This is a new technology being tried by Microsoft (MSN to be exact) to fight spam.
Doesn't seem convincing, how Bondings are related to IronPort, and how they fight spam, does it?
Wait a minute. Look at the following headlines reporting the same piece of news:
1. Microsoft to 'flag' good spam (Australian IT, Australia)
2. Microsoft to use IronPort anti-spam technology (Telecom Paper, Netherlands)
3. Microsoft unblocks anti-spam filters (CNN/Money)
4. Hotmail says spam is a-ok (The Inquirer, UK)
5. Can white lists defeat spam? (CIO)
6. Email marketers told to pay upfront to send to MSN or Hotmail (PC Pro, UK)
7. Microsoft throws its weight behind email accreditation program(me) (InternetWeek)
8. Buy your way to legitamacy (Wired News)
9. Microsoft opens spam to bulk mailers (Security Focus)
After reading my condensed version, choose your side.
---
Microsoft wants spammers to pay a financial penalty for the junk cluttering up your inbox. Provided you are using MSN Hotmail. The software giant about just endorsed a plan to cut down on spam and help pave the way for legitimate email to pass through.
Both MSN and Hotmail have begun implementing the Bonded Sender programme from a private email-infrastructure company IronPort.
There are more than 170 million active users from the two Microsoft email platforms.
How does this programme work?
The original method agressively filters the content of email to identify suspect junk. However, this often results in false positives. Bonded Senders is built around the idea that Microsoft has to approve commercial email senders.
To bypass MSN's filters altogether, emailers post a sum of money, known as a Bond, to Microsoft after a validation process. Bond fees are charged according to amount of email sent.
Those who didn't post a bond will get blocked off. No questions asked. Do note that when I say blocked, the suspected junk mail isn't necessarily booted off the service. Instead, MSN Hotmail may send these junk to a Junk Mail Folder, according to users' preferences.
Sounds like a Pay-to-Spam permit.
This explains why my Google Alerts, which have arrived in my Inbox nicely for some time without me forcing Hotmail to recognise it as legitimate, suddenly arrived in the Junk Mail Folder. Same for my Apple eNews. Or is it pure prejudice?
TRUSTe screening required
To prevent spammers from buying their way into the list, no-name companies must pass a rigid screening process by TRUSTe, an independent non-profit privacy organisation. Bonds are debited if a sizable number of complaints are registered against companies on the list. If there are too many complaints, the company is kicked off the list permanently. The compaint rates are also monitored by TRUSTe.
One question: How is "no-name companies" defined?
These are surely not "no-name", since they are the pioneer service supporters: Warner Music, eBay, Major League Baseball, Motley Fool, Nasdaq, DoubleClick and CNET. (I didn't add a comma after DoubleClick because it has been acquired by CNET)
---
The downside is that what users think of as spam and what marketeers think of as spam are sometimes two different things. Excluding the get-rich-quick scams and enlargement pills it's not too long before we get into areas of potential dispute. In theory, Hotmail's filters could be adapted to apply tougher rules the spam-like email that isn't certified but whether this works in practice is still open to question. We fear Hotmail users will likely end up with just as much junk mail as before - except some of it will be certified as safe.
Ironic again, isn't it?
Personally, I don't really support this. Microsoft benefits; money rolls in. I mean, it could put these bonds into some high-interest account, which any bank would gladly offer, even if it isn't a fixed deposit.
Does this really cut down on spam? In a sense it does. But overall, it doesn't.