he service providers' point of view but the real problem will appear to the end-user, who will suffer simultaneously from spamming and spitting. Even though SPIT is not yet a dominant Internet threat, several mecha- nisms and frameworks have been introduced to detect and counter the threat. Most of them combine or adapt existing and proved ideas from the anti-spam domain, while some introduce innovative new concepts. Until now as no prac- tical amount of SPIT is present, their efficacy and efficiency could only be estimated in laboratory conditions, although a concrete evaluation framework is still missing. Unsolicited communications infringe privacy, primarily in its narrow and visible sense, i.e., through the illegal intrusion into the private realms of the person. SPIT as a specific form of spam is considered to be an invasion of pri- vacy [2]. VoIP spam (in the form of "call spam", IM spam, Presence spam), *http://www.voipsa.org/pipermail/voipsec_voipsa.org/2006-March/001326.html. Accord- ing to Columbia University officials (http://www.voipuser.org/forum_topic_10383.html) recent SPIT accident was recorded also in the University during a VoIP pilot rollout. © 2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC SIP Vulnerabilities for SPIT, SPIT Identification Criteria referred to as SPIT, differs from other "traditional" forms of electronic com- munications (e.g., e-mail) in that is significantly more obtrusive and intrusive, as a phone will actually ring with every SPIT message, possibly even after midnight [3]. The fundamental right of privacy, anchored in various national constitu- tional texts as well as in the European Convention of Human Rights (Art. 8), encompasses informational privacy, relational privacy and freedom of com- munication in the meaning of privacy/secrecy of communications. Informa- tional privacy (or right to informational self-determination) relates to the individual's right to decide autonomously, whether and which personal infor- mation they can communicate to others and/or processed by them. Affect