The measure, which raises important questions about the position of ISPs and the neutrality of their role, is a previous response in Australia at the initiative of the Australian Communications and Media Authority. Here already, in 2005, another project evoked keeping lists of infected computers IP, distributed to five local ISPs partners in the operation. In this context, each Fai comes into contact with the customer to alert and help repair its security problems. Failing a satisfactory response, the ISP may be able to cut access, at least until the problem is resolved. A form of graduated response, safety version.
Even in 2005, the Federal Trade Commission launched an operation, Spam Zombies, 2005, requesting the establishment of emission allowances, blocking ports, or isolation in quarantine of suspicious computers, those who ship abnormal amounts of emails .
The proactive measures of this magnitude are rare. Typically, ISPs argue for specific solutions, such as filtering of TCP port 25, used for sending emails. In its recommendations to the fight against spam, the FAA recommends that "for e-mail (...) the position of a residential user should be able to issue e-mails via the server's email service provider. "Free opted for this solution since December 2006, leaving the subscriber however the freedom to turn the filter since the management interface for use smtp competitors. All these questions are also marked by a need for transparency: Orange had also blocked the famous port, but without informing its customers who were using other SMTP servers, making it impossible to blow the issue of letters.