|
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.
|