Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Spam Filter Service

On Sun, 06 Aug 2006 14:12:08 +0100, Roy Schestowitz
<newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>__/ [ catherine yronwode ] on Monday 07 August 2006 03:49 \__
>> Spam filtering is something that must be effectively addressed in email
>> before we can convince google to deal with the content-spam pages that
>> have all but crippled their search engine's usefulness.
>The two are very separable, actually. Plagiarism and SPAM are very different.
>Spam comment, on the other hand, is similar to SPAM.
>In most cases, in order to generate SPAM and spam comments (among other
>attacks, e.g. automated forums posts, subscriptions with links, Wiki spam)
>the attacker uses a network of bots. This ways the attacker attacks in
>proxy. Neither the victim nor the hijacker can be trivially caught. The ISP
>and the vendor or the faulty software are often on the clear, too.
>These bots are essentially Microsoft Windows boxes that have been hijacked to
>become an army of thousands, or tens of thousands (sometimes nearing a
>million, given enough botmaster, AKA 'Windows puppeteers') connected
>machines that can be run concurrently and be used for brute-force floods of
>SPAM (DDOS attacks included). Everyone is affected. Your address needn't
>even be public. If a friend of your has got your address in his/her
>addressbook in Outlook or Outlook Express, the address will leak upon
>hijacking. See, for example, some interesting statistics.
>More than 95% of e-mail is 'junk'
>,----[ Quote ]
>| More than 95% of e-mail is junk, be it spam, error messages or
>| viruses, report mail monitoring firms.
>| [...]
>| Further work has shown that most of this junk mail is originating
>| on hijacked home computers.
>| E-mail security firm Return Path said 99% of the computers it monitors
>| that send mail have been taken over by spammers or virus writers.
>                http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/5219554.stm
>The Internet is doomed unless something gets changed. I actually wrote about
>it 2 days ago, in case you are interested and have some spare time.
>I'm sorry to sound so bitter, but the state of the Net is extrely miserable.
>Even Google has come to Microsoft's rescue, ironically enough...
>Google puts up 'Beware of malware' signs
>,----[ Quote ]
>| Google has started warning people when search results could potentially
>| lead them to malicious code.
>And Windows Vista might be even worse. Appended is a list that backs this
>statement, FWIW:

snip much vista stuff.

>Much like that vapourware that Microsoft calls Windows Vista. They called it
>the "most secure O/S ever"

That's Marketing doing their job.

> and it's already being cracked on a weekly basis.

and that's R&D failing in theirs. we live in a consumer society where
work has to be continually reinvented. These are the consequences,
nothing can ever really work, because if it did lots of people would
be out of work. 

>It's not even known when it'll be released. Guesses point at a premature
>release in March or April. The high hardware requirements are good news to
>spammers. Greater brute force for targetted attacks.

All in all I'm glad I'm still with 98SE.



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index