Most spam comes from just six botnets [Telecom]

Most spam comes from just six botnets [Telecom]

NewsGroups | Search | Tools
 comp.dcom.telecom  Post an article  get this group's latest topics as an RSS feed add this group's latest topics to your My MSN content add this group's latest topics to your My Yahoo content  add this group's latest topics to your Google content  YahooMyWeb Yahoo!  Google Google  Windows Live Favorites Windows Live  del.icio.us del.icio.us  digg digg  Add to Netscape Netscape
Subject Author Date
Most spam comes from just six botnets [Telecom] Jim Haynes 03-17-2008
Posted by Jim Haynes on March 17, 2008, 7:52 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
This was an item in slashdot today (http://slashdot.org)
reporting some research that six botnets are generating
85 percent of the world's spam.


***** Moderator's Note *****

I gave up on Slashdot a while back: IMNSHO, the site pushes a steady
stream of "Gee Wiz" stories, but very little usable information. Seems
to me that it's all flash and no pan.

That aside, six or sixty doesn't matter: it's the fact that it's still
coming and still profitable (obviously) that counts. My feelings about
spam are the same as those on telemarketing: hitting delete just
exascerbates the problem. The real solution is to take action, both
with laws and with streetfighting, to make the business cost more than
it's worth.

When I'm elected President, things will change:

1. I'll sign a bill that will make it a crime to knowingly benefit
from spam. The guy who writes the check is the one _I_ want in
jail, not the guy who empties his trash into my inbox.

2. I'll embargo all email from countries without an actively enforced
anti-spam law, and force them to go through a selected few gateways
with _really_ good filters and _really_ poor throughput. They'll
get the message fast enough.

3. I'll require that all email software sold to the Federal government
or bought with government funds - which, effectively, means all
software - contains anti-spam code such as Teergrube.

At essence, spam is an attack on the economy of the western world.
It's costing businesses billions of dollars each year, with no end in
site and fortunes being made and bribes paid so that you and I can
waste hours hitting "delete". It's government laxness that allows it,
and only action by the government will stop it.

Bill Horne
Temporary Moderator

(Please put [Telecom] at the end of the subject line of your post, or
I may never see it. Thanks!)


Spring Sale Save 20% Banner - Sale Ended 5/3/07 So Updated to NonPromo Ad
Posted by Steven Lichter on March 18, 2008, 11:56 am
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Jim Haynes wrote:
> This was an item in slashdot today (http://slashdot.org)
> reporting some research that six botnets are generating
> 85 percent of the world's spam.
>
>
> ***** Moderator's Note *****
>
> I gave up on Slashdot a while back: IMNSHO, the site pushes a steady
> stream of "Gee Wiz" stories, but very little usable information. Seems
> to me that it's all flash and no pan.
>
> That aside, six or sixty doesn't matter: it's the fact that it's still
> coming and still profitable (obviously) that counts. My feelings about
> spam are the same as those on telemarketing: hitting delete just
> exascerbates the problem. The real solution is to take action, both
> with laws and with streetfighting, to make the business cost more than
> it's worth.
>
> When I'm elected President, things will change:
>
> 1. I'll sign a bill that will make it a crime to knowingly benefit
> from spam. The guy who writes the check is the one _I_ want in
> jail, not the guy who empties his trash into my inbox.
>
> 2. I'll embargo all email from countries without an actively enforced
> anti-spam law, and force them to go through a selected few gateways
> with _really_ good filters and _really_ poor throughput. They'll
> get the message fast enough.
>
> 3. I'll require that all email software sold to the Federal government
> or bought with government funds - which, effectively, means all
> software - contains anti-spam code such as Teergrube.
>
> At essence, spam is an attack on the economy of the western world.
> It's costing businesses billions of dollars each year, with no end in
> site and fortunes being made and bribes paid so that you and I can
> waste hours hitting "delete". It's government laxness that allows it,
> and only action by the government will stop it.
>
> Bill Horne
> Temporary Moderator
>
> (Please put [Telecom] at the end of the subject line of your post, or
> I may never see it. Thanks!)
>

I got another e-mail selling insurance from an online insurance agent!!
In the past i just deleted it, this time, I went to his web and noted
all the companies he had listed and e-mailed or went to their sites and
advise them; including a copy of the e-mail with the link as to what I
had found, within 1 day I either got e-mail from the companies or in one
case a phone call stating they would take action, one company did, they
fired the mailer who they thought was legit, YA Right a legit email
business, the guys web site is now a 404 error. I don't know it he is
gone for good. I had done the same for a company selling Dish Network
in San Diego, Dish would do nothing, so I posted all the company
officers phone and fax numbers on a Hacker newsgroup. The Spam site is
still running, but the e-mails to me which I had been getting 3 a day
stopped.

If the bosses starting hearing about the problem, they will take action.


--
The Only Good Spammer is a Dead one!! Have you hunted one down today?
(c) 2008 I Kill Spammers, Inc. A Rot In Hell Co.


***** Moderator's Note *****

I've gotten several replies to the original post on this topic, and
I'll post the good ones, but this isn't an anti-spam Digest, so I'll
end the thread after today.

If you want to fight spam, visit http://www.cauce.org/ and join the
cause.

Bill Horne
Temporary Moderator

(Please put [Telecom] at the end of the subject line of your post, or
I may never see it. Thanks!)


Posted by Jim Haynes on March 18, 2008, 3:57 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
The reason I posted the item from slashdot was not to start a discussion
of spam, but because I thought it was interesting from a telecom
standpoint about the botnets. Here are six (among more) illegal,
clandestine "service providers" that are responsible for a huge
amount of net traffic. Botnets should interest us for the same
reason that phone phreaking and various-colored boxes interest us.
There is clearly a need for more security responsibility on the part
of software purveyors and computer owners; but is there anything that
can be done in the network to shut down the botnets?

I think I'm agreeing with Bill about spam - that what is needed is
something that will cause the spammer some pain. Spam filtering
software saves us some time, but only causes the spammers to flood
the network with more traffic attempting to penetrate the filters.
Thus it is in a sense counterproductive.


***** Moderator's Note *****

Every ISP has already taken all the measures that they can: requiring
that email go out through smarthosts, blocking incoming mail to
dynamic IP addresses, even implementing flawed anti-spam measures such
as SPF.

Shutting down botnets is surprisingly hard to do, since the ISP's
depend heavily on automation to cut costs and are loathe to involve
their paid staff in chasing down each machine. Some have invested in
software that automatically disables access for suspect machines, but
of course the first reaction of every affected user is to deny they
have a problem and to call tech support and demand that the ISP
pretend there's no problem too.

Spam prevention is an arms race: filters gave way to embargoes (I
don't accept email from anywhere outside the U.S. in my personal
server), and embargoes gave way to challenge-response systems (which
are, in themselves, a form of spam), and now to "Gated Communities"
which promise to eliminate spam for those who only correspond with
others inside the gate.

The solution to spam is to choke the flow of money, not of bits.

Bill Horne
Temporary Moderator

(Please put [Telecom] at the end of the subject line of your post, or
I may never see it. Thanks!)


Posted by mc on March 18, 2008, 12:01 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
> 1. I'll sign a bill that will make it a crime to knowingly benefit
> from spam. The guy who writes the check is the one _I_ want in
> jail, not the guy who empties his trash into my inbox.

Well said! And have the FDA go after all drug companies whose products are
advertised by spam -- the presumption being that illegal sales are taking
place, even if the advertisements are misspelled.

It ought to be easy enough to find spammers by following a trail of money.


***** Moderator's Note *****

The drug companies are doing quite well with their regular business,
and they don't need to sell anything by spamming. I doubt _any_
legitimate drug has *ever* been sold by a spammer, and if anyone thinks
they can buy prescription drugs from an address they get in spam,
well, a fool and his money were lucky to get together in the first
place.

Bill Horne
Temporary Moderator

(Please put [Telecom] at the end of the subject line of your post, or
I may never see it. Thanks!)


Posted by Koos van den Hout on March 18, 2008, 12:21 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Just a comment on the moderators comments:

> When I'm elected President, things will change:

You missed the rule that all ISPs operating in the country where you are
president are required to have an active abuse department which checks
reports about spam and other netabuse and deals with it, including
quarantaining users.

Koos van den Hout

--
Koos van den Hout Homepage: http://idefix.net/~koos/
Fax: +31-30-2817051 PGP keyid DSS/1024 0xF0D7C263 or RSA/1024 0xCA845CB5
Webprojects: Camp Wireless http://www.camp-wireless.org/
The Virtual Bookcase http://www.virtualbookcase.com/


***** Moderator's Note *****

Koos, nice to hear from you! How've you been?

Please consider:

1. Yes, it _is_ a blog. ;-)

2. *Please* have mercy on those of us over Fifty, and put in more
contrast: black text on a blue background is just too hard.

3. I saw a guy at a KOA campground who had the entire camp-wireless
list printed out and hung on a hook next to his steering wheel.

4. Is there any way to interoperate between X.509 and PGP/GPG?

5. IMHO, Abuse departments are a _reaction_ to spam, not a preventive
measure: as with most illegal things, it stops when you take the
money out of the equation. YMMV, but I'd rather cut off the cash
flow than demand my ISP spend more to play whack-a-mole.

Bill Horne
Temporary Moderator

(Please put [Telecom] at the end of the subject line of your post, or
I may never see it. Thanks!)


Similar ThreadsPosted
Know Your Enemy: Tracking Botnets March 15, 2005, 11:53 am
Bringing Botnets Out of the Shadows / Online Volunteers Monitor March 21, 2006, 2:06 pm
FTC Says 'Spam' Email Filters Getting Smarter, But so is Spam November 28, 2005, 9:48 pm
More Spam! Get Ready for Spam on Your Net Phone April 8, 2005, 11:14 am
Re: More Spam! Get Ready for Spam on Your Net Phone April 11, 2005, 3:54 pm
spam in comp.dcom.telecom October 18, 2006, 3:47 am
[Telecom] Cell phone text message spam January 1, 2008, 10:54 pm
Re: [Telecom] Cell phone text message spam January 6, 2008, 1:20 am
Getting Serious About the War on Spam April 15, 2005, 11:29 am
Re: Getting Serious About the War on Spam April 15, 2005, 7:25 pm

other useful resources:
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
Telecommunications Industry Association
Electronic and Software Security Products and Services
International Telecommunication Union

Custom CGI Perl and PHP programming by 1-Script.com

Contact Us | Privacy Policy
The site map in XML format XML site map