[PD-ot] pd list used to get addresses to spam to?

Hans-Christoph Steiner hans at eds.org
Mon Jan 15 03:17:14 CET 2007


On Jan 13, 2007, at 9:49 PM, Christian Klippel wrote:

> hi,
>
> Am Sonntag, 14. Januar 2007 03:05 schrieb Chris McCormick:
>> On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 10:37:44AM +0100, Frank Barknecht wrote:
>>> Christian Klippel hat gesagt: // Christian Klippel wrote:
>>>> but an hour after my post, i start to get spam attempts to
>>>> @mamalala.net !
>>>
>>> I've given up trying to hide my email address from websites. In the
>>> long run it just doesn't seem to work.
>>
>> I can recommend 'spamprobe', which is a bayesian filtering system  
>> that
>> you can install easily via procmail. I used to get 100 spams a day or
>> more, and now I get roughly 5 to 10 with that number going down  
>> slowly.
>> Apt-get installable.
>>
>
> well, my goal is to not accept any incomming spam at all, before  
> the DATA part
> starts. so far i'm down to the same number like you, but without any
> filtering of received mails. qmail + spamcontrol is pretty nice for  
> that.
>
> i see a (big) problem with post-filtering incomming mail:
> to the spammer it is another successfull delivery of spam, so he  
> will continue
> with that. but if the mail is recjected during the smtp session  
> already, they
> get back an reject error.
>
> if all people (especially sysadmins of bigger network providers)  
> would do
> that, i'm sure that we would have a much smaller spam problem than  
> we have
> now. again, every accepted mail is a success for the spammer,  
> regardless of
> someone filtering it afterwards. the mail just shouldnt be accepted  
> in the
> first place.
>
> with the envelope checking that spamcontrol implements, you can get  
> rid of a
> lot of spams already _before_ accepting the mail (just look hoe  
> spambots
> construct a mail, there are quite some thing by which you can  
> identify a spam
> mail)
>
> the rest one could do (like me) by just blocking spamming networks.  
> kornet for
> example is massively involved in spamming, so just block them  
> completely.
>
> a big problem is that providers just dont care about the problem at  
> all,
> despite them praying to the public that they take spam fighting  
> serious. they
> just dont. its all just empty blah-blah phrases.
>
> now, think a bit further: if most systems would block spams that  
> way, even by
> blocking complete networks, providers would get immense pressure  
> from their
> customers because of the decreased ability to send legitimate mails  
> from
> their networks due to the blocks. and when customers make pressure,  
> it means
> loss of $$ for the providers, the only thing that could make them  
> move.
>
> or do you think that providers dont get spam's as well? it would be  
> an easy
> task for them to analyze the spams with a script, and kick the  
> asses of their
> customers who are identified to have spamming machines. this would  
> also make
> the users more aware about the problem of hacked machines used as  
> spambots.
>
> but as long as there is no pressure (read: potential loss of $$$),  
> they will
> just not care at all. none of them!

The real problem with spam is social not technical.  The spambot/anti- 
spam competition is just an arms race, they'll constantly find new  
ways to trump each other with no end in sight.  The bayesian method  
seems to be the most effective.

Really, to stop spam, people need to be educated to believe if  
something seems to good to be true, it is.  Spam continues to be sent  
because people follow the links and buy stuff from spammers.  Spam  
could be reduced if people were prosecuted for violating the various  
non-spam related laws like fraud, selling prescription drugs, etc.   
But the cops are generally underfunded and not well educated on the  
related computer issues.

.hc


>
>> Best,
>>
>> Chris.
>>
>
> greets,
>
> chris
>
>> -------------------
>> chris at mccormick.cx
>> http://mccormick.cx
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PD-ot mailing list
>> PD-ot at iem.at
>> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-ot
>
> _______________________________________________
> PD-ot mailing list
> PD-ot at iem.at
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-ot


------------------------------------------------------------------------

Man has survived hitherto because he was too ignorant to know how to  
realize his wishes.  Now that he can realize them, he must either  
change them, or perish.    -William Carlos Williams





More information about the PD-ot mailing list