your argument is akin to saying "I can take one punch to the face because it probably won't kill me". Spam will grow to fill whatever bandwidth and space allocation you give it. By the time you were to actually receive 2 million spam emails, you'd notice that it was a significant drain on your email infrastructure in terms of bandwidth, storage space, technical support and archiving. Sarbanes-Oxley now demands that some companies archive all communications, effectively making those companies pay for each piece of spam twice. As well, there is a fundamental omission in your logic above, in that, while you certainly have the bandwidth to receive all that mail, I would doubt that your obviously-shared server has a quota large enough to let you accumulate 8GB worth of spam (given real mail and whatever else you store on the Web, FTP, etc). Receiving that much spam is thus, in effect, a denial of service attack, preventing you from receiving legitimate mail. And even if you had a quota that big, would you want to have to sift through 2 million emails? - -- Tobias DiPasquale 7A79 308C 0354 EA9C 7807 ED83 03C9 9E01 148E 7D01 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (Darwin) iD8DBQFBuZf1A8meARSOfQERAmWeAJ9ht6xxrQ1qlAuRkHobgNEA3JiRywCfcEVM N/TsXURZVs5Qe2Xaxqa6raM= =L7PC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ___________________________________________________________________________ Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
|
|