Newsgroups: news.admin.net-abuse.misc
From: hoey@aic.nrl.navy.mil (Dan Hoey)
Date: 1995/10/30
Subject: Re: E-Mail SPAM from info.oaktreex.com...

Sam.Wil...@ed.ac.uk (Sam Wilson) writes:

> ... INETUSA have replied with an exemplary
> form letter describing their reponsese to spamming; I have heard
> nothing (unsurprisingliy?) from oaktreex.com.

Exemplary?  The only thing exemplary about INETUSA's form letter was
that it was an instructive example of a half-hearted attempt to act
concerned without saying anything about whether they plan to do
anything about the current situation (or even read the complaints):

* They promised to react to spam originating "at the INETUSA.COM
  machines".  They didn't say whether they consider OAKTREEX.COM to be
  such a machine.

* They claim that after a second offense from "the same account",
  they will "revoke the posting privileges of that site".  Aside from
  the unspecified distinction between an "account" and a "site", this
  says nothing about e-mail bombing, which is the problem under
  discussion.

* They claim that in the case of SPAM that "passes through" their
  facilities, there is little they can do.  My point is that they can
  at least stop supporting this nuisance with DNS service.  And if,
  as I suspect, they are the sole connection of OAKTREEX.COM, they
  can just pull the plug.

* They mention that "INETUSA does not consider itself a Police Force
  of the Internet."  But I certainly didn't write anything suggesting
  they might be.  I just want to know when they are going to cease
  being the Internet Pumping Station for the Internet Sewage Outfall.

* They thank me for bringing this to their attention and promise to
  "address it accordingly."  Uh huh.

When the same OAKTREEX scumbunny junk-mailed the same nuisance ad ten
days ago, postmas...@INETUSA.COM promised "The user will be deleted
from my service and will not be allowed access to my domains".  (Does
anyone have any idea what that is supposed to mean?)  Now they are
managing to be EVEN MORE vague and dissembling about their plans.

It's time.

Either it's time for an explanation of why INETUSA.COM didn't fix this
when they said they would, and how INETUSA.COM plans to prevent any
future occurrence,

Or it's time to start finding out why UUNET is supplying gateway
service to a service that acts as a front for junk emailers.

Tell us, INETUSA, what time is it?

Dan Hoey                    posted and emailed
Hoey@AIC.NRL.Navy.Mil