|
Speech by SCIT on "Tackling Spamming: Next Steps"
Following is a speech by the Secretary
for Commerce, Industry and Technology,
Mr John Tsang, at a luncheon organised
by information and communication technology
organisations today (February 24):
"Tackling Spamming: Next Steps"
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Good afternoon.
2. First of all, let me wish you all
a prosperous new year of the Rooster.
Like they say - "Spring is the best
time to make action plans for the rest
of the year". I am, therefore, hugely
delighted to be able to share with you
in the early days of the new spring our
action plan in tackling spamming.
Background
3. Spamming, as you all know well, is
a problem that is affecting almost everyone
in Hong Kong. It takes many forms, from
junk fax to junk e-mail to junk voice
or video messages on your fixed line or
even your mobile telephone. And it will
take on other forms as technology develops.
4. To individual consumers, spam is an
intrusive nuisance that invades your personal
privacy, breaches your IT security with
virus and spyware, and transmits illicit
contents - from pornography to illegal
gambling services and even deceptive business
practices.
5. To businesses, spam costs you money
in the form of lost worker productivity
and the need for network capacity upgrade
and information security investment.
6. To e-marketers, spam creates the reactive
need for computer users to install anti-spam
systems that serve to block inadvertently
legitimate messages, thereby reducing
the effectiveness of e-marketing campaigns.
7. To telecommunications operators, particularly
Internet service providers, spam adds
to your operating costs, with additional
server capacity to manage anti-spam systems
and additional resources to handle customer
complaints.
8. Without any doubt, spam has become
the major 21st Century problem that affects
all of us without any prejudice, and the
only difference in treatment between spam
victims lies merely in the degree of damage.
Recognising the damaging effects of spam
on our community, we launched a consultation
exercise in June last year, with a view
to ascertaining the size of the problem
and soliciting views from all stakeholders
on how the problem should be tackled.
We received in total 42 useful submissions.
I would like to take this opportunity
to thank the authors of these submissions,
and many of them are here today, for all
their help in sharing with us their expert
input on this very important subject.
Key Findings of Consultation and Latest
Developments
9. The submissions confirmed that spam
is an increasingly serious problem to
Hong Kong adding substantial unnecessary
costs to society.
10. Our study reveals that fixed telecommunications
network service operators in Hong Kong
received over 36 000 complaints on junk
fax in 2004. That is an average of some
100 complaints a day.
11. On e-mail, the Hong Kong Internet
Service Providers Association, which conducted
surveys in October last year among 11
members serving over 90% of Internet users
in Hong Kong, found that spam has risen
to account for around 60% of all e-mails,
with individual members experiencing as
much as 90% of their e-mails being spam.
The estimated costs of spam to Hong Kong
Internet service providers is some HK$5.9
million a month, or some HK$71 million
a year. That is certainly not a small
sum for a competitive industry!
12. But the biggest costs come from the
impact on businesses and consumers in
terms of lost productivity. A rough industry
estimate in January 2004 put the costs
of spam to lost productivity in Hong Kong
at a stunning HK$6 billion a year.
13. While there are talks and estimates
about the costs of preventing and removing
spam, online marketers have been complaining
also that certain anti-spam measures have
served to dilute their marketing efforts.
Asia Digital Marketing Association, representing
digital marketers in Asia, made reference
to a research carried out by Jupiter Research
which revealed that in 2003, marketers
in the world lost nearly HK$1.8 billion,
from spam filters blocking legitimate
messages, and that the estimated costs
of such measures to online marketers could
go up to HK$3.3 billion by 2008.
14. Spam is certainly growing in numbers,
changing its sources and forms as technology
develops, and spreading to different applications
as convergence begins to take shape in
the new communications media environment.
15. According to an anti-spam organization,
Spamhaus, spam could account for 95% of
all e-mails sent by mid-2006. Spamhaus
also warns that the source of incoming
spam is changing fast, and Internet service
providers are seeing far more spam coming
directly from the major mail relays of
other Internet service providers.
16. Other than e-mails, a recent study
conducted jointly by the University of
St. Gallen in Switzerland, and Intrado,
a vendor of emergency communications services,
with the cooperation of the International
Telecommunication Union, the ITU, found
that about 80% of mobile phone users worldwide
have received spam on their mobile phones.
Consumers and operators can expect the
mobile spam problem to grow exponentially
should the costs of sending such messages
go down further.
17. Many mobile operators submit that
spamming through Short Messaging Service
(SMS) and Multi-media Messaging Service
(MMS) is not yet a major nuisance in Hong
Kong. However, given such a global trend,
we need to maintain a close watching brief
on whether this could become a more serious
problem as the number of third generation
mobile users grow and the attractiveness
of SMS and MMS marketing campaign increases.
Next Steps
18. Ladies and gentlemen, there is no
doubt in my mind that we need to step
up our fight against spamming. Drawing
on the views expressed in the submissions
and the trend on recent developments,
we intend to launch today a campaign entitled
"STEPS" in fighting the spam
epidemic. Let me explain to you what I
have in mind.
Strengthening Existing Regulatory Measure
19. The first letter "S" stands
for strengthening existing regulatory
measures. In conjunction with relevant
industry associations and service providers,
we will start work in two areas. The first
area is fax. There are already guidelines
for fax advertisers, but some of them
have ignored these guidelines and continued
to spam recipients who have already put
their fax numbers on the "not-to-call"
list. We will work closely with fixed
telecommunications network service providers
to penalise such irresponsible marketing
behaviour by reducing the timeframe required
to cut off their access to telecommunications
services, which is their means to send
out fax advertisements.
20. The second area is SMS and MMS. We
have already promulgated a Code of Practice
for mobile network operators on the handling
of inter-operator unsolicited promotional
SMS. Given the potential growth of the
problem involving operators participating
in marketing campaigns, we plan to work
with the industry to extend this code
of practice to cover intra-operator unsolicited
messages, such as location-based advertisements
sent by our own service providers, so
that the code will cover all SMS and MMS
unsolicited promotional messages.
Technical Solutions
21. The second letter "T" stands
for technical solutions. We can protect
ourselves from spam to a large extent
by adopting products with suitable technologies.
For service providers, the adoption of
such products will improve their services
to subscribers and ease the load on their
network equipment.
22. While we believe that we should not
dictate or recommend individual products
or solutions, we can help in the process
by facilitating the industry, businesses
and consumers to learn more about the
latest developments and offerings. We
will, therefore, collaborate with the
industry in organising seminars, conferences
and exhibitions to promote anti-spam technical
solutions to all users.
Education
23. The third letter "E" stands
for education. Spammers' ultimate goal
is for recipients to purchase the products
or services on offer. It is, therefore,
vital in the fight against spam that the
recipients play their part in denying
the spammers by not purchasing anything
marketed through spam or, better still,
not responding to spam at all.
24. To this end, we will work with industry
organisations to develop an information
campaign on spam to raise the level of
awareness and provide accurate information
and useful resources to consumers. We
will also feature spamming as a topic
in the Government's regular promotion
and user education events and develop
user tips for this purpose.
Partnerships
25. The fourth letter "P" stands
for partnerships. By this we mean both
local and international partnerships.
In Hong Kong, many anti-spam measures
need close cooperation among industry
members, with the Government playing a
coordinating and facilitating role.
26. One possible partnership is the development
of a common blacklist to filter spam at
the local Internet service provider level.
Such a measure requires Internet service
providers to share their existing blacklists
and contribute information to update the
common blacklist in future. We will work
with industry organizations to facilitate
the process and liaise with relevant authorities
to ensure that the sharing of information
in developing and maintaining the common
blacklists would comply with relevant
laws, such as the Personal Data (Privacy)
Ordinance.
27. We will also work with industry organizations
to develop codes of practice and best
practice guidelines for combating spam
to enable the Internet service providers
with less resources to learn ways to improve
their service to subscribers.
28. There is also a global dimension
to spam since most spam do come from overseas
sources. International partnerships are,
therefore, vital in the control of the
overall problem. A number of international
organizations, such as APEC, OECD, ITU
etc. are already developing joint mechanisms
to deal with this problem, and Hong Kong
will continue to take an active part in
the process.
29. In addition, the Commerce, Industry
and Technology Bureau will shortly become
one of the Founding Signatories of a Multilateral
Memorandum of Understanding on Cooperation
in Countering Spam. This MoU will facilitate
cooperation among Asia-Pacific signatories
on many fronts in tackling the spam problem.
We will continue to develop international
partnerships and play a leading role in
the fight against spam.
Statutory Measures
30. Last but not least, the fifth letter
"S" stands for statutory measures.
There are already many applicable provisions
in existing legislation prohibiting activities
that may support spamming.
31. For example, the Telecommunications
Ordinance prohibits unauthorised access
to computers by means of telecommunications.
Actions such as hacking may be an offence
under this Ordinance.
32. Under the Crimes Ordinance, if a
spammer sends e-mail to a computer causing
it to cease functioning, or in a manner
which amounts to "misuse of computer",
he may have committed an offence of criminal
damage under that Ordinance.
33. If e-mails contain the Trojan programme,
virus, hacking tools etc. that facilitate
senders to gain access to a computer system
without authority, he may have committed
an offence under the Crimes Ordinance
on "access to computers with criminal
or dishonest intent".
34. If phishing e-mails are used as vehicles
to deceive inadvertent victims, the sender
may have committed an offence under the
Theft Ordinance.
35. These statutory provisions are already
there in our statute book but they are
intended for the more serious, criminal
nature of spam-related activities. They
are not intended to regulate other spam-related
activities such as e-marketing by individuals
who simply take advantage of the Internet
and other communications infrastructure
as a low-cost marketing means, for which
recipients and service providers have
to bear the consequence of abuse.
36. We have taken a long, hard look at
the different views contained in the submissions
to the consultation, and we have also
considered the potential adverse impact
on legitimate e-marketing activities and
the likely ineffectiveness of legislation
against 95% of spam that comes from overseas.
We have arrived at the conclusion that,
on balance, it would be necessary to enact
legislation to regulate spamming. Such
a piece of legislation would prevent Hong
Kong from becoming a safe haven sheltering
illicit spammers. It would also facilitate
cooperation with overseas jurisdictions
with similar legislation in investigation
and enforcement work against spammers.
37. We note that views in the submissions
were divided on many aspects of legislation,
for example,
* whether legislation should be technology
neutral to cover all forms of spam, such
as e-mail, SMS, MMS, fax etc.,
* whether the legislation should cover
commercial spam only or all spam of unsolicited
nature,
* whether the legislation should cover
automatically generated voice and video
electronic messages,
* whether the legislation should stipulate
"opt-in" or "opt-out"
requirement,
* whether the legislation should mandate
e-mail header labelling requirements,
* whether the legislation should restrict
e-mail address harvesting and other practices,
* whether the liability should be civil
or criminal in nature,
* and more.
38. We have apparently a great deal more
work to do. Many issues related to legislating
against spam still need to be resolved.
We have at this stage an open mind on
the exact form and content of the legislation,
but the key is to strike the right balance
between the need to discourage spamming
on the one hand, and to enable legitimate
e-marketing activities to develop properly
on the other. We hope to draw on the experience
of jurisdictions with anti-spam legislation,
including the recent lawsuits in the US,
with a view to developing a balanced framework
in Hong Kong.
39. Our aim is to work out a legislative
framework which is largely acceptable
to different stakeholders before we proceed
to draft the legislation. We will engage
representative stakeholder groups over
the next few months for detailed and pragmatic
discussions. We intend to introduce the
full draft legislation into the Legislative
Council some time next year. It is a difficult
exercise, and I shall count on your full
support in the process.
Conclusion
40. Ladies and gentlemen, I have outlined
for you the outcome of the consultation
exercise and our intended course of action.
You will agree that as technologies develop,
techniques used by spammers will only
become more sophisticated. The recent
development of spamware illustrates the
evolving nature of this problem. Take
the example of "Send-Safe".
It is not only capable of setting up infected
PCs, or so-called zombies, to send out
spam. It is also capable of disguising
their origin as e-mails sent out from
zombies' Internet service providers, thereby
fooling blacklist filters. Fortunately,
we have not all gone over to the dark
side. I take heart in the industry meeting
the challenge and working on promising
projects, such as the Penny Black project,
that could fundamentally shift the spam
equation by adding cost to spamming with
the effective imposition of a "stamp"
requirement.
41. This basket of measures that I have
described under the "STEPS"
campaign marks the beginning of our battle
against spam, and the measures will no
doubt need to evolve over time. Like computer
virus, we may never be able to eradicate
the problem. But we aim to contain it
as far as possible. In this battle, we
need the efforts from all quarters of
our community. Our plan sets the scene
for a partnership of Government, the ICT
industry, the e-marketing industry and
the community in a united front. In this,
I see no difference in perspective. You
are our allies, and I look forward to
working closely with you all in controlling
this 21st Century problem.
42. Thank you.
|