A Broadband and ADSL forum. BroadbanterBanter

Welcome to BroadbanterBanter.

You are currently viewing as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today.

Go Back   Home » BroadbanterBanter forum » Newsgroup Discussions » uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) (uk.telecom.broadband) Discussion of broadband services, technology and equipment as provided in the UK. Discussions of specific services based on ADSL, cable modems or other broadband technology are also on-topic. Advertising is not allowed.

About Spam



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 20th 06, 11:13 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Eeyore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,222
Default About Spam

We just got a post about the 'nonsense poetry' to try and evade spam filters.

Tell me something please from your own perspective....

We have had Spam / UCE for decades now. It's a total pain in the ass / arse for
everyone.

Reputedly the bulk of it originates from mere hundreds or perhaps a thousand or
so originators.

If there was a cohesive effort to identify and stop it - it could indeed be
stopped - virtually 'overnight'.

If needs be, some domains could be completely blocked. So ? Who would lose ?

Why isn't it happening ? Does US 'freedom of speech' stop it from being blocked
?

Cooments please !

Personally I'd have any originator of UCE sentenced to a mandatory prison term
of 10 yrs with confiscation of propery. I bet it would stop damn fast.

Graham




  #2  
Old December 20th 06, 11:50 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Harry Broomhall
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 27
Default About Spam

On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 10:13:06 +0000, Eeyore
wrote:

We just got a post about the 'nonsense poetry' to try and evade spam filters.

Tell me something please from your own perspective....

We have had Spam / UCE for decades now. It's a total pain in the ass / arse for
everyone.

Reputedly the bulk of it originates from mere hundreds or perhaps a thousand or
so originators.


It depends on your definition of 'originators'. Yes - it is
thought that there are not many people involved, but they control
millions of machines worldwide to actualy send the stuff. These are
often referred to nowadays as 'botnets'.

These machines are mostly people's personal machines where the
owners have been too lazy, or too disinterested, or too ignorant (or a
whole lot of other possibles) to keep them patched, and to run
anti-trojan software. And to be just plain careful with their
machines.

Some ISPs will try and isolate the worst of these, but others just
don't have the resources, and perhaps the management aren't interested
enough to provide those resources.


If there was a cohesive effort to identify and stop it - it could indeed be
stopped - virtually 'overnight'.


Now you see why this isn't so.

Regards,
Harry.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
  #3  
Old December 20th 06, 11:59 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Jim Howes
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 104
Default [OT] About Spam

Eeyore wrote:
Reputedly the bulk of it originates from mere hundreds or perhaps a thousand or
so originators.


Examine the stats at Spamhaus.org, and you'll quickly discover that something
like 90% of the spam comes from only a small handful of individuals.

If there was a cohesive effort to identify and stop it - it could indeed be
stopped - virtually 'overnight'.


Yes, but 'cohesive effort' requires Mr. & Mrs. Bloggs, with their windows 95
PC's and dialup modems, to actually know, or care, about the security of their
system. Spammers no longer send spam. Infected and compromised systems send
the bulk of spam. Virus writers and spammers are in the same business.

If needs be, some domains could be completely blocked. So ? Who would lose ?


Spammers routinely use perfectly honourable domains, because they can. Email is
insecure. Short of requiring everyone to digitally sign email, and send via
authenticated servers, it will remain so. Even if people are forced to use
authenticated servers, and digitally sign mail, user agents will evolve to make
this easier, which means automated signatures and login, which means automated
compromises of those systems.

Why isn't it happening ? Does US 'freedom of speech' stop it from being blocked


The spammers seem to think so, read the legal/news pages on spamhaus.org

Personally I'd have any originator of UCE sentenced to a mandatory prison term
of 10 yrs with confiscation of propery. I bet it would stop damn fast.


Personally, I'd get a whole lot more medieval on their arse...
  #4  
Old December 20th 06, 02:53 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
William Poaster
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default [OT] About Spam

On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 10:59:24 +0000, Jim Howes wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Reputedly the bulk of it originates from mere hundreds or perhaps a
thousand or so originators.


Examine the stats at Spamhaus.org, and you'll quickly discover that
something like 90% of the spam comes from only a small handful of
individuals.

If there was a cohesive effort to identify and stop it - it could indeed
be stopped - virtually 'overnight'.


Yes, but 'cohesive effort' requires Mr. & Mrs. Bloggs, with their windows
95 PC's and dialup modems, to actually know, or care, about the security
of their system.


Well not only their win95 system, but *any* windoze system:
http://www.secureworks.com/analysis/spamthru-stats/

Pirated copies of windows also helps bots, as do such applications as
Limewire, KaZaa etc on a vulnerable windows box.

Spammers no longer send spam. Infected and compromised systems send the
bulk of spam. Virus writers and spammers are in the same business.


If needs be, some domains could be completely blocked. So ? Who would
lose ?


Spammers routinely use perfectly honourable domains, because they can.
Email is insecure. Short of requiring everyone to digitally sign email,
and send via authenticated servers, it will remain so. Even if people are
forced to use authenticated servers, and digitally sign mail, user agents
will evolve to make this easier, which means automated signatures and
login, which means automated compromises of those systems.

Why isn't it happening ? Does US 'freedom of speech' stop it from being
blocked


The spammers seem to think so, read the legal/news pages on spamhaus.org

Personally I'd have any originator of UCE sentenced to a mandatory
prison term of 10 yrs with confiscation of propery. I bet it would stop
damn fast.


Personally, I'd get a whole lot more medieval on their arse...


Ah, the red-hot poker treatment that Edward II got...

--
"I didn't know what I was signing -
they held an enormous cheque over my eyes."
-- Alexei Sayle, UK comedian --
Reminds me of Novell/M$ deal...
  #5  
Old December 20th 06, 03:35 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Ivor Jones
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,969
Default About Spam



"Eeyore" wrote in
message
We just got a post about the 'nonsense poetry' to try and
evade spam filters.

Tell me something please from your own perspective....

We have had Spam / UCE for decades now. It's a total pain
in the ass / arse for everyone.

Reputedly the bulk of it originates from mere hundreds or
perhaps a thousand or so originators.

If there was a cohesive effort to identify and stop it -
it could indeed be stopped - virtually 'overnight'.

If needs be, some domains could be completely blocked. So
? Who would lose ?


I for one would (and have) - see below.

Why isn't it happening ? Does US 'freedom of speech' stop
it from being blocked ?


I doubt it, the US provider web.tv are currently blocking my ISP
(Freeserve/Wanadoo/Orange or whatever it's called this week) due to a
minority of its users sending spam. As a result, both a friend in the US
and I have had to resort to Google mail to get messages to and from one
another.

Ivor


  #6  
Old December 20th 06, 09:04 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Phil Thompson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,720
Default About Spam

On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 10:13:06 +0000, Eeyore
wrote:


If needs be, some domains could be completely blocked.


blocking any non-text email would be another tactic. Back to basics -
email for mail and FTP for file transfers :-)

Phil
  #7  
Old December 20th 06, 11:43 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
cw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 323
Default About Spam

Its several things.

Firstly, proof. You actually need to gather evidence to proove exactly who
is sending the messages. Places like Spamhaus work it out, but their
workings wouldn't stand up in court. We can be pretty much sure they get it
right most of the time, but without something that concretely shows who
sends it, the legal side of things falls apart.

As to blocking, well blocking by domain is stupid and spammers forge all
sorts of domains. You can block known bad IP addresses as the moment it
leaves the spammers control these cannot be forged by them but not the
envelope from or reply to addresses.

Playing whack-a-mole is never going to win. The spammers need to be
discouraged from spamming. Either go after the spammers, or the muppets who
actually buy stuff from spam to make it profitable!

--
Colin
*Drop DEAD from the email address to reply*
  #8  
Old December 21st 06, 12:00 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Colin Wilson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 850
Default About Spam

blocking any non-text email would be another tactic. Back to basics -
email for mail and FTP for file transfers :-)


....and munged / third party web links to enable tracking BANNED ENTIRELY
- or at least for any site that requires you to log in or sells a
financial service of some kind.
  #9  
Old December 21st 06, 12:12 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Dave Plumb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6
Default About Spam

We have had Spam / UCE for decades now. It's a total pain in the ass /
arse for everyone.


I think like unauthorised bill-posters they should target the destination
of the spam. Be it a telephone number (then the phone number needs to be
pulled) or a domain (then the domain needs to be pulled).

I understand there are registrars who specialise in hosting webstites that
won't be taken down, in which case working your way up the food chain
should give results eventually.

That Israeli Brokerage stuff going around a month ago was a PITA and the
current crop of "It Me" and "Me Again" is also pretty boring. I'm sure
their ultimate aim is to kill email off for everyone!

D
  #10  
Old December 21st 06, 12:52 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
JW
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 83
Default About Spam

cw wrote:
Its several things.

Firstly, proof. You actually need to gather evidence to proove exactly who
is sending the messages. Places like Spamhaus work it out, but their
workings wouldn't stand up in court. We can be pretty much sure they get it
right most of the time, but without something that concretely shows who
sends it, the legal side of things falls apart.

As to blocking, well blocking by domain is stupid and spammers forge all
sorts of domains. You can block known bad IP addresses as the moment it
leaves the spammers control these cannot be forged by them but not the
envelope from or reply to addresses.

Playing whack-a-mole is never going to win. The spammers need to be
discouraged from spamming. Either go after the spammers, or the muppets who
actually buy stuff from spam to make it profitable!


No-one is going to spend much time and effort chasing them,
and we don't want another law enforcement agency (cybercops?)

There is a very simple way to stop it - maybe the only way:
introduce charges. A penny-post would have minimal impact
on users, but a lot on spammers.

Users who allow their PCs to be taken over would soon find
an incentive to prevent it. Or else they would have their
account frozen for non-payment.

Free services could still be provided, but businesses and
others should be able to junk it, as all legitimate
correspondence would soon migrate to the paid channels.
 




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Spam Paul Hanson uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 41 February 9th 06 11:24 AM
Spam Paul Cummins uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 1 February 9th 06 11:23 AM
Spam Mel uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 6 May 26th 04 01:18 AM
Spam Phil Thompson uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 0 January 30th 04 03:19 PM
no spam Stephen Routledge uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 0 November 24th 03 09:14 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2019 BroadbanterBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.