Can That Spam!

By JOSHUA QUITTNER

Could spam be dying? I ask this because much of the junk e-mail I get these days is about spam itself: how to make money from bulk e-mailing, how to "harvest fresh addresses," how to MAKE MONEY FAST on the Internet by spewing your commercial message to millions of people all over the world. If spam works so well, why are promoters so desperate to sell me on its benefits?

I know that mine is a minority perspective and that the typical Net user is furious about spam. And with good reason: By some estimates, unsolicited junk messages account for more than 15% of all Internet e-mail--and as much as 30% on America Online, where spammers' "robots" cruise chat rooms to collect screen names. Spam is particularly obnoxious because, unlike the direct-mail solicitations that come via the postman, the online recipient pays the delivery cost.

Some important folks believe legislation represents the best chance for eradicating junk e-mail. I'm dubious: U.S. laws can be enforced only within U.S. borders. Unfortunately, a bill sponsored by Senators Frank Murkowski (R., Alaska) and Robert Torricelli (D., N.J.), which unanimously passed the Senate on May 13 and is being considered by the House, might actually aggravate the spam scene. The bill would fine junk mailers who hide their return addresses--that is, the vast majority of spammers. It would require them to list their real snail-mail addresses, telephone numbers and legal names. And supposedly, spammers would be forced to honor requests from folks who want their names taken off mailing lists.

Paradoxically, the bill could promote spamming by legitimizing it and giving it legal protection. America Online, which supports the Senate bill, has had great success shutting down spammers by using existing laws, including the Federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and state computer-trespass statutes. "We're for anything that will lessen spam," says Tricia Primrose, an AOL spokeswoman.

The first line of defense against spam is well-educated consumers. The cardinal rule? Never reply to spam--and especially don't fall for the part of the e-mail message that says, "If you'd like to be removed from this list, send e-mail to..." Spammers place a high premium on "live" addresses, that is, active mailboxes. Your request to be spared solicitations will actually put you on a "must-spam" list. Another easy solution: maintain two e-mail addresses (or, in the case of AOL, screen names). One address is just for friends, family and work; the other is for public stuff, such as chat rooms or registering for software at websites. Be sure to check out the online resources that battle spammers. For AOLers, the best place to go is keyword JUNKMAIL. Or send complaints to [email protected] Web folks should go to www.ybecker.net

Finally, I highly recommend Sam Spade, a free set of software tools that helps track spam from phony addresses. The program--written by computer engineer Steve Atkins, who has brought down hundreds of spammers--can be downloaded from www.blighty.com/products/spade A simpler, Web version is at www. blighty.com/spam/spade.html The documentation that comes with Sam Spade is an excellent explainer on the arcane world of Net messaging. Spammers, beware!

Send your questions about spam and other technology issues to Josh Quittner on the Ask Josh board at time.com