On Mon, 26 May 2003 18:53:12 PDT, Peter Deutsch said: > The case we prosecuted turned out to be a small group of kids breaking > into compute hosts, but from what I was told I would think you should be > able to use the same provision against spam relayers, since the key > element was the unauthorized use of compute cycles, not what they did > with the cycles. IANAL by any means, but I suspect that the owner of an open relay would have a hard time demonstrating unauthorized use of cycles to relay mail *through an open relay*. Now if the spammer actively *bypassed* a security feature in order to relay the mail, that would be different, as it would indicate that they knew it was unauthorized...
Attachment:
pgp00237.pgp
Description: PGP signature