1. Home
  2. General Telecommunications Forum
  3. Most spam comes from just six botnets [Telecom]

Most spam comes from just six botnets [Telecom]

This was an item in slashdot today

formatting link
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.

  1. 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.

  2. 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!)

Reply to
Jim Haynes
Loading thread data ...

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.

Reply to
Steven Lichter

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!)

Reply to
mc

Just a comment on the moderators comments:

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

Reply to
Koos van den Hout

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!)

Reply to
Jim Haynes

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.