Anti-Spam Management for Service Provider in Malaysia Alan Lee NTT MSC

Background Working group of the ISF –TIME, Maxis, Jaring, NTT MSC Need for collaboration among the IASP at National level To Combat Spam

Objectives To establish a national anti-spam efforts –Inter IASP Cooperation –Resolutions of Spam –To define common processes –To present a serious effort and penalties for spamming –Best current practices –Technical framework for action –Implement a national anti-spam infrastructure –Education

Global Internet Service Provider Service Provider Service Provider Spam Current Model Different policies Inconsistent results No cooperation No representation Spammers playground No control to register spam source or de-list

Service Provider Service Provider Service Provider Spam Local Anti-spam Platform Local RBL Service Portal Reports Global Internet Proposed Model Local Database Use of Whitelist and Backlist Information Sharing Collaboration Useful reports Moderated National level representation

Mail Filtering Algorithm Incoming mail Override? Accept mail N Y Deny mail Special allow/deny list. Eg. Internal mail servers N Y Whitelisted? Whitelist lookup to allow mails within main mail servers Blacklisted N Y Blacklist lookup Local RBL Based on recommended RBL Mail allowed through of dropped Global RBL Y N

Service Provider Process Spam Complaint Source from either , newsgroup, portal Internal customer? Y N Identify if source is a customer Issue warning Request for Assistance on LAP Issue warning to customer to rectify issue Solved? Most issue would have been solved at this stage N Y Request to be blacklisted is always worst case scenario Request to be Blacklist Share solution on portal if necessary

Listing and De-listing Process Request for listing By a ISAP member Request posted for approval Posting on the portal or newsgroup Approved? N 2/3 of members vouch the claim or no objections from others Y Blacklisted for 2 weeks before review again Blacklisted Resolved? N If not resolved, permanent blacklisting is proposed Request for de-listing IP Address removed from Blacklist Y De-listed

Effects of Blacklisting Mails will be denied delivery by local service providers Deny spammers from moving to other service providers Suspension of services Trial under Section 233, network abuse

Requirements Technical –Web front for posting –DNS Server for blacklisting propagation –Whois server for maintaining local contact –Reporting server Processes –Secure information sharing between ISF members –Active participation from individual abuse teams –Moderated by MCMC

Concerns Online marketing companies might be affected Suspending user accounts might not be the best interest of the company Difficult to track spammer who uses public hotspots and cybercafe Not all ISF members will agree on policies introduced

Long Term Objectives Close cooperation between ISAP for effective resolution to abuse issues Provide national level representation in terms of contact point for abuse issues Law against spam

Thank You