Shakedown spam and antispam spam

Well, I tried to get away from the whole issue of unsolicited e-mail, also known as spam, but it seems to be turning into the column topic that won't die.

The reason I can't let spam drop is it seems to be a hot topic. Feedback about the past two columns has been enormous, and we can blame faithful reader Matt Steinhoff for giving me yet another new type of spam to consider: shakedown spam.

Matt received a message from GSI Research - which has no discernable presence on the World Wide Web that I could find - about spam. The GSI dispatch starts with the salutation, "Dear friend," which is never a good sign, and continues: "Our research indicates you may have been a victim of unsolicited commercial e-mail (UCE), or so-called 'Internet spam.' "

The pitch goes on to say: "We at GSI Research are fighting to keep Internet bandwidth free of UCE in order to conserve resources. . . . The services we provide to the Internet community include identifying, tracking down and demanding accountability from spammers, and discouraging them by all legal means. . . . As you can imagine, the technology and vigilance required to combat the spammers is expensive. To reiterate, we need your help. Your contribution of $9.99 would assist us greatly in combating the UCE received by thousands of e-mail accounts daily."

I nearly fell out of my chair when I read this. And to make the pitch even more outrageous, GSI suggests you pony up your contribution by sending in your credit card details! Antispam spam with a twist. This is the first time I have seen a shakedown via e-mail.

Matt says he has contacted HotMail via e-mail three times to report the spam, but all he's received so far are autoreplies. Would anyone from HotMail care to comment?

As if this gem wasn't enough humor for one night, in came a message from my old friend Jim Sterne with another example of antispam spam.

This spammer's literacy is sketchy. He starts off with the subject "Important Notice Form ISP" (I suspect he meant "from"). He goes on: "Our ISP is working 24 hours a day to stop Spammers. By the year 2000 all Spammers will be VANISH! Thank to all members who cares about having a peaceful internet service! Help us clean out the internet services and kick out all Spammers!"

The author, who signs himself "Director ISP, Dan Kirbit," helpfully continues: "Below are some services that we recommand.to be helpful!"

The first service Dan Kirbit recommends is www.cvpinc.com. The supplied link brings you to a cheesy Web site that claims to be "Your Doorway to the hearts and minds of over 300,000 viewers." This site, administered by one Jose Castro out of New York, has some lame offer to get your Web site on Web TV. Mr. Castro's writing is curiously like that of "Dan Kirbit."

Our friend Dan Kirbit goes on to recommend a site, www.globalads.com, as a way of making "96.6% of all porn sites" vanish. If you follow the link, you'll find a very ticked-off company that claims vehemently to have nothing to do with the antispam spam.

These are examples of real spam, the kind of snake-oil selling that gets people so riled. I've been thinking some more about how spam can be controlled, and I have another suggestion. If all ISPs add a routing and identification header to each message, tracking back to find the miscreant would be a lot easier.

So a couple of things: 1. What's wrong with this solution? 2. What fabulous examples of spam have you received? Next week: something completely different (unless, of course, spam stays really interesting).