Re: [exim] TYhe Evolution of Spammers

On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 08:14:22AM -0800, Marc Perkel wrote:

> Having an open relay for spam is what is against policy. No one is going
> to complain if there is no spam - which there won't be.

Depends on what you agreed to when you subscribed to service.

> Actually not. There's no legal liability for being compromized by a
> spammer. You definitely got the law wrong on that.

That is incorrect. It has everything to do with what you agreed to
in your ISPs terms of service. If you violate it, and there are fees
tied along with the offense, they can very easily get a summary
judgement against you if not paid. Especially if there is intent shown
that you intended to violate the terms of service willingly.

Now, not all ISPs will follow through with those fees, and they may
not even catch you doing it, but be prepared to accept the consequences
of your actions. The ISP assumes all the risk of having their IP space
placed in RBL lists, and that risk extended to you financially in
most ISP terms of service.

--
Dean Brooks
dean@???