Content for TR 33.937 Word version: 18.0.0
1 Scope
2 References
3 Definitions, Symbols and Abbreviations
3.1 Definitions
3.2 Symbols
3.3 Abbreviations
...
...
1 Scope p. 8
The scope of this report is to highlight alternative solutions that could be used to protect mobile subscribers from receiving unsolicited communication over IMS and to analyze these solutions in respect of their requirements and impacts on standardized interfaces.
This activity took into account the study done in TISPAN TR 187 009 on "Feasibility study of prevention of unsolicited communications in the NGN".
2 References p. 8
The following documents contain provisions which, through reference in this text, constitute provisions of the present document.
- References are either specific (identified by date of publication, edition number, version number, etc.) or non-specific.
- For a specific reference, subsequent revisions do not apply.
- For a non-specific reference, the latest version applies. In the case of a reference to a 3GPP document (including a GSM document), a non-specific reference implicitly refers to the latest version of that document in the same Release as the present document.
[1]
ETSI TR 187 009: "Feasibility study of prevention of unsolicited communications in the NGN".
[2]
TR 21.905: "Vocabulary for 3GPP Specifications".
[3]
TS 22.228: "Service requirements for the Internet Protocol (IP) multimedia core network subsystem (IMS); Stage 1".
[4]
Internationales Anti-SPAM-Recht from 'Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik', page 42 to 45, http://www.bsi.de/literat/forumkes/kes0508.pdf
[5]
Spam Regulation Overview from Caslon Analytics, http://www.caslon.com.au/spamnote.htm
[6]
Combating SPAM Through Legislation - A Comparative Analysis of US and European Approaches from E. Moustakas, Prof. C. Ranganathan, Dr. P. Duquenoy, http://www.ceas.cc/papers-2005/146.pdf
[7]
Stemming The International Tide Of SPAM - Trends in Telecommunication Reform 2006 from John G. Palfrey, Jr., http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/treg/publications/Chap%207_Trends_2006_E.pdf
[8]
Report Of The OECD Task Force On SPAM: Anti-SPAM Toolkit of Recommended Policies And Measures, http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/63/28/36494147.pdf
[9]
ITU Survey On Anti-SPAM Legislation Worldwide on WSIS Thematic Meeting on Cybersecurity 2005, http://www.itu.int/osg/spu/spam/legislation/Background_Paper_ITU_Bueti_Survey.pdf
[10]
EU Symposium 2006: Countering SPAM In A Digital World from Cristina Bueti, http://spamsymposium.eu/files/Cristina%20Bueti.ppt
[11]
RFC 5039: "The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and Spam"
[12]
TS 29.328: "IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) Sh interface; Signalling flows and message contents".
[13]
TS 29.329: "Sh interface based on the Diameter protocol; Protocol details".
[14]
TS 24.611: "Anonymous Communication Rejection (ACR) and Communication Barring (CB)using IP Multimedia (IM) Core Network (CN) subsystem; Protocol specification".
[15]
TS 29.228: "IP Multimedia (IM) Subsystem Cx and Dx Interfaces; Signalling flows and message contents".
[16]
TS 29.229: "Cx and Dx interfaces based on the Diameter protocol; Protocol details".
[17]
Identity Verification on the Fraud Forum manual of the GSMA, FF.21 Ver 2.0.
[18]
RFC 4474: "Enhancements for Authenticated Identity Management in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP Identity)", 2006-08, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4474.txt
[19]
Microsoft Live Hotmail Under Attack by Streamlined Anti-CAPTCHA and Mass-mailing Operations, http://securitylabs.websense.com/content/Blogs/3063.aspx#
[20]
RFC 4408: Sender Policy Framework,2006-04, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4408.txt
[21]
RFC 4871: Domain Keys Identified Mail, 2007-05, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4871.txt
[22]
Concerns around the applicability of RFC 4474, IETF, 2008-02, http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rosenberg-sip-rfc4474-concerns-00
[23]
A framework for consent base communication in SIP, draft IETF, 2007-11, http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-sip-consent-framework-03.txt
[24]
Addressing an Amplification Vulnerability in SIP servers, draft IETF, 2009-02, http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zourzouvillys-sip-via-cookie-00
[25]
TR 33.828: "IMS media plale security"
[26]
3 Definitions, Symbols and Abbreviations p. 9
3.1 Definitions p. 9
For the purposes of the present document, the terms and definitions given in TR 21.905 and the following apply. A term defined in the present document takes precedence over the definition of the same term, if any, in TR 21.905.
Unsolicited Communication [3]:
Unsolicited Communication (UC) denotes bulk communication in IMS where the benefit is weighted in favour of the sender. In general the receiver(s) of UC do not wish to receive such communication. UC may comprise of, e.g., "SPam over IP Telephony (SPIT)" or "SPam over IP Messaging (SPIM)".
3.2 Symbols p. 9
For the purposes of the present document, the following symbols apply:
3.3 Abbreviations p. 9
For the purposes of the present document, the abbreviations given in TR 21.905 and the following apply. An abbreviation defined in the present document takes precedence over the definition of the same abbreviation, if any, in TR 21.905.
ACR
Anonymous Call Rejection
AS
Application Server
BL
Black List
DSL
Digital Subscriber Link
PUCI
Protection against Unsolicited Communication in IMS
SPIT
Spam over IP Telephony
UC
Unsolicited Communication
