DNS Abuse Forum - May 25

Home / News

New Code of Practice to Combat Spam

Australia has cracked down on junk mail with an industry code for tackling spam.

Under the new code, internet service providers (ISPs) will bear some of the responsibility for helping fight spam. Service providers must offer spam-filtering options to their subscribers and advise them on how to best deal with and report the nuisance mail. ISPs will also be compelled to impose "reasonable" limits on subscribers' sending email.

Read full story: The Register

By CircleID Reporter – CircleID's internal staff reporting on news tips and developing stories. Do you have information the professional Internet community should be aware of? Contact us. Visit Page

CircleID Newsletter The Weekly Wrap

More and more professionals are choosing to publish critical posts on CircleID from all corners of the Internet industry. If you find it hard to keep up daily, consider subscribing to our weekly digest. We will provide you a convenient summary report once a week sent directly to your inbox. It's a quick and easy read.

I make a point of reading CircleID. There is no getting around the utility of knowing what thoughtful people are thinking and saying about our industry.

Co-designer of the TCP/IP Protocols & the Architecture of the Internet


Re: New Code of Practice to Combat Spam By The Famous Brett Watson  –  Mar 28, 2006 7:57 pm PDT

Primary source information on this matter can be found at the Australian Communications and Media Authority's website: ACMA registers internet industry code on spam.

From a technical perspective, this code of practice is noteworthy in that it considers publication of SPF records a "best practice" to be followed. It also prohibits open proxies and open relays, whether on the ISP's hosts or customer hosts, and reserves the right for ISPs to scan for such services as a part of enforcing their AUP. Outgoing mail must use SMTP "AUTH" or similar, and outgoing port 25 blockage is required of dynamically addressed hosts "where technically and commercially viable".

The "best practice" SPF requirement is a little dubious, given that development in this area (MARID — Mail Authentication Records In DNS) is still very much a work in progress. Still, that particular requirement has very little impact in actual practice, since it's quite possible to publish an explicitly noncommittal SPF record.

Add Your Comments

 To post your comments, please login or create an account.



Threat Intelligence

Sponsored byWhoisXML API


Sponsored byVerisign

Domain Management

Sponsored byMarkMonitor

IPv4 Markets

Sponsored byIPXO

Domain Names

Sponsored byVerisign

Brand Protection

Sponsored byAppdetex

DNS Abuse Forum - May 25