terrible, nasty idea...

[Chris Fortune]

> What I do not like about the whole idea of spamming the spamer is the fact that once your systems get widespread, they can be used
to create DDOS attacks on completely innocent people/websites. Say, I do not like some website. I just put his/her URL in the spam
message and send it to the sufficient amount of people who implemented the "terrible, nasty idea" of yours.
>
That's why bogofilter would be used to assess content of the website before attack.  If website is non-spammy, then no attack.
However, it would be a potent weapon against competing spammers.  They would no doubt attack eachother, as this is the natural use
of the program.


> And that's all I have to do! Beautiful example of non-symmetric attack. I just send few emails, and you do all the dirty work for
me.
>
Just the parsing of the web page and delivery of javascript engine, the actual attack is conducted by the home user's web browser,
so you would still have to do your own dirty work  ;-)


> The same's bound to happen with the trick you propose. Probably some spammer will do that to force you to turn off the engine you
are just creating.
>
Yes, swift karmic backlash!   My home server would be mercilessly DoS'ed by vengeful spammers.  That is why the idea will never be
implemented.  It is a good topic for discussion, though.

Anti-spam is passive aggression: Defense.  If we reach out and attack the spammers then we have become what we are fighting against.