Filters At ISP Level Is Better Option
Panda Software agrees with the growing crowd of security firms and joins with it in projecting the corresponding link between water supply and quality broadband connections. Panda says in a statement that it is possible to compare the services rendered by water companies with those provided by ISPs. While the water companies are supposed to supply portable water, ISPs don't have to fulfill equivalent demands. The companies' reason that since the quality of the content of Internet traffic should be high, the ISPs should be more amenable in ensuring that quality.
Panda Software and its group of security firms are of the opinion that e-mail filtering needs to be more aggressive and can occur in the initial phase of the delivery process. This can help to prevent malware at its very origin in the bad sectors of the Internet.
While MessageLabs has been drumming this since a long time, 'British Telecommunications' (BT) recently announced its decision to install spam filters. These will enable to clean its broadband supply and help those subscribers who have become victims of 'botnets' to make their PCs hygienic.
After that, BT's 'Customer Security Team' can come down on professional spam operators, which could comprise of stopping rogue accounts and enlisting offending IP addresses in the industry blacklists.
According to Mark Sunner, 'chief technical officer' at MessageLabs, the ideal protection is not strict end-user security mechanisms, but the practice of filtering by ISPs over the Internet.
By virtue of 'Internet Industry Spam Code of Practice', ISPs must now provide anti-spam filtering. Some ISPs like iiNet, TPG and Pacific Internet provide free spam filtering. Where default filtering is absent, there the control is usually accessible via ISP's website. While some spam will get through, filters at the provider level are a better 1st line of security.
As per BT, about 80% of emails, equivalent to around 6.5 billion emails a day, are spam.
While it is encouraging to find BT enforces the new system, the issue is that ISPs, such as BT, should have been proactive, rather than reactive to customer problems, for spam mail has been a problem since a decade. BT had failed to fulfill hope until 2006 to really tackle the problem.
» SPAMfighter News - 24-10-2006