[Mimedefang] Spammers who won't take no for an answer

[Daniel Kasak]

Kevin A. McGrail wrote:

>Just an FYI before someone actually does this, it *IS* a crime in the US.
>
>Though in spirit, I'm with ya ;-)
>
>See USC Title 18, Sec 1030 (Fraud and related activity in connection with
>computers) or in particularly, my state, Virginia also makes it a crime in §
>18.2-152.4.
>
>And the Virginia law is definitely NOT vague:
>
>"A. It shall be unlawful for any person to use a computer or computer
>network without authority and with the intent to:
>
>1. Temporarily or permanently remove, halt, or otherwise disable any
>computer data, computer programs, or computer software from a computer or
>computer network; "
>
>Regards,
>KAM
>  
>
Not that I'm particularly interested in US law, but wouldn't spamming 
itself break these laws? What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
The '... with intent to ...' bit could be denied, but I'm sure spammers 
realise the effects of their activities on mail servers.
In Australia, we have had Telstra refunding 50% of monthly access costs 
to users who couldn't send / receive mail because of the backlog of spam.
I could argue that I had no intention of halting / disabling their 
systems, and was simply using smbdie in a pre-emptive attack ( no UN 
backing required ) with the goal of relieving the load on my mail server.

I accept, however, that the law is an ass, and what's more, it's an ass 
with a tendancy to favour corporate interests.
Your warning, therefore was sensible.

-- 
Daniel Kasak
IT Developer
* NUS Consulting Group*
Level 5, 77 Pacific Highway
North Sydney, NSW, Australia 2060
T: (+61) 2 9922-7676 / F: (+61) 2 9922 7989
email: dkasak at nusconsulting.com.au
website: http://www.nusconsulting.com.au