> More broadly: does the community believe that spam has become so bad > that it can be considered a security problem? > > Thanks, > Crispin Crispin, I would argue: - Most viruses have been benign and have really only impacted productivity by taking down email systems, servers, etc while they are cleaned and patched, not to mention the impact on the end user who has to run antivirus software and clean out his/her mail box. Despite this, viruses are considered a security threat. - Spam can fill mail servers with spam to the point that valid mails are bounced from mailboxes that are full. This can mean the loss of important messages. - Some of our users spend the first hour or so of every Monday deleting spam. This is a direct impact to productivity (the nature of our business is such that spam filters will not work for us). - Most companies would consider theft of their product a security issue (no matter who perpetrated the theft), but reduced productivity causes a reduction in production for the same cost, so the net result is much the same. - Some spam is extremely offensive and could be considered intimidating by some users. In short, spam seems to have a similar impact and cost as viruses. Additionally, if you define "security" to include any unauthorized or malicious act that impacts a person's or organization's productivity and hence impacts the bottom line, then spam seems to qualify as a security problem. Gavin
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Jun 02 2003 - 10:47:24 PDT