Government and botnets

The US government is looking at telling ISPs how to deal with compromised customers and botnets.
They’re a bit late to the party, though. Most of the major commercial ISPs have been implementing significant botnet controls for many years now. Control involves a number of different techniques, but notification has been designed into the system from day 1.

“There is no need for mandated action in this area since the market is already moving forward. Many ISPs are already doing a great deal to combat the menace of bots and malware. All over the U.S., ISPs currently have notification systems in place to tell their users they are infected and — whether they deliver these warnings via email, phone, walled gardens, or inline warnings — the warnings are being delivered,” says Michael O’Reirdan, chairman of the MAAWG. “Other ISPs currently have pilot programs or technology development efforts in place, and there will be more deployments in the near future.”
O’Reirdan says ISPs handled the spam battle on their own, and can also do so for battling bots. It has become a business issue for them, he says. “No one had to mandate anti-spam platforms: ISPs put them in place to deal with the menace of spam because, if they had not, they would have lost customers if customers’ mailboxes were overrun with spam. The same is happening with anti-bot platforms. It is becoming a ‘table stakes’ issue for ISPs, and legislating in this arena will merely lock the response of ISPs in stone to conform with the legislation rather than allow innovation and development to meet the rapidly varying nature of the bot challenge posed by the bad guys,” he says. Kelly Jackson Higgins

The ISPs have taken a leadership position in the area of protecting consumers from botnets. This has been a major discussion point at MAAWG for years. Many ISPs have worked closely with vendors to create detection and notification systems to mitigate and clean botnet infections.

Related Posts

MAAWG and email appending

In today’s Magill Report Ken says:

The only surprise in the Messaging Anti-Abuse Working Group’s statement last week condemning email appending was that it didn’t publish one sooner.
However, MAAWG’s implication that email appending can’t be accomplished without spamming is nonsense.

Read More

Holomaxx doubles down

Holomaxx has, as expected, filed a motion in opposition to the motion to dismiss filed by both Yahoo (opposition to Yahoo motion and Hotmail (opposition to Microsoft motion). To my mind they still don’t have much of an argument, but seem to believe that they can continue with this.
They are continuing to claim that Microsoft is scanning email before the email gets to Microsoft (or Yahoo) owned hardware.

Read More

Prepping for MAAWG

The June MAAWG meeting is next week. Both of us are working on various projects, documents and announcements for the meeting. This means light blogging, although we’ll post public announcements as they come out.
If you’re going to MAAWG be sure to stop by and say hi!

Read More