Comparative Analysis of Techniques for Eliminating Spam in Fax over IP

Report as inappropriate Your report has been received

Description

The International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security (IJCSIS) is a reputable venue for publishing novel ideas, state-of-the-art research results and fundamental advances in all aspects of computer science and information & communication security. IJCSIS is a peer reviewed international journal with a key objective to provide the academic and industrial community a medium for presenting original research and applications related to Computer Science and Information Security. . The core vision of IJCSIS is to disseminate new knowledge and technology for the benefit of everyone ranging from the academic and professional research communities to industry practitioners in a range of topics in computer science & engineering in general and information & communication security, mobile & wireless networking, and wireless communication systems. It also provides a venue for high-calibre researchers, PhD students and professionals to submit on-going research and developments in these areas. . IJCSIS invites authors to submit their original and unpublished work that communicates current research on information assurance and security regarding both the theoretical and methodological aspects, as well as various applications in solving real world information security problems. . Frequency of Publication: MONTHLY ISSN: 1947-5500 [Copyright � 2011, IJCSIS, USA]

Shared by: ijcsis

Stats

views:: 65
posted:: 2/14/2011
language:: English
pages:: 5

Public Domain

Document Sample

(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,
Vol. 9, No. 1, 2011

Comparative Analysis of Techniques for Eliminating
Spam in Fax over IP

Manju Jose Dr. S.K. Srivatsa
Research Scholar, Senior Professor,
Mother Teresa Women’s University St.Joseph College of Engineering,
Kodaikanal, India Chennai,India.
manjusaje@gmail.com profsks@rediffmail.com

Abstract— Fax over PSTN line suffered heavily in terms of high this technology has improved over the years and now has
costs, call drops, improper imaging, corrupt messages etc. Fax elaborate standards and mechanisms for faxing over IP.
over IP (FoIP) came as substitute to eliminate costly connection Reducing cost is one of the most important reasons for
and transmission fees. With growing usage of FoIP, the spam is
also rising and ruining business prospects. The approaches from
growing importance of fax over IP. Fax over IP can be almost
the point of view of regulations and technologies to curb spam free in some cases. Also, fax over IP doesn’t demand
have been examined. Three technologies have also been expensive additional equipment because the existing fax
compared to suggest most suitable anti-spam technology. machine can be used for the purpose [16], [17].

II. FAX OVER IP
Keywords- Fax over IP (FoIP), S/Fax, SharePoint, Spam, Consolidation of data and communication networks through IP
Filtering Spam Fax, Digital signature is serving the objectives of reducing IT infrastructure costs
while managing data and communication applications
efficiently [19]. Communication technologies getting
standardized through IP are causing an overlap between
I. INTRODUCTION network applications based on traditional communications
Facsimile or fax over the Public Switched Telephone Network backbone and future IP environments. Organizations today are
(PSTN) line revolutionized the electronic transmission of experiencing challenges in understanding their existing
documents and made Telex obsolete. A fax machine network applications. However, they can take advantages of
traditionally is an electronic device having scanner, modem new IP-based approaches to data communications including
and a printer inbuilt. Fax machine transmits data in pulses fax over IP (FoIP).
through a PSTN line to a recipient using a compatible fax Most organizations are willing to implement VoIP to support
machine. The recipient fax machine transforms these pulses their voice based operations. These organizations also need to
into images and prints the same on fax paper. The traditional provide reliable faxing capabilities to their employees. It
method reserves its usage for PSTN line, and only one fax can makes commercial sense as well to utilize the existing VoIP
be sent or received at a time. technologies for supporting fax operations as well. There are
Fax over PSTN line suffered heavily in terms of high costs, huge potential benefits for organizations consolidating fax
call drops, improper imaging, corrupt messages etc. There was with voice systems through unified messaging applications.
a need to transform the way traditional fax systems worked. Initially, fax systems have utilized reliable PSTN networks
Instead of using PSTN line, an idea of using IP was and have been backed by reliable T.30 fax protocol to
experimented with. This experiment was found to be establish and maintain communication between two fax
extremely successful as it cut down the costs and made faxing devices. Now FoIP has new standards developed specifically
easier for users. Since fax over IP (FoIP) transmits data over for FoIP making it possible for fax transmissions to utilize the
an already established network, it eliminates costly connection Internet. Noticing this trend, fax manufacturers have started
and transmission fees. manufacturing fax equipments that can support transmission
Initially, fax over IP suffered from lack of quality as well as over Internet as well [19].
efficiency and was not being considered as an ideal alternative
to traditional fax systems. These issues plagued fax over IP III. TECHNOLOGIES
system as it didn’t have a technology of its own. Initially, it FoIP is supported by two technologies such as “store-and-
used Voice over IP (VoIP) as its base technology. However, forward” (T.37) and “realtime” (T.38). These technologies

48 http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/
ISSN 1947-5500
(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,
Vol. 9, No. 1, 2011

utilize the standard T.30 fax definition to recognize data being 5. Least Cost Routing
transferred and to ensure compatibility with existing fax 6. Better utilization of new IP equipment
devices. These technologies differ from each other in methods 7. Eliminate the fax boards
of delivery and confirmation receipts. Real-time FoIP, based
on the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) VoIP networks are increasingly entering private and public
standard T.38, elaborates the necessary technical features for organizations with IP Telephony technology. These
transferring fax in real-time mode between two standard organizations would naturally want to leverage the value and
Group 3 facsimile terminals over Internet or other IP based convenience of single IP communications network. Standard
networks. T.38 is generally preferred as FoIP protocol because VoIP Codecs have been designed for voice conversations.
of its ability to align with the technologies of faxes over These Codecs allow certain amount of latency and packet loss,
PSTN. which can still be accepted in a voice conversation.
T.30 handles IP fax transmission through like a standard fax However, faxes cannot afford to accept even small amounts of
call facilitating an end-to-end communication. With T.38, latency or any packet loss, rendering standard VoIP Codecs
sending and receiving fax is similar to fax handling of non- unacceptable for reliable faxing.
FoIP fax devices. This involves establishing a session, sending This limitation forces organizations to retain analog lines on
and verifying the transmission of one or more pages and PBX, or deploy expensive fax boards to manage their fax
finally completing the session with positive confirmations traffic. These extra expenses affect the ROI negatively that
from both sides. FoIP-enabled transmission is different as the organizations expect from their VoIP network investment.
server traverses first part of the communication to the network This scenario also requires organizations to maintain legacy
on IP technology rather than the PSTN. The session can use communication equipments with their modern IP network
T.38 for transmission if the partner device is directly infrastructure.
addressable on the same network. The IP switch converts T.38 FoIP can utilize TCP/IP standards and technologies to connect
packets to standard T.30 packets over PSTN if the devices are to the closest PSTN access to send and receive faxes. FoIP, as
separated by the telephone line. a public standard, is supported by most of the vendors’ VoIP
IP fax mechanism has two approaches namely boardless gateways. Rather than connecting a fax card to the PSTN,
approach and the boarded approach for an Ethernet FoIP device can connect directly to the T.38 supported VoIP
connection. Boardless system makes the fax works through gateway. This principle is applicable on both inbound and
DSPs (digital signal processors) located in IP routers. DSP outbound faxes [20]. eFax uses the store-and-forward
manages transmission and conversion of T.38 packets to T.30 capabilities as per T.37 standard to enable sending of faxes as
packets. Since there is greater awareness among organizations emails. This obviously doesn’t happen in real-time, which is
over implementation of VoIP, there are lesser chances that the expected legal standing associated with fax. The fax is
organizations will go for FoIP before VoIP. forwarded as email to an email server and then transmitted as
Rather organizations are likely to utilize the already existing an email attachment to a fax device for physical faxing.
VoIP infrastructure to minimize the expense of adding FoIP to This method cuts IT support requirements for fax, but
the same infrastructure. Also, VoIP will offer the required introduces limitations such as higher costs. Other providers
support already included in its routing infrastructure. use their VoIP networks to transmit fax, but this method
Organizations need to ensure that investments in VoIP requires an Analog Terminal Adaptor (ATA) hardware device
infrastructure are justified in including support for FoIP as into which a traditional fax machine must be plugged. These
well. services are not enabling the users to fax straight to a receiver
Organizations adopting an IP environment need to enhance the desktop.
benefits of their existing fax technologies by enabling them to These limitations force organizations to not to use their
support FoIP communications. existing VoIP networks for faxing. These organizations have
A research [19] surveyed more than 500 fax users and limitations in realizing that VoIP capabilities added to their
potential users on their FoIP needs and expectations. This infrastructure also have added FoIP capabilities, without
research identified the following most sought after benefits additional effort or expense [21].
while implementing FoIP technologies: There has been growing consensus regarding using existing
VoIP networks to support faxing to save efforts and cost. Still,
1. Savings in Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) due to notable differences between VoIP and FoIP need to be
network consolidation understood by the organizations before taking a decision.
2. Ability to push consistent fax solution throughout the For organizations that have already implemented VoIP
entire network including remote locations. technologies, adding FoIP capabilities on the top of VoIP
3. Improved IT management infrastructure would make perfect business sense.
4. Device/application integration However, for organizations that are yet to decide on type of IP

49 http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/
ISSN 1947-5500
(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,
Vol. 9, No. 1, 2011
capabilities, they would scale up to, a thorough comparison big relief to business users with numerous advantages
between VoIP and FoIP is definitely required. associated with it such as compatibility, retention and

FoIP is less tolerant to delays in comparison to VoIP. As delay integrity. This article also highlighted the challenges of spam
in the absence of keep-alive mechanisms may force a session or junk fax that were ruining the business prospects of fax
to drop. However, VoIP would absorb such network over IP systems.
impairments and would force delayed browsing experience to The perspectives of spam fax differ for the recipients and
the users. FoIP is also less tolerant towards packet errors or organizations dealing in fax marketing [14]. The costs
losses in comparison to VoIP. For communication reliability, attached with spam are high and fax spammers are not
FoIP may require an error-correcting but delay-adding authorized to use fax paper and toner of unwilling recipients to
protocol such as TCP to ensure delivery confirmation or repeat send sales pitches. Further, fax spammers shouldn’t be
requests [22]. Considering the tighter integration of FoIP with allowed to tie up bandwidth, computing power, and storage of
real-time transmission and reliability, FoIP is treated as first unintended recipients as they haven’t paid for it [18]. With
possible alternative by the organizations. aggressive marketing pitches over fax machines, email boxes
and cell phones, the list of offenses that deserve the spam
IV. THE GROWTH STORY SO FAR handle is also growing [10].
A research report [2] highlighted that fax revenues would
continue to grow from $270 million in 2005 to $400 million in VI. THE FIGHT BACK
2010, achieving a remarkable compound annual growth rate A new lobby of anti spam activists has decided take on fax
(CAGR) of 8.2%. This report estimated that fax over IP sales spammers and these activists have been fighting against
would grow by a 50.7% CAGR to $245 million in 2010 and unsolicited fax messages through claims of damages and
non fax over IP fax sales would decrease to $155 million in advocating for a law on spam faxes.
2010. This report further added that fax over IP systems would A suit [9] filed to get junk or spam faxes banned was different
dominate the market by 2010 with integration of VoIP. in approach as it didn’t claim damages. Rather, it helped in
Another research report [4] highlighted that more than 100 establishing a junk fax ruling under which sending of junk
billion fax pages are transmitted around the globe on a yearly faxes was considered a criminal act.
basis despite efforts to become a paperless society. This A prominent case [13] used junk fax law to sue violator over
research report also highlighted that fax over IP markets email spam and sought damages proving the ground
would continue to grow rapidly during the five-year forecast comprehensively. This case argued that computer was also
period unfazed by economic recession. This report further acting as fax machine and that email was really no different
highlighted that fax has certain advantages over e-mail as it from fax over IP. This case further argued that received spam
largely remains compatible across various devices and email using a phone line connection and printed message
systems, retains the format of complex documents and finally demonstrate suitability of trial of this case under junk fax law.
sends documents in non-editable format so that the recipients An article [8] cited doubts in the opinions regarding
do not modify them. willingness of courts to apply junk fax law, as most of the
A research report [3] on fax messaging markets observed that existing state laws on spam are weak and counterproductive.
patent law situation with respect to fax over IP has undergone
radical changes. This report further added that fax over IP VII. SPAM FAX: CURBING THE MENACE
would continue to enjoy growth rates that were earlier An article [14] suggested certain measures to prevent spam in
diminished due to economic downturn. This report concluded fax over IP as per the provisions of the Junk Fax Prevention
with fax over IP market projections of $ 1.575 billion in 2013. Act [15]. The recipient can contact the sender directly and
A research report [5] on computer based fax markets for the express his/her unwillingness to receive spam fax messages.
period of 2009-2014 and observed that usage of IP has The recipient can also choose “opt out” option to block his/her
contributed towards tremendous growth of fax over IP. This fax number from fax mailing lists. The recipient also has a
report highlighted phenomenon of multi function peripherals choice to approach a regulator and file a complaint or even
(MFPs) and integration of business computing systems. The claim damages.
MFPs would account for 32% of revenues produced through A suggestion was made regarding integrating FoIP with
fax over IP industry. This integration has also fuelled demand Microsoft SharePoint to eliminate spam and security risks.
for fax over IP services. This report forecasted that desktop This integration can ensure the right movement of documents
faxing would account for 70% share of fax systems, out of and junk or spam is filtered out [1]. This article further
which 42.5% share would be attributed to unified messaging. elaborated that FoIP, when integrated with SharePoint,
provides efficient inbound routing of fax into SharePoint sites.
V. SPAM IN FAX: THE INSIDER’S PERSPECTIVE This feature enables the users to search content, metadata tags,
An article [1] argued that fax over IP systems have brought and optical character recognition (OCR) features of fax

50 http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/
ISSN 1947-5500
(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,
Vol. 9, No. 1, 2011
documents to differentiate spam from necessary documents TABLE I. Comparative Analysis
and apply rule based routing. The users also have the Technologies Integration S/FAX over Spam Fax Filter
of FoIP with IP (PDF (Non- rasterized
provision of triggering an automated SharePoint work flow
SharePoint Format) Format)
process to ensure that fax documents go to the right folders or Mechanism Inbound rule Use of S/FAX Conversion of
destinations while filtering junk out of the system. base routing over IP to rasterized form
Another article [7] criticized the spam filters for their of fax into generate of fax image into
SharePoint secure mails non-rasterized
application in content sorting only. Moreover, most of the sites in pdf form
spam filters sort the spam after accepting the messages. High Filtering / Searching Verifying Verifying non-
volume of spam forbids the users from receiving it and all Segregation content, integrity and rasterized forms
messages classified as spam are automatically deleted. This metadata tags digital of the fax image
and OCR signature of against spam fax
causes difficulties to genuine senders as their messages are features of fax pdf characteristics to
deleted without any reason being assigned. Using spam filter documents to documents to filter spam from
on protocol level would reject the spam and assign reason for filter spam allow fax necessary fax
doing so. Such spam filters are rare. This article advocated the from messages to documents.
necessary fax enter
use of pdf format over spam filters to counter spam faxes. A documents
suggestion was made regarding using secure fax (S/FAX) over Load on Network High Low High
IP to generate secure mails in pdf format containing sender’s Disposal After fax Before fax After fax enters
name, address, and digital signature. This pdf can also be enters the enters the the system
system system
given password protection, if required. Upon receipt, the pdf Response Time High Low High
reader can verify the integrity of the document as well as the
digital signature and allow the receiver to either view it or
discard as spam. IX. CONCLUSION
An article [11] suggested charging fax spammer from $500 to
$1500 for every unsolicited fax they send. The article added S/FAX over IP approach proposed by Engelbert is
that this amount could become significant if fax spammers conclusively better than rest of the approaches, as this
send many faxes. The recipient needs to keep track of all approach does not allow the spam fax to get into system.
unsolicited faxes with date & time stamps to be used for Rather, this approach proposes to use spam filter to accept or
claims. discard fax messages subject to verification of integrity and
A technology [6] has also been proposed regarding spam fax digital signature of incoming fax messages. Also, this
filter that can transform a rasterized form of a fax image into approach proposes to assign reasons for rejection of fax
non-rasterized forms. Non-rasterized forms of the fax image messages enabling the senders to receive the status of their
can then be checked against spam fax characteristics, or messages.
characteristics of fax images not known as spam. The fax
image is declared as spam if it tests favorably to at least one of X. LIMITATIONS
the known characteristics of spam fax. In case, the fax image The researcher experienced certain limitations while
doesn’t conform to any of the characteristics of spam fax, it conducting this research as there is no benchmark available,
can be declared as non spam. which could be taken into consideration for comparing the
Another article [12] suggested complaining to regulator and technical approaches to prevent spam in fax over IP. The
highlighting the matter to draw mass attention to curb the fax researcher interacted with fax users to understand their
spam menace. expectations from these spam prevention approaches to
identify the key indicators for comparison. The researcher
VIII. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS attached high significance to pre disposal of spam faxes as this
A comparative analysis as given in table.I involving three would prevent the spam faxes from entering into the system.
approaches [1], [6], [7] has been done to understand the The significant factors may be different for different users.
unique characteristics associated with each approach.
While comparing, the key indicators such as disposal of spam XI. FUTURE RESEARCH WORK

faxes, system overload, response time etc were kept in The researcher is willing to work and explore this area more in
consideration. The researcher had attached higher significance order to identify best technologies and approaches to prevent
to anti fax spam technology offering pre disposal of spam spam in fax over IP. The researcher also intends to bring more
faxes as this would largely save the network from getting technologies and approaches under the ambit of comparisons.
flooded with spam faxes resulting in higher load on resources. A detailed research can be initiated on the basis of already
covered issues and suitable statistical parameters can be used
for rigorous technical comparisons. Developing a globally
acceptable technology or approach to prevent spam in fax over

51 http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/
ISSN 1947-5500
(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,
Vol. 9, No. 1, 2011
IP is also a possibility in future. [12] Nefer, B. (2010), How Do I Cancel Spam Faxes?
http://www.ehow.com/how_6885111_do-cancel-spam-faxes_.html.
[13] Seymour, J. (2003), Michigan Man Uses Junk FAX Law to Sue Sears
REFERENCES Over Spam, http://www.linxnet.com/misc/spam/mi_spamsuit.html.
[1] Campbell, S. (2010), The Many Benefits of FoIP and Microsoft [14] Stevens, P. (2006), Spam Fax Facts, http://faxing-service-
PowerPoint, http://www.tmcnet.com/channels/foip/articles/77591- review.toptenreviews.com/spam-fax-facts.html.
many-benefits-foip-microsoft-sharepoint.htm. [15] The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (2005),
[2] Davidson Consulting (2006), Computer-Based Fax Markets, 2005– http://www.junkfaxes.org/federal_law.htm.
2010, December 2006 [16] Unuth, N. (2010), IP Faxing: A Cheaper Way of Sending Fax,
[3] Davidson Consulting (2009), Fax Messaging Markets, 2008-2013, July http://voip.about.com/od/faxingoverip/a/IPFaxingIntro.htm.
2009 [17] Unuth, N. (2010), Reasons for Using Faxing over IP,
[4] Davidson Consulting (2009), FoIP Server Markets, 2007-2013, April http://voip.about.com/od/faxingoverip/tp/AdvantagesofIPFaxing.htm.
2009 [18] Warner, J. (2003), How much does spam really cost? The Miami
[5] Davidson Consulting (2010), Computer-Based Fax Markets, 2009- Herald, March 10, 2003.
2014, April 2010 [19] The Essential Guide to Fax Server Software, Windows ITPro eBooks,
[6] El-gazzar, Amin et al. (2007), Spam fax filter, United States Patent May 2009.
7184160. [20] Choosing between Traditional and FoIP/VoIP Faxing, Sagem-Interstar
[7] Engelbert, S. (2005), How to send a S/FAX over IP, Group, July 2007.
http://www.aloaha.com/wi-software-en/sfax-ip.php. [21] Chernicoff, D., The Essential Guide to Fax over IP, Windows ITPro,
[8] Festa, P. (2002), Newsmaker: A cybersage speaks his mind, CNET April 2006.
News, http://news.cnet.com/A-cybersage-speaks-his-mind/2008- [22] Berkowitz, C. H. (2006), Save money by using fax over IP,
1082_3-958576.html?tag=mncol;txt. Computerworld.
[9] Festa, P. (2003), Spam law a matter of fax? CNET News,
http://news.cnet.com/2100-1028-994076.html.
[10] Hansen, E. and Olsen, S. (2002), Spam: It's more than bulk e-mail,
http://news.cnet.com/2100-1023-961134.html.
[11] Miller, N. (2010), Stop Fax Spam For Good,
http://ezinearticles.com/?Stop-Fax-Spam-For-Good&id=3577712.

52 http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/
ISSN 1947-5500