Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Spam

SMS SPAM to be Banned Down Under? 213

Posted by CmdrTaco from the step-in-the-right-direction dept.
mickers writes "news.com.au reports that in Australia, phone companies which allow SMS spam to be sent across their networks face fines of up to A$10 million under a new industry code.." Are people having a huge problem with SMS spam yet, or is this sort of action more pre-emptive?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

SMS SPAM to be Banned Down Under? More

SMS SPAM to be Banned Down Under?

Comments Filter:

  • This is nice and all... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 15, 2003 @08:37AM (#6203920)
    ...but why not instead take the action of banning the spammers and punishing them as well? Basically, put it in the contract when you let someone use your network that if they send spam, they'll face nasty fines and be subject to litigation?

    • Re:This is nice and all... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by dhuv ( 241988 ) on Sunday June 15, 2003 @08:40AM (#6203928) Homepage
      Most of the spam comes from countries where that law cannot/wouldnot reach.
      • Actually Australia has a few more spam laws, one of which is that (Email) spammers' ISPs face a fine if they do not take reasonable actions to prevent spamming. I think they will expand that to telephone operators too. I know this because we contracted for one Aus ISP migrating to Windows 2000 from NT and we were explicitly told me put stupid messages in SMTP welcome messages to the effect of, "You are forbidden by law to send unsolicited messages".
        Quite useless really.

        • Something to think about.. (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward
          Many users on this site would say it's absurd to force P2P networks to restrict what travels through their network. They simply provide the service and it's up to the users to comply with the law or face the consequences, themselves. For this and various other reasons, the RIAA isn't thought of highly on this site. Fair enough.

          So if the P2P networks aren't responsible for traffic over their networks, why should cellular companies be? When it's the RIAA telling P2P networks to stop file sharing of copyright
          • I didn't say I agreed with it!
          • P2P networks are like web sites - they offer content which you elect to download or visit. Spam is "push" content which is delivered to you regardless of your preferences - this is the major difference.

            As for targetting cellular phone companies, they can wield far greater control over their networks than ISPs can over the Internet - and can eliminate the threat of SMS spam simply by ensuring that any and every sender pays a "per message" fee.

            • Well, In Australia we do pay a per message fee already. What a few people may not be aware of, however, is that (In my experience, anyway) all of the SMS spam I have received has been to advertise services by the service provider themselves, and I reckon it's safe to say that they don't pay per message. I for one am sick of getting "did you know vodafone blah blah blah" SMS messages on my phone.

          • Pay per message (Score:2, Insightful)

            by bagofbeans ( 567926 )
            Payment per message simply legitimises the spam.

            Also, nothing to stop a provider doing deal to pass the spam for free for institutions such as CC providers in return for some benefit.

            If you're going to something postive, insist that the recipient cannot be charged for receiving SMS.
      • Most of the spam comes from countries where that law cannot/wouldnot reach.
        Mmm... Didn't the United States sue Sherman Networks [zdnet.com.au], the company that made Kazaa, which is based in Australia?
        In my opinion, stopping spam should be much higher priority than stopping illegal file sharing. (Not just because I benefit from the latter...)
        • No because i can still go to downloads.com and get kazaa....

          Sharman Networks has an office in Estonia [lonelyplanet.com] where the guy who designed the encryption inside the kazaa protocal and two other programmers live.

          This office is not actually a part of Sharman Networks but a contractor for a company in the Netherlands [alien-visitors.nl], this company sold the Kazaa software to, Sharman Networks who are based in a south pacific island called Vanatu [vanuatugovernment.gov.vu]

          Vanatu famous for being an offshore tax, sex slave trade and gambling haven. The Exect
    • Because this is what we do with regular spam *checks his mail* I have another 95 spam this morning that say it doesn't work.
  • This will force companies to stop this, it's about time someone tackled this problem.
    • Here's my paranoid theory of the day:

      Note that this bill requires that the carriers stop the spam. This requires that they develop and install software to detect it. So in addition to just transmitting messages, the carriers are required to install software that examines every message, classifies it as to content, and take some action based on that content.

      It's hardly any secret that lots of governments are themselves developing such software. But in this case, the government has figured out that it do

  • SMS Spam from my provider (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 15, 2003 @08:38AM (#6203922)
    The worst SMS spam that I get is actually from my telephone (wireless) provider.

    Every so often, they send me a message telling me about their cheap rates and how I could be working more efficiently by using SMS :)
    • So far, SMS spamming doesn't seem to have really taken hold here in Perth. So far, the only SMS spam I've had has been from my provider.

      • Re:SMS Spam from my provider (Score:5, Interesting)

        by KDan ( 90353 ) on Sunday June 15, 2003 @08:52AM (#6203983) Homepage
        The worst in europe is the way some networks message you to let you know that you're going through one network or another (as they all interoperate). So you're driving on the highway at 120+km/h, and you suddenly get your phone beeping to let you know... that you're welcome to SFR/Orange/Vodafone/etc. They should be sued because that is probably a cause for accidents.

        Daniel

        • Re:SMS Spam from my provider (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Stuart Gibson ( 544632 ) on Sunday June 15, 2003 @09:27AM (#6204115) Homepage
          If your phone beeping is a probable cause for an accident you either shouldn't be driving or shouldn't have a phone, maybe even both.

          What's the next plan - suing ice cream vans, or fire services because of the distracting noise?

          Goblin
          • All it is is an additional (and completely useless) distraction when you don't need to have additional distractions. No matter how good a driver you reckon you are, distractions will have some effect on you. It may only be a small increase of the probability of having an accident, but it is an increase nevertheless, and with no good excuse for it.

            Daniel
        • Apart that all (at least I suppose) european traffic laws requires that you must be able to control your vehicle at all time. And, if you're not able to do so while messaging, then choose.

          Anyway, this kind of beeping welcome message is usually encountered near borders where, in most case, there's some kind of speed limit at 10-30 km/h to cross the old custom post (at least for the 10-20 that I know)

          Seems that before sueing someone else, you may eventually try to respect the actual traffic laws.
    • I would strongly agree with this. My provider was the worst offender. I say was as I got so annoyed by this and other customer service issues I moved provider. As other posters have commented there is a cost to send SMS which of course is near nill for providers and thatâ(TM)s why they are the most prolific.

      I've noticed that there are a lot of competitions that are enter by SMS. I presume that this is harvesting of numbers for future campaigns. As people have entered the competion they are interested

      • So far, my provider, ATT Wireless, has been the ONLY source of SMS spam. The worst part was that I called immediately after the first one and demanded they NEVER send me any again. A month later, I was startled high up on a ladder (my SMS ring was quite piercing) which really got my goat. I called and yelled at the customer service drone. I haven't gotten any since, but I have a nagging feeling that they might send another.
    • Yes! And let me name names here: Cingular was the one spamming me. When I called them up, they offered to stop sending them to me, but said that they were determined to keep sending spam to everybody who didn't complain. I now use Sprint, who haven't spammed in the six months I've been using them.

  • Right on... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jdreed1024 ( 443938 ) on Sunday June 15, 2003 @08:40AM (#6203931)
    Are people having a huge problem with SMS spam yet, or is this sort of action more pre-emptive?

    Who cares? It's still a step in the right direction. Unfortunately, it seems that in today's society we often have to wait until something is already a serious problem before doing anything about it. Yay Australia for taking this step.

  • This only applies to telco tho. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Soahc ( 128220 ) on Sunday June 15, 2003 @08:40AM (#6203933)
    If i read it correctly. This only applies to the telco's who take a list and do mass dump of sms's onto the network. Pople like blueskyfrog who spam anyone with a phone won't be hit by this because they do their own sms, and arn't a telco.

  • Not too bad... Yet (Score:4, Informative)

    by xYoni69x ( 652510 ) <yoni.vl@gmail.com> on Sunday June 15, 2003 @08:41AM (#6203935) Journal

    Here in Israel, I get SMS spam at a rate of about 1-2 messages per week.
    I don't know how it is in Australia, but at least here it isn't terribly annoying (yet).

    However, I noted that I couldn't find any way to "opt out", which probably makes it illegal.
    But since I'm not bothered too much by it, I probably didn't search hard enough.

  • Vodafone NL is blocking mass SMS. They only relay SMS from known companies who signed an agreement. Spamhauses are and will be blocked.
    • Ahhh, but ALL my SMS junk messages in Australia come from vodafone themselves.

  • Spam in Oz (Score:3, Interesting)

    by miximata ( 630333 ) on Sunday June 15, 2003 @08:43AM (#6203952)
    SMS Spam is definately already a problem. The carriers themselves have been guilty of spamming their own users with new offers they can take advantage of - for a fee, of course. I'd link the story from AustralianIT, but their article seems to have vanished except from Google cache...hrm. Its good to see a quick reaction to this, and it would be nice to think it might even have some influence on the issue of email spam as well...

  • Cingular (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Bobman1235 ( 191138 ) on Sunday June 15, 2003 @08:45AM (#6203957) Homepage
    The only SMS spam I have gotten so far has been from my service provider, Cingular. I don't think they'd press charges against themselves, so this doesn't really help. However, it's a good step. Being charged by the message, I'd be pretty annnoyed to be spammed.
    • Being charged by the message, I'd be pretty annnoyed to be spammed.
      Aren't you supposed to only be charged for outgoing messages?

      • Aren't you supposed to only be charged for outgoing messages?

        If you're a Cingular subscriber (which I am) and you don't get a plan that includes a given number of text messages, then you pay 10 cents for each incoming and outgoing message, which can be sent to you via email just like any other spam, so if this started happening to me, I would have no choice but to cancel messaging on my phone.

        If you cancel messaging, you will still receive messages, but you won't pay for them.

      • Is that true? Always assumed it followed the same model as airtime, with no distinction between outgoing and incoming.

        I don't use it enough to care at this point I guess.
        • Is that true? Always assumed it followed the same model as airtime, with no distinction between outgoing and incoming.

          I've only heard about the airtime payment model in the US, although some one is bound to tell me that it is uesd elsewhere.
          In Australia, where the article is from, the Caller (and Sender) almost always pays. I don't pay for SMSs I read, only those I send. Same for calls, I don't pay if some one calls me, they pay for that.

  • i dont know how it is in the states... i dont think texting really took off there, nearly as much as it did in the UK or around europe, from what ive heard its quite big in australia as well... i get a few spam sms messages a month and though this is nowhere near the level of email spam, it is much easier to combat, as phone use, especially with texts, can easily be traced and excessive text use will be easily seen, simple... but yeh... tsmy pointless comments
    • It comes down to the pricing. In the states we typically get a lot of minutes per month of voice calling to anywhere else in the lower 48 states at least. My particular service provider, Sprint PCS, wants extra money to allow me text messaging and then limits my to 50 messages a month, costing who knows how much per message after that. Other providers provide text messaging much cheaper, I'm told, but still it's more of a teenagers' thing. Adults usually have a service contract and plan that lets them just
      • In the UK I get 500 minutes and 500text messages and 500 wap minutes a month for about 35$
        I'm quite happy with it, its about the cheapest monthly plan you can get that gives you a lot of text messages.

        Text messages is mostly a teenage thing here in the UK, but many adults happily use it as well. Its very handy for communicating with someone when you're not able to talk, say at a conference or in a lecture.
        • In the US I get 300 minutes, 1000 weekend minutes, unlimited GPRS data service, unlimited SMS, no long-distance, no roaming, and unlimited calls to anyone on the same network for $40 a month.

          I use SMS a lot - all my friends have it on their phones and it interoperates between networks quite well. Much easier than calling someone.

          I have a Danger Hiptop. It's a java-powered PDA/Phone with AIM, email, a very nice
          microbrowser that renders real HTML, and a lot more. http://www.danger.com

          I hear it's coming to
  • At least it costs the spammers money to send an SMS - not like email being free.

    I'd get a spam SMS every couple of days.

    Come to think of it, I might switch off my computer and phone, go hollow out a tree trunk and live in that for the rest of my life. At least no-one would find me!

  • Not much (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SJ ( 13711 ) on Sunday June 15, 2003 @08:54AM (#6203988)
    I can't say we get a lot of SMS Spam... maybe 1 or 2 messages a week... but the main difference is that SMS Spam requires immediate attention, which makes is 10 times more annoying.

    With email spam, you receive it at your leisure when you get the rest of your email. So you are essentially getting it when you are mentally prepared to.

    SMS spam on the other hand interupts whatever it is you are doing because your phone beeps and demands attention. This means that if the message you get is spam, it is much more annoying because unlike getting a message from a friend, it is something completely worthless and nowhere near as interesting as what you were doing in the first place.
  • I'm Australian. I've had a prepaid mobile for about five years now and the only spam I really get is from my provider when I haven't recharged my account, or from BlueSkyFrog who I've bought ringtones from in the past. Spam is far worse in my e-mail inbox and sail mailbox than it ever has been on my phone.

  • Don't be fooled (Score:5, Insightful)

    by honestpuck ( 619842 ) on Sunday June 15, 2003 @08:54AM (#6203991) Homepage Journal
    Well actually SMS spam is an incredibly minor problem in Australia. I don't even believe this is a pre-emptive measure.

    I think that what we have here is a government doing it's usual thrashing around trying to convince people it understands technology and its problems and trying to convince us that its doing something about our problems without having to admit that it either doesn't want or cannot address the real issues like email spam, an incredibly low broadband take up rate and a badly performing virtual telecommunications monopoly in the shape of Telstra.

    Of course a large part of the Australian electorate will be convinced. Hey, those cool dudes in the Government and its bureacracy are doing a great job -- look at the way they handled SMS spam.

    Tony Williams

  • No, SMS spam is not a huge problem downunder at the moment. But just from asking around it appears that SMS spam is on the rise on Australian modile networks.

  • Better now (Score:3, Insightful)

    by m00nun1t ( 588082 ) on Sunday June 15, 2003 @09:04AM (#6204025) Homepage
    Easier to close the gate on a wild horse before it escapes rather than after.
    • I disagree. Closing the gate is just as easy after a wild horse has escaped as it is before the horse has escaped.

      Of course, closing the gate after the horse has escaped doesn't accomplish very much, but it's still an easy thing to do.
  • I live in Australia and recently my girlfriend got a series of very unsolicited SMS's from an unknown number. The problem continued for several weeks until she decided to go to the police (due to their sexual nature). There was virtually nothing the police could do. Thankfully, the SMS's have now stopped but my girlfriend had no legal support at all.

    There is certainly a need already for tighter controls on SMS usage - particularly unsolicited SMS (eg; SPAM). Fines are probably a good idea but tracking dow

  • can YOU turn off SMS? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Openadvocate ( 573093 ) on Sunday June 15, 2003 @09:07AM (#6204034)
    I don't get SMS spam and I ever use SMS. If SMS spam became a problem, I would just turn SMS off. But I have never had a phone where I could disable incoming SMS. Does anyone has such a phone?
    Of course, one could just let the inbox fill up the memory but thats not a great way to solve it.
  • ..seems to be very country and phone company specific. All I can say that I haven't gotten any sms spam. At least here in Finland I can deny all such messages.

    If I only knew how to I would make a site where people could mark their country/phone company that sends spam so we could have some statics and it would help people to choose their phone company.

  • AT&T in the US... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Spoing ( 152917 ) on Sunday June 15, 2003 @09:13AM (#6204050) Homepage
    I started to recieve SMS spam on my AT&T phone. Very annoying.

    After some frustrating attempts to figure out how to disable it, even being told by customer service that it "can't be turned off", I marched in to an AT&T mobile store and demanded _they_ turn it off. A smile, a nod, and a few keystrokes later they said they turned SMS off for me.

    Customer service still says it's enabled on my phone and "can't" be disabled...yet, I've seen no more spams.

  • by using this page http://www.rogers.com/english/wireless/sendpcs.htm l and a script.

  • Anit SPAM phone software (Score:3, Interesting)

    by lithium100 ( 624098 ) on Sunday June 15, 2003 @09:15AM (#6204064) Homepage
    I wonder, especially with the increasing number of phones with the Java Micro Edition installed, if we will soon have anti-spam software available for your mobile phone? Much the same way as there is anti email spam software for Outlook and the like.

  • Why, we dont pay for it (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Zeddicus_Z ( 214454 ) on Sunday June 15, 2003 @09:21AM (#6204089) Homepage
    Well, considering no-one in Australia actually pays for *incoming* SMS (or incoming calls for that matter), i cant see what the problem is. Sure, if we were like some other countries where we payed for both outgoing and incoming sms/calls/data, it would need to be banned. But really, when the incoming SMS costs you nothing to receive, and the phone companies get their compensation for those millions of messages from the spam originator, whats the problem? Other than sheer annoyance that is.
    • I think annoyance is the MAJOR problem. Why else would email SPAM be a problem?
    • you're an idiot. most countries don`t expect u to pay for incomming, otherwise if u hated someone u could text them 1,000,000 times a day, thats dumb. secondly the inconvenience of receiving a useless message every few minutes/hours is incredibly annoying.
    • ...whats the problem? Other than sheer annoyance that is.

      That's precisely the problem. The "it doesn't cost you anything" argument is just the same as the "just hit delete" argument that e-mail spammers give. Annoyance shouldn't be permitted simply because it's free. It doesn't cost you anything to receive crank phone calls on your land line. But that's still illegal.

      • But junk mail is completely legal. The arguement that is always used is that spam should be illegal because the receiver pays for the connection (by paying for a net connection), but junk mail is paid for by the sender (by paying the post office to send it) so that can't be made illegal. If you do not pay for incoming SMS messages, and the sender does pay for outgoing SMS messages, then it seems it would be exactly like junk mail and be legal.

        Annoyance should not be a legal reason to ban something or pun
  • I got my first SMS spam just yesterday, about "dates" and "chatting" etc. Not related to my phone provider.

    The message implied that some unknown person who has a crush on me typed in my number, but they never said whom. The company seemed very untrustworthy so I didn't reply.
  • I always hear about how all the other countries have superior cellular telephone service than we do here in the states. However, neither me nor any of my friends have ever received a single unwanted SMS message. Finally, a good thing about the lack of acceptance of cellular standards here... no spam!
    • I never got one on my phone either, here in Europe. Most providers take a dim view of spamming.

      Hmm or maybe it's because I have a corporate subscription, and regular subscribers do in fact get spammed.
    • "Finally, a good thing about the lack of acceptance of cellular standards here... no spam!"

      Hmmm... you mean that the US doesn't use GSM? There are two major nationwide GSM providers in the US, T-Mobile and AT&T. Cingular is GSM as well.

      Hmmm... maybe we don't have GPRS?
      Nope, I have a very nice GPRS device that works everywhere I go - and I live in northern Colorado.

      Hmmm... maybe our SMS systems don't interoperate?
      Nope, I've sent SMS messages to people with Sprint, Verizon, AT&T (pre and post GSM r

  • How difficult is it to just press delete, if you're not interested in the offer?

    I agree that email spam is terrible, but SMS ads are free for the receiver and not very annoying.

    Commercials and ads are here to stay, better get used to it.

    • the problem is that many phones do not have much storage - so as you get more spam - real messages get lost because many providers will not keep SMS for more than a specific time period. Its hardly like you can install spam heuristics on a mobile phone.

      In the UK, O2 (Was BT CellNet) sends spam to its customers. You can opt out by contacting them - although, They still sent me spam and I had to opt out (again). The spam is generally for BT's services and I've had some of the bogus spam messages that cam

    • I agree that email spam is terrible, but SMS ads are free for the receiver and not very annoying.

      Commercials and ads are here to stay, better get used to it.

      They are not free everywhere. My friend/roommate has a super-cheap plan, with no included SMS messages included, but she can still send or recieve SMS messages for ten cents each.

      So tell me... If SMS spam gets out of control, who the hell is going to pay for all that junk?

  • About SMS in Australia (Score:3, Informative)

    by BiOFH ( 267622 ) on Sunday June 15, 2003 @09:37AM (#6204149)
    American readers should keep in mind that SMS use here is nearly as ubiquitous as Starbucks stores in the states. We SMS all freakin' day long. Lots of US networks adopted digital late in the game, but down here there was no slow crawl from analog (it just is, I'm not making any commentary). So Aussies have been using services like this for a while and they've become a part of life. And now MMS and video phones is all the rage (if you believe the providers).

    Walk around any mall here and you'll see lots of people thumbing messages to loved ones and friends. So, yes, spam pisses us off just as if it were email spam. It's annoying as hell.
    • SMS just isn't that popular in the US and Canada, despite most recent handsets having the ability.

      Given the choice between text'ing someone or just ringing them up by voice, takes less hunt and pecking on a tiny keyboard, and just less efford all-round to just phone them and talk, or leave a message on their machine :)

      My provider charges me $0.10/min (billed by the second) with 300 free minutes per month. SMS messages on the other hand are $0.10 each. It's cheaper to just phone someone and talk to them
    • "And now MMS and video phones is all the rage (if you believe the providers)."

      Actually, the situation is exactly the same in the US. T-Mobile is hyping a new Nokia video-camera-phone. Sprint has picture + audio MMS. Verizon and AT&T also have their respective products.
  • I live in the UK and I've had a mobile since 1998, so thats 5 years now and I haven't received a single spam.

    Its a good idea to clamp down on it though. I think there's a similar thing in the UK. People I know who have received spam all have Nokia phones. Their numbers have probably been sold by companies they've bought new ringtones and logos from. These are themselves sent to the phone via SMS.

    I use a Panasonic phone, and before that an Erricson. Both phones can't change logos or ringtones via SMS,
  • god i hate it when people call me on my mobile to try and sell me things. the other month i actually had a call from somebody claiming to be from orange (my provider) offering me a new phone.

    because i wouldn't dream of doing business from an unsolicited phone call, and to get rid off him, i asked him if there were any details of the offer on the web. he said yes and gave me the address of some crappy mobile phone accessories company. he wasn't even from orange!

    now i basically just cancel any call from a

  • Interestingly enough... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by rosewood ( 99925 ) <.rosewood. .at. .chat.ru.> on Sunday June 15, 2003 @09:41AM (#6204164) Homepage Journal
    just had a girlfriend get back from the old .au

    She was very suprised that everyone used SMS down there. She said it was rather expensive to call someone on your cell and its $.25 to send someone an SMS. Before she left I tried to convince her to get a plan for her cell phone here that has SMS and she said it was silly.

    Seriously, those in the know here that use SMS love it. Those that dont -- well poo on them.

    However, its starting to have the AIM effect. One of her friends that was with us picking her up is a freshman in college and she was talking about how all her girlfriends text eachother at the mall... ...

    plz no.

  • A few facts (Score:5, Informative)

    by Zeddicus_Z ( 214454 ) on Sunday June 15, 2003 @09:41AM (#6204165) Homepage
    1) This is not a law. Its a code of practice, and no-where in the article does it say whether said code is mandatory.

    2) This code of practice applies ONLY to "carriers and service providers". So Shazza's Crikey Crocadile Shoe Shop isn't going to be affected in any way when they decide to send out 3 million SMS spams advertising their latest evening shoe.

    3) At 30c/SMS, spammers are up for one hell of a phone bill after sending all that spam. Considering the success rates of Email spam and the cost of SMS, id say SMS spam for any type of business is a money losing proposition that all but the stupidest PHB could clearly see. And those PHB's will quickly learn when they pay 400,000 in SMS bills for 10,000 in generated sales.

    4) Related to above. Because of the cost of SMS, the only entities that could really use SMS spam effectively are Telcos. Hence why this only applies to telcos. But of course, as I said earlier, there's no word on whether its mandatory or not. What ifyour new telco simply decides not to be a member?
    • SMS ads could be made localised so that they only affect your cell. For example there might be an offer on at your local Tesco so all those who are near the store at the time could be sent a text.

      Also 30c/SMS???? I pay 5p (AU 12.5c) per message, and I get five free a day and I only had to pay £15 two years ago for that.

      Text messaging can be sent in bulk from providers for companies for something like 2p a message.

      FYI: Text messaging = SMS;
    • At 30c/SMS, spammers are up for one hell of a phone bill after sending all that spam.
      Unfortunatly, I don't have any reference to current figures, but at least in Europe, there's quite a number of wholesale SMS service providers that allow you to send SMSs for a lot less that that...

      And as long as the receiving network has peering available between itself and some network the service provider has access to, there's little to control spam.

  • It is pre-emptive. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Rip!ey ( 599235 )
    Are people having a huge problem with SMS spam yet, or is this sort of action more pre-emptive?

    I'm an Australian. This has been reported in local news as well as on-line news. It is entirely pre-emptive. They are moving now to prevent the problems that people face with e-mail spam from crossing into a new domain.

    Another potential problem with the new crop of mobile phones (those with inbuilt cameras) is also recieving attention, with likely bans from carrying them in some places. An example of this wo
  • Has anyone actually found SMS to be remotely useful? I can see some rare instances, such as being in somewhere you can't talk, but can't it wait? One of my friends sent me an SMS once, but in trying to reply I found it was clunky, hard to use, and slow as hell. So I called him back. It was much easier. Until they can increase the speed you can use SMS, I just find it easier to have it completely disabled.
  • as a last defense - I'm a very low user of SMS (1-2 messages per 2-3 months) so I was on a 'per use' basis where I would pay for each outgoing (10 cents) and incoming (2 cents) messages. It wasn't too bad and it was useful as I could use the service when I needed to. I'm not sure how, but in the past two months I've received around 12 spam messages originating from web spammers. This is quite a surprise since I haven't ever given out my number to anyone.

    I called the cellphone company each time, the first t
  • One problem I would have with cellspam is tracking the source of messages. With DSM (like SMS, but standing for Digital Short Messaging) my phone has an email address. Others can email my phone (useful when overseas friends wish to contact me), but it does not seem to have a way to show headers, etc?
    Would this put an onus on the cell-provider to cache this messages so I can view them with a POP/IMAP program capable of viewing headers? Because otherwise, tracking SPAM sources could be difficult.
  • What is this Sega Master System spam you speak of??

  • SMS Spam (Score:2, Interesting)

    by togtog ( 104205 )
    I am thankful that I have never given out my SMS address to anyone. In over a year I haven't gotten a single spam on it. What I want to know is, when will we get over this whole spam friendly system?

    I think if we had a system where you could issue ID numbers, long hex numbers, to potential callers and spammers then auto filter out anything without the proper ID number we would be a lot better off. Think about a fancy party, you only send out invites to those you want to show up, and when they get there the

Slashdot Top Deals

A triangle which has an angle of 135 degrees is called an obscene triangle.

Close