From...

ALSO    Message Boards:    Internet: Spam mail    Online privacy    Sign up for the Computer Connection email service    For more computing stories

July 5, 1999
Web posted at: 10:39 a.m. EDT (1439 GMT)

by Roberta Furger

(IDG) -- When 13-year-old Ashley finally convinced her parents to let her have her own screen name on America Online, she did what most kids her age would do. She visited chat rooms, perused message boards, and exchanged e-mail with her friends.

What Ashley didn't realize, however, was that her first solo voyage through cyberspace had not gone unnoticed. Every time she posted a message on a message board or made an innocent quip in a chat room, junk mailers harvested her e-mail address -- a fact that became abundantly (and offensively) clear when Ashley logged on for a second time, just 48 hours later.

"There were more than 200 e-mail messages -- most of which were about porn sites," recalls Ashley's mom, Marta, who is still angry about the incident. "We've always received some junk e-mail, but never anything like what Ashley got in just a few days."

Although I've written about junk e-mail before and received more than my fair share of spam, Ashley's story stopped me in my tracks. I know that chatting and message-board postings will be part of my preteen daughter's online experience. And it makes my skin crawl to think of my daughter -- or anyone else's -- wading through X-rated solicitations to read the latest missive from her best friend. (With parental control features enabled, a subscriber with a "teen" designation can't actually access any of the X-rated sites advertised in junk mailings. But the messages themselves, with subject lines like "Free Porn" and "Young Nude Females," are disturbing enough.)

MORE COMPUTING INTELLIGENCE
	IDG.net home page
PC World home page
FileWorld find free software fast
Make your PC work harder with these tips
Reviews & in-depth info at IDG.net
		IDG.net's desktop PC page
		IDG.net's portable PC page
IDG.net's Windows software page
IDG.net's personal news page
Year 2000 World
Questions about computers? Let IDG.net's editors help you
Subscribe to IDG.net's free daily newsletter for computer geniuses (& newbies)
Search IDG.net in 12 languages
News Radio
	Fusion audio primers
	Computerworld Minute

Ashley's experience isn't unique. Shortly after I spoke with Ashley's mom, a PC World editor relayed a similar experience. And since then I've heard from many parents of teens who are struggling to control the steady stream of spam that flows into their children's AOL mailboxes.

The target of choice

Spam is a fact of life for anyone who has an e-mail address, but AOL users are particularly vulnerable to attack, according to leaders in the fight against junk e-mail.

AOL's content and community make it "a very different sort of system than most ISPs," according to Ray Everett-Church, an attorney for the Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-Mail (CAUCE) and formerly a consultant to AOL's antispam group. Unlike other ISPs, which primarily serve as a gateway to Web-based content and services, AOL is the final destination for many of its subscribers.

And as Ashley's experience indicates, everyone from porn-site operators to get-rich-quick schemers is taking advantage of that community. "AOL is the target of choice [for spammers]," says Jason Catlett, president of Junkbusters, a Greenbrook, New Jersey, developer of online privacy tools. Harvesting e-mail addresses on AOL is as simple as calling up the member directory or writing a program that captures screen names as they appear in chat rooms or on message boards. With minimal time and effort, a junk mailer can compile those addresses into a database for spamming or for selling to other junk e-mailers.

AOL recognizes its vulnerability -- as well as its role as a family-oriented service -- and provides members with tools (including an array of mail controls) for customizing their online experience.

Parents of young children would be well advised to take full advantage of these controls. Thus my 7-year-old, for example, can receive e-mail only from a short list of friends and relatives. But when it comes to teens, exercising the same level of control is harder, since teenagers want and deserve more freedom than younger kids. Currently, though, parents and teens seem to have only two options on AOL: Block e-mail from all but a specified list of addresses, or deal with a barrage of spam.

The bottom line, acknowledges AOL spokesperson Rich D'Amato, is that anyone who frequents chat rooms and message boards is going to receive spam. As a work-around for this problem, D'Amato suggests that families dedicate one screen name for chatting and posting items on message boards, and then set the mail control for that name to refuse all e-mail. "It's a simple way for people to participate in AOL communities without worrying about spammers," he says.

More trouble ahead?

For many households, D'Amato's recommendation may work, but it doesn't address the systemwide problem of junk e-mail. And observers, as well as some former AOL insiders, wonder if the online powerhouse is doing enough these days for its subscribers -- or for the industry.

In the past, AOL employed what Ray Everett-Church calls a "tremendous team" to investigate spam and follow up on abuses. But that team has effectively been dispersed, he says, as part of restructuring in the wake of the Netscape acquisition.

David O'Donnell, the former principal postmaster for America Online, shares Everett-Church's concerns about the decline of its policing efforts. O'Donnell, who left AOL in November 1998, believes the service now relies too heavily on using technology to combat spam, while deemphasizing investigative work. "There's the perception at AOL that technology is cheaper [and better] than using humans to fight spam," he says.

Though AOL's D'Amato acknowledges the restructuring, he denies that it signals a weakening of AOL's commitment to fight spam. "Technology is an ever-more-important piece of our antispam effort, but the human detective work is no less a part of our antispam effort today than it was in the past," he says.

"We're fighting spam on many fronts," D'Amato adds, pointing to AOL's recent work with the Virginia legislature to enact a law making it illegal to send e-mail with forged headers (a practice that obscures the sender's identity) or to sell, distribute, or use software designed to forge e-mail headers. The company's lawyers have also been busy filing lawsuits against individuals and companies that send spam.

Is it enough?

Is AOL doing all it can to clamp the lid down on spam? Do the changes resulting from the Netscape acquisition signal bad times ahead for subscribers?

It's too soon to gauge the effect of the Netscape acquisition on AOL's antispam endeavors. But from where I sit, the company still has plenty of room for improvement. We know that AOL has more families and first-time users among its subscribers than any other Internet service. No doubt these demographics pose unique challenges for the service. They also demand unique efforts.

For starters, AOL could warn parents more specifically about the volume and nature of spam they may receive. There's no mention, for example, that a mailbox might be flooded with invitations to see "Free, Explicit, Hardcore Sex."

In addition, AOL should take a more active role in industrywide efforts to fight spam at the source. Bright Light Technologies has developed network tools to help ISPs identify and block incoming spam. Though more than a dozen ISPs have signed on, AOL has not. D'Amato says AOL reviewed the Bright Light approach but opted to focus on its own tools.

Be part of the solution

Of course, you can help fight spam, too. One way is to take advantage of the mail controls AOL currently offers. Antispam activists like O'Donnell also recommend following up on every piece of junk e-mail that gets through -- identifying the source and reporting it to the ISP. But few of us have time to pursue that level of detective work. And is it our responsibility?

AOL users should at least forward junk e-mail to TOSspam@aol.com. According to D'Amato, staffers investigate all such items. You can also monitor spam. Does the volume increase after you visit certain chat rooms or message boards? Keep a log and alert AOL's customer service staff if you notice anything that might help them identify spammers.

Washington has taken an interest in spam control, too. The first bill to be introduced (the Inbox Privacy Act) would allow ISPs to ban spam and then seek damages from violators. Visit the CAUCE Web site (link below) for legislative updates.

CAUCE supports an outright ban on junk e-mail. And a precedent for such a ban exists: In 1991, Congress banned junk faxes -- a problem that affected fewer people than junk e-mail does today.

Opponents of an across-the-board ban argue that some people enjoy receiving spam. I have yet to meet a person who admits to this vice, but anyone who does can simply subscribe to Internet mailing lists.

Meanwhile, the rest of us can read our e-mail free of solicitations for porn, get-rich-quick schemes, and diets-du-jour.

Sounds good to me.

Fighting spam? Let us know about it at consumerwatch@pcworld.com. PC World Contributing Editor Roberta Furger is the author of Does Jane Compute? Preserving Our Daughters' Place in the Cyber Revolution (Warner Books, 1998).