Slashdot Mirror


Stopping Spambots: A Spambot Trap

Neil Gunton writes "Having been hit by a load of spambots on my community site, I decided to write a Spambot Trap which uses Linux, Apache, mod_perl, MySQL, ipchains and Embperl to quickly block spambots that fall into the trap. "

52 of 304 comments (clear)

  1. Elements of good design I'd missed by Dark+Paladin · · Score: 4, Informative

    Looking at my Day Job and personal web site, other than the very cool technical achievement of the trap (I'll have to see if I can rewrite this for my Checkpoint FW system), there were one things I learned about good design from this article:

    Eliminate mailto - makes sense. You should have an http based "send me a message system" - force a live person to type stuff in instead of letting a program pick out addresses.

    Eliminating mailto alone would probably help in mot of my spam problems (as I have my "contact me" address right on the first page).

    1. Re:Elements of good design I'd missed by hagardtroll · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I put my email address in a jpeg image. Haven't found a spambot yet that can decipher that.

    2. Re:Elements of good design I'd missed by carm$y$ · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Eliminating mailto alone would probably help in mot of my spam problems

      You're 100% right. And fighting against spambots by relying on UserAgent is akin to... well.... security thru obscurity, albeit somehow in reverse.

      What also looks strange is that he doesn't consider that one can get a link directly to a page on the n-th level: as human browsers don't usually download robots.txt either, sounds like he's gonna ban some poor guys who got a link from a friend...

      --
      -- No sig today
    3. Re:Elements of good design I'd missed by Technician · · Score: 3, Informative

      I like the way geocaching.com handles the problem. To email a user, you have to click on a link containing the user profile. A link in the profile provides a contact user option which provides a form to fill out - if you are also a regisered user of the site. If you are not a user of the site, then you are prompted to log in or become a user. If you are a user and contacting another user, there is a checkbox when if checked will also send your real address to the user you are contacting so then with his permission, contact may be made via regular mail. This is useful for sending graphics and attachments. The best part is your address is not given out unless you specificaly permit it on a case by case basis. I love it.

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
  2. Slashbot by Ctrl-Z · · Score: 3, Funny


    "I have a truly marvelous demonstration of this proposition which this bandwidth is too narrow to transmit."

    --
    www.timcoleman.com is a total waste of your time. Never go there.
  3. Block? Are you kidding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Why on Earth would you like to block a spambot? So it doesn't get any more useful addresses?
    No way, man.
    If you realize you're serving to a bot, go on serving. Each time the bot follows the "next page" link, you /give/ it a next page. With a nicely formatted word1word2num1num2@word1word2.com, where words and nums are random.
    Give it thousands, millions of addresses this way.

  4. Re:/.ed by HiQ · · Score: 3, Funny

    The dude fell in his own trap. :-D

  5. How I track spammers using PHP by Elkman · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I did something rather low-tech: I created a "Contact Us" page on my web server that has an automatically-generated address at the bottom. It says, "Note: The address spamtest.1018617636@example.com is not a valid contact address. It's just here to catch spammers." The number is actually the current UNIX timestamp, so I know exactly who grabbed this mail address and sent me mail.

    As it turns out, I really haven't received that much mail to this address. About the only mail I've ever received to it is someone from trafficmagnet.net, who tells me that I'm not listed on a few search engines and that I can pay them to have my site listed. I need to send her a nasty reply saying that I don't care about being listed on Bob's Pay-Per-Click Search Engine, and that if she had actually read the page, she would have noticed that she was sending mail to an invalid address. Besides, the web server is for my inline skate club and we don't have a $10/month budget to pay for search engine placement.

    I think I've received more spam from my Usenet posting history, from my other web site, and from my WHOIS registrations than I've received from the skate club web site.

  6. Hammered already.... by cswiii · · Score: 5, Funny

    From the website:
    The Problem: Spambots Ate My Website

    s/Spambots/Slashdot/

  7. re: spidertrap by blibbleblobble · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My PHP spider-trap - See an infinity of email addresses and links in action!

  8. removing mailto: a bad solution by bluGill · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Removing mailto: links is a bad solution to the problem. It might be the only solution, but it is bad.

    I hate the editor in my web browser. No spell check (and a quick read of this message will prove who diasterious that is to me), not good editing ability, and other problems. By contrast my email client has an excellent editor, and a spell checker. Let me pull up a real mail client when I want to send email, please!

    In addition, I want people to contact me, and not everyone is computer literate. I hang out in antique iron groups, I expect people there to be up on the latest in hot tube ignition technology, not computer technology. To many of them computers are just a tool, and they don't have time to learn all the tricks to make it work, they just learn enough to make it do what they want, and then ignore the rest. Clicking on a mailto: link is easy and does the right thing. Opening up a mail client, and typing in some address is error prone at best.

    Removing mailto: links might be the only solution, but I hope not. So I make sure to regualrly use spamcop.

  9. Re:Block? Are you kidding? by f3lix · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This isn't such a good idea - for every random (non-existent) domain that you generate, a root DNS server will be queried when an email is sent to this address, which increases the load on the root servers, which is generally a bad thing. How about instead, returning pages with the email address abuse@domain-that-spambot-is-coming-from all over them...

  10. Similar to how the new ORBZ works? by Masem · · Score: 4, Interesting

    After the Battle Creek incident with ORBZ, the maintain changed the way it worked; instead of being pro-active on checking for open relays, he now has a 'honeypot' like system where a unique email address that isn't directly visible on the site but still may be harvested by a spam bot. Any server that sends email to that address is automatically added to The List. Mail server admins that believe that they should not be on this list can argue their case to remove their server.

    --
    "Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
    "I can see my house from here!" - ST:
    1. Re:Similar to how the new ORBZ works? by toupsie · · Score: 4, Interesting
      he now has a 'honeypot' like system where a unique email address that isn't directly visible on the site but still may be harvested by a spam bot. Any server that sends email to that address is automatically added to

      This is the same method I have been using for a while. I have an e-mail account called "cannedham" that I had posted on several web sites as a mailto: anchor on a 1x1 pixel graphic. Any e-mail sent to that address updates my Postfix header_checks file to protect the rest of my accounts. It works like a charm.

      --
      Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
  11. Take a look in the mirror by Spackler · · Score: 5, Informative
  12. A tip by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's a tip for those of you writing spambot traps... How about not blindly responding to the faked Return-Path address?

    Now that should be illegal. You people whine about your 10 spams a day, try 10,000 from 2000 different email addresses. Idiot postmasters should be caught and jailed.

  13. he suggests formmail, another spam tool by nwc10 · · Score: 5, Informative
    Interestingly within the article he suggests hiding your e-mail addresses by making a feedback page. One of the programs that he suggests is formmail, and he links to Matt's original version.

    formmail itself (even the most recent version) can still be abused by spammers to use your webserver as a bulk mail relay - see the advisory at
    http://www.monkeys.com/anti-spam/formmail-adviso ry . df

    It's a shame he didn't suggest the more robust formmail replacement at nms which is maintained, and attempts to close all the known bugs and insecurities.

  14. Re:Block? Are you kidding? by BlueUnderwear · · Score: 3, Insightful
    At first glance this might be a good idea but this will be resource burden on your system.

    Add a couple of sleep(20); into the cgi script that generates the bot fodder. The bot will still stay busy waiting for your webserver's response, but your script will exactly consume zero resources.

    For additional kicks, set up a DNS teergrube.

    --
    Say no to software patents.
  15. Removing the Mailto: may not be the best plan.. by liquidsin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've found that a lot of people just won't send email if there's not a link to facillitate it. I've become rather fond of using javascript to write the address to the page. Spambots read the source so they don't piece the address together but *most* browsers will still do it right. Just use something like:

    <script>document.write("<A CLASS=\"link\" HREF=\"mailto: " + "myname" + String.FromCharCode(64) + "mydomain"</script>

    Seems to work fine. Anyone know of any reason it shouldn't, or have any other way to keep down spam without totally removing the Mailto: ? I know this won't work with *every* browser, but it beats totally removing mail links. And I don't think spammers can get it without having a human actually look at the page...

    --
    do not read this line twice.
    1. Re:Removing the Mailto: may not be the best plan.. by liquidsin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      hell, go one step further:

      <img src="myemailaddress.jpg" alt="me at domain dot com">

      that way people who use browsers that speak (ie. the blind) would still hear your address correctly, so long as spambots don't start to pick up on the spelling out of "at" and "dot".

      --
      do not read this line twice.
    2. Re:Removing the Mailto: may not be the best plan.. by e_n_d_o · · Score: 3, Interesting

      On my company's Web site we've had success with this technique. The addresses posted on the Web site have not received any significant amount of spam. I have yet to see a single spam message that hits all four of the addresses on our contact page at once, which I believe would be a likely indicator we've been hit by a spambot.

      We embed this JavaScript code on each page that needs mailtos:

      <script type="text/javascript" language="JavaScript1.3">
      // Anti e-mail address harvester script.
      function n_mail(n_user) {
      self.location = "mailto:" + n_user + "@" + "yourdomain" + "." + "com";
      }
      </script>

      And then make email address links of this form:

      <a href="javascript:n_mail('foo');">foo<!-- antispam -->@<!-- antispam -->yourdomain<!-- antispam -->.<!-- antispam -->com<!-- antispam --></a>

      Our addresses even show up correctly in lynx, but are "clickable" only in JavaScript-enabled browsers.

      Of course, it's probably only a matter of time before spambots can compensate for this code. A more secure approach would be to put email addresses "components" in borderless cells of tables, or as a previous poster suggested, in images.

  16. Similar setup without SQL requirements by bero-rh · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My setup (catches some of the more commonly used spambots) uses mod_rewrite to send spammers to a trap.
    Setup details at http://www.bero.org/NoSpam/isp.php

    --
    This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
  17. Another way to stop spambots by PanBanger · · Score: 3, Funny

    Have your page linked on slashdot! Page gets slashdotted, problem solved.

  18. Simple solution! by Balinares · · Score: 3

    1) Put a link such as: mailto:dedicatedaddress@wherever.com?Subject= [Question] About your site (or whatever)
    2) Trash any email sent to dedicatedaddress that doesn't have the [Question] tag in the subject.

    Hope this helps.

    --

    -- B.
    This sig does in fact not have the property it claims not to have.
    1. Re:Simple solution! by c=sixty4 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      1. Put a link such as: mailto:dedicatedaddress@wherever.com?Subject= [Question] About your site (or whatever)
      2. Trash any email sent to dedicatedaddress that doesn't have the [Question] tag in the subject.
      Congratulations. You just ensured you can't be emailed by anyone not running Internet Explorer.
      --
      "The good die first." "Most of us are morally ambiguous, which explains our random dying patterns." --- MST3K
    2. Re:Simple solution! by fanatic · · Score: 3, Informative

      Congratulations. You just ensured you can't be emailed by anyone not running Internet Explorer.

      This seems to work fine (the window comes upo with the right email address in the to: line and the '[Question]' tag in the subject: line) in Netscape 4.76

      and Lynx Version 2.8.3rel.1

      and Mozilla 0.9.7, which implies Netscape 6.x, and Galeon will work as well, though I haven't tested these.

      --
      "that's not encryption - it's a new perl script that I'm working on..." - from some Matrix parody
  19. Re:Block? Are you kidding? by BlueUnderwear · · Score: 5, Funny
    - for every random (non-existent) domain that you generate, a root DNS server will be queried when an email is sent to this address, which increases the load on the root servers, which is generally a bad thing.

    Why is this a bad thing? They are owned by Verisign.

    How about instead, returning pages with the email address abuse@domain-that-spambot-is-coming-from all over them...

    This is also a good idea. In fact, I have a script which does a traceroute to the IP of the bot, and then looks up the admin contact using whois for the last couple of hops, and returns these. Oh, and for additional fun, throw in a couple of addresses of especially loved "friends"...

    --
    Say no to software patents.
  20. A better solution: obfuscate the mailto: link by rsidd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Write some of your email address using html code for the ascii characters, like &#36 &#35 114 for "r".
    (Yes, I've posted about this before, but it does work for me.) Browsers render it so users get the address they want, but spambots try to grab it from the raw html and get something meaningless.

    1. Re:A better solution: obfuscate the mailto: link by Sangui5 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Some spambots will render that correctly. Less likely, though, is if they'll render an email that has had this done to it: it's encrypted through javascript.

      It is a rather impressive piece of work. Uses honest-to-god RSA.

      You could also encrypt all email addresses, and then in your spambot trap, put really really CPU intensive javascript. You'll win either way: either the spambot doesn't do javascript, and it won't get your addresses, or it does do javascript, and they've just spent an eternity wasting time. It would work the same way as a tarpit, but it wouldn't eat nearly so many resources on your end.

      If you're really clever, you could have the javascript do useful work, and then have the results of that work encoded into links in the page. You could then retrieve the results when the spider follows the link.

      There was an idea called hashcash floating arount a while back. The idea was that an SMPT server would refuse to deliver email if the sender didn't provide a hash collsion of so many bits to some given value. The sender has to expend way assymetrically more resources to generate the collision than it takes the reciever to check it. That way on can impose a cost on sending a lot of email. It's not so much to be a burden on ordinary users, but if you need to send thousands of emails, it will add up.

  21. Re:Block? Are you kidding? by cperciva · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Add a couple of sleep(20); into the cgi script that generates the bot fodder. The bot will still stay busy waiting for your webserver's response, but your script will exactly consume zero resources.

    Zero resources, except for memory.

    A much better solution would be to point the bot at a set of "servers" with IP addresses where you're running a stateless tarpit.

  22. my spambot trap by romco · · Score: 4, Informative

    The page is already slashdoted. Here is a little
    script that traps bots (and others) that use your robots.txt
    to find directories to look through. Requires an .htaccess file with mod_rewrite turned on

    robots.txt
    #################

    User-agent: *

    Disallow: /dont_go_here
    Disallow: /images
    Disallow: /cgi-bin

    dont_go_here/index.php
    ############

    $now = date ("h:ia m/d/Y");
    $IP=getenv(REMOTE_ADDR);
    $host=getenv(R EMOTE_HOST);
    $your_email_address=you@whatever;

    $ban_code =
    "\n".
    '# '."$host banned $now\n".
    'RewriteCond %{REMOTE_ADDR} ^'."$IP\n".
    'RewriteRule ^.*$ denied.html [L]'."\n\n";

    $fp = fopen ("/path/to/.htaccess", "a");
    fwrite($fp, $ban_code);
    fclose ($fp);

    mail("$your_email_address", "Spambot Whacked!", "$host banned $now\n");

    --
    AdFuel
  23. Re:Block? Are you kidding? by Ralp · · Score: 3, Informative
    Wpoison does this.

    From the website: Wpoison is a free tool that can be used to help reduce the problem of bulk junk e-mail on the Internet in general, and at sites using Wpoison in particular.

    It solves the problems of trapped spambots sucking up massive bandwidth/CPU time, as well as sparing legitimate spiders (say, google) from severe confusion.

  24. Re:Block? Are you kidding? by gclef · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Actually, I've done this w/a bot trap on my site at home. It's a perl script that generates a bunch of weird-sounding text w/some fake email addresses at the bottom and a bunch of database-query-looking links back to the original page.

    The bots don't fall for it anymore. Some dorks in Washington state decided to make a couple requests a second to it once, but in the two years I've had it up, they're the only ones.

  25. Other options.. by primetyme · · Score: 4, Informative

    A pretty good article, but being able to install modules into Apache may not be the best situation for everyone who wants to stop Spambots..

    Shameless plug, but I've got an ongoing series in the Apache section of /. that deals with easy ways that administrators *and* regular users can keep Spambots off their sites:
    Stopping Spambots with Apache
    and
    Stopping Spambots II - The Admin Strikes Back

    Just some more options and choices to help people out!

  26. Re:Block? Are you kidding? by boky · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I agree. And, come on, how much technology do you need?

    This is my solution to stopping spambots. It's in a JavaServlet technology and I am posting it here to prevent my company's site from being slashdotted. It does not prevent the spammer from harvesting emails it just slows them down.... a lot :) If everyone had a script like this, spambots would be unusable.

    Feel free to use the code in anyway you please (LGPL like and stuff)

    Put robots.txt in your root folder. Content:

    User-agent: *
    Disallow: /members/

    Put StopSpammersServlet.java in WEB-INF/classes/com/parsek/util:

    package com.parsek.util;
    // Slashdot lameness filter trick... sklj lijef oiwej goweignm lkjhg woeèi weoij woefh woegih weoigj woefm weoikjf woeifh woefhpweifjwopejf pw
    // Slashdot lameness filter trick... flk joweij pgwej pweof ,mpeof ,mpweorj pweomfwpegj pwehg woeigh owèefij woeij eogih oibhwepoi upeorw wpeo
    // Slashdot lameness filter trick... fkjew fiwje spbojkwe gkwpeori wpbv-j wpeofksweok pweorjsw eigjhwoeifj pweorj wepoj wepfomwe fpmwoe fpowe
    // Slashdot lameness filter trick... epoiw epw0 w'pg wpoe wpeom, wpog wepfoiwpeor kwpeof, wpobm wepofkwpeofk wopvf,w bowkpeoirf pwoef,mwepof p
    // Slashdot lameness filter trick... vlwkepo wesp ibebemwf èsdm fèefo.bp kwèpef èlfk èeofsw èegjwegoweofiw peok èglks dgèlksdfèokwe ofèkwe èfoe
    import java.io.File;
    import java.io.StringWriter;
    import javax.servlet.ServletContext;
    import java.net.URL;
    import java.util.Enumeration;
    import java.lang.reflect.Array;
    public class StopSpammersServlet extends javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet {
    private static String[] names = { "root", "webmaster", "postmaster", "abuse", "abuse", "abuse", "bill", "john", "jane", "richard", "billy", "mike", "michelle", "george", "michael", "britney" };
    private static String[] lasts = { "gates", "crystal", "fonda", "gere", "crystal", "scheffield", "douglas", "spears", "greene", "walker", "bush", "harisson" };
    private String[] endns = new String[7];
    private static long getNumberOfShashes(String path) {
    int i = 1;
    java.util.StringTokenizer st = new java.util.StringTokenizer(path, "/");
    while(st.hasMoreTokens()) { i++; st.nextToken(); }
    return(i);
    }
    // Respond to HTTP GET requests from browsers.
    public void doGet (javax.servlet.http.HttpServletRequest request,
    javax.servlet.http.HttpServletResponse response)
    throws javax.servlet.ServletException, java.io.IOException {
    // Set content type for HTML.
    response.setContentType("text/html; charset=UTF-8");
    // Output goes to the response PrintWriter.
    java.io.PrintWriter out = response.getWriter();
    try {
    ServletContext servletContext = getServletContext();
    endns[0] = "localhost";
    endns[1] = "127.0.0.1";
    endns[2] = "2130706433";
    endns[3] = "fbi.gov";
    endns[4] = "whitehouse.gov";
    endns[5] = request.getRemoteAddr();
    endns[6] = request.getRemoteHost();
    String query = request.getQueryString();
    String path = request.getPathInfo();
    out.println("<html>");
    out.println("<head>");
    out.println("<title>Members area</title>");
    out.println("</head>");
    out.println("<body>");
    out.println("<p>Hello random visitor. There is a big chance you are a robot collecting mail addresses and have no place being here.");
    out.println("Therefore you will get some random generated email addresses and some random links to follow endlessly.</p>");
    out.println("<p>Please be aware that your IP has been logged and will be reported to proper authorities if required.</p>");
    out.println("<p>Also note that browsing through the tree will get slower and slower and gradually stop you from spidering other sites.</p>");
    response.flushBuffer();
    long sleepTime = (long) Math.pow(3, getNumberOfShashes(path));

    do {
    String name = names[ (int) (Math.random() * Array.getLength(names)) ];
    String last = lasts[ (int) (Math.random() * Array.getLength(lasts)) ];
    String endn = endns[ (int) (Math.random() * Array.getLength(endns)) ];
    String email= "";

    double a = Math.random() * 15;
    if(a if(a if(a if(a if(a if(a if(a if(a if(a if(a if(a if(a if(a email = email + "@" + endn;

    out.print("<a href=\"mailto:" + email + "\">" + email + "</a><br>");
    response.flushBuffer();

    Thread.sleep(sleepTime);

    } while (Math.random()
    out.print("<br>");
    do {
    int a = (int) (Math.random() * 1000);
    out.print("<a href=\"" + a + "/\">" + a + "</a> ");
    Thread.sleep(sleepTime);
    response.flushBuffer();
    } while (Math.random() out.println("</body>");
    out.println("</html>");

    } catch (Exception e) {
    // If an Exception occurs, return the error to the client.
    out.write("<pre>");
    out.write(e.getMessage());
    e.printStackTrace(out);
    out.write("</pre>");
    }
    // Close the PrintWriter.
    out.close();
    }
    }

    Put this in your WEB-INF/web.xml

    <servlet>
    <servlet-name>stopSpammers</servlet-name& gt;
    <servlet-class>com.parsek.util.StopSpammersS ervlet</servlet-class>
    </servlet>
    <servlet-mapping>
    <servlet-name>stopSpammers</servlet-name& gt;
    <url-pattern>/members/*</url-pattern>
    </servlet-mapping>

    Here you go. No PHP, no APache, no mySQL, no Perl, just one servlet container.

    Ciao

    --
    boky
  27. Re:Block? Are you kidding? by richie2000 · · Score: 3, Informative
    Wpoison basically does that; it serves a page with bogus addresses and adds a nasty delay between pages, keeping the spider occupied.

    However, the instructions for installating Wpoison more or less assumes that one has a single website to protect. I have around 20 virtual hosts. So instead of creating a renamed cgi-bin in every DocumentRoot, I added a single

    ScriptAlias /runme/ "/var/www/cgi-bin/"

    to httpd.conf and then linked it like this:

    <A HREF="/runme/addresses.ext"><IMG SRC="pixel.gif" BORDER=0></A>

    I also added a single transparent pixel to the link to keep it invisible but still fool the spiders. Add the runme directory as excluded in the robots.txt and you should be on your way. Muhahahah, and so on.

    --
    Money for nothing, pix for free
  28. Take this one step further... by Jason+Levine · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There's a spam-blacklist, so how about a spambot-blacklist?

    You'd have a standardized spambot trap (like the one described in the article) on various webservers. The new spambot info could go into a "New SpamBots" database (which wouldn't be blocked). Once a day, the webserver would connect up with a central database and submit the new spambot info it's obtained. Then the server would download a mirror of the updated "SpamBots" database which it would use to block spambots.

    The centralized SpamBots database would take all of the new SpamBot info every day and analyze them in some manner as to detect abuse of the system (ensuring that only true spambots are entered). E-mails could be fired off to the abuse/postmaster/webmaster for the offending IP address. Finally, the new SpamBot info would be integrated into the regular SpamBot database.

    This way you'd be able to quickly limit the effectiveness of the Spambot-traps across many websites.

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  29. Re:Block? Are you kidding? by blibbleblobble · · Score: 3, Funny

    Especially loved "friends"...

    Like hotline@mpaa.org, cdreward@riaa.org, senator@hollings.senate.gov for example?

  30. Attn Spambot Authors by NiftyNews · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Dear Spambot Authors,

    Thanks again for your interest. I hope that we were able to help you write the spambots of the future that will be able to detect and sidestep as many of the above protection schemes as possible. We tried to work all of our knowledge into one convienient thread for your development team to peruse.

    Thanks for your interest in SlashDot, home of too much information.

  31. Re:Block? Are you kidding? by dirk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why on Earth would you like to block a spambot? So it doesn't get any more useful addresses?
    No way, man.
    If you realize you're serving to a bot, go on serving. Each time the bot follows the "next page" link, you /give/ it a next page. With a nicely formatted word1word2num1num2@word1word2.com, where words and nums are random.
    Give it thousands, millions of addresses this way.

    This would be good to do with known bad addresses, but random addresses only add more unknowing people to the list. You may add 1000 email addresses to the list and slow them down, but if even 10 of those email addresses are real, you've added to the problem. The bad addresses will be taken out as they are found to be bad, and the good ones will be left in. You've signed JoeRandomUser@RandomDomain.com up for all the spam he can handle, even if he has taken great lengths to keep his email address off the spam lists. In theory this sounds like a great idea, until your the guy getting your email address randomly fed to the bots.

    --

    "Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
  32. What I use by Phroggy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Take a look at these two bits of code from http://www.slickhosting.com/contact.shtml :

    <A HREF="mailto:hosting%40slickhosting.com"
    onMouseO ver="window.status='mailto:hostingsli ckhosting.com';return true;"
    onMouseOut="window.status='';">hostingslic khosting.com</A>

    <!-- Spam trap
    abuse@
    (your domain) HREF="mailto:abuse@ (your domain) "
    root@
    (your domain) HREF="mailto:root@ (your domain) "
    postmaster@
    (your domain) HREF="mailto:postmaster@ (your domain) "
    uce@ftc.gov HREF="mailto:uce@ftc.gov"
    -->

    --
    $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
    $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
  33. Re:Block? Are you kidding? by LinuxHam · · Score: 3, Interesting

    postmaster@127.0.0.1 and abuse]@127.0.0.1postmaster@127.0.0.1 and abuse@127.0.0.1

    Good idea but, I'm sure spam software has been rejecting 127.0.0.1 for many years.

    How about a few people volunteering real FQDNs that all resolve to 127.0.0.1? I realize that people would be volunteering horsepower and bandwidth for DNS lookups, but it would be in the name of dramatically reducing spam. Then, keep a list of all the "loopback FQDN's" and let the rest of us feed those FQDN's into spam-trap generators. Eventually, there would be so many real-looking spam trap email addresses that the spam software wouldn't be able to keep up with the list of loopback FQDN's.

    To take it to the next level, you could hide the list of "loopback FQDN's" by making a reverse DNS lookup against a couple of volunteered IP addresses return a random FQDN from the list of loopback FQDN's at the time that the spamtrap page is dynamically generated.

    Spammers would never know the entire list of FQDN's that resolve to loopback.

    --
    Intelligent Life on Earth
  34. Re:Block? Are you kidding? by erc · · Score: 4, Informative

    Way too much work. Here's similar Escapade [escapade.org] code:

    <QUIET ON>
    <html><head><title>Members area</title></head><body>
    <p>Hello random visitor. There is a big chance you are a robot collecting mail
    addresses and have no place being here.
    Therefore you will get some random generated email addresses and some random links
    to follow endlessly.</p>
    <p>Please be aware that your IP has been logged and will be reported to proper
    authorities if required.</p>
    <DBOPEN "SpamFood", "localhost", "login", "password">
    <FOR I=1 TO 100 STEP 1>
    <SQL select * from names order by rand() limit 1>
    <LET FN="$Name">
    </SQL>
    <SQL select * from lasts order by rand() limit 1>
    <LET LN="$Last">
    </SQL>
    <SQL select * from addresses order by rand() limit 1>
    <LET AD="$Address">
    </SQL>
    <a href="mailto:$FN.$LN@$AD">$FN.$LN@$AD</a> <br>
    </FOR>
    </body>
    </html>

    --
    -- Ed Carp, N7EKG erc@pobox.com PGP KeyID: 0x0BD32C9B What I'm up to: http://intuitives.mine.nu
  35. Don't stop spambots, feed them with Sugarplum by dananderson · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I don't stop spambots, I feed them. I feed them phony email addresses and addresses of spammers (gathered from places such as my fake /cgi-bin/formmail.pl). I use http://www.devin.com/sugarplum/, mentioned before on /. to dish it out!

  36. Problem with wpoison... by wideangle · · Score: 3, Informative

    is that some of the fake emails it generates will be real.

  37. the danger of mailing lists.. esp. SuSE user list by SethJohnson · · Score: 3, Informative


    Another way your e-mail address can be susceptible to spambots is if you participate in any mailing list. If the administrator decides to archive the list on a website, in many cases the email addresses of the participants will be there in plain text. I found this out after doing a google search for my own email address and having it turn up on the SuSE web site. I sent an e-mail asking that they do a regsub on the archive to substitute the '@' with [at] or something similar. That was more than six months ago and the SuSE website admin still hasn't done it.
  38. New Program - Mailwasher by Peale · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Speaking of spam, I've come across this new program called mailwasher. You can check your mail while it's still on the server, and then - get this - fake a bounced message. There are probably other programs that do this, but this is the first one I've heard of.

    Anyway, AFAIK, it's WinBlows only, and available at http://www.mailwasher.com, although right now it seems the site is down, all I get is a 404!

  39. Here's a Javascript that writes mailto: links... by Artifice_Eternity · · Score: 3, Informative

    ...so that you can leave them out of your HTML source:

    http://artificeeternity.com/includes/linkwrite.j s

    Instructions for use are included in comments. The script fragment that replaces mailto: links in the page will actually shorten your code -- it only requires entering the username and domain once. Also, the @ sign is added in by the script, so the address itself never appears in your HTML.

  40. Re:Block? Are you kidding? by slamb · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Way too much work. Here's similar Escapade [escapade.org] code:

    Not similar enough. That makes 300 queries per hit against your database, and I don't think you even used prepared statements. His code slowed their software to a crawl by sleeping. Yours will slow your software to a crawl by excessive database traffic.

  41. http://www.mailwasher.net/ by jasonk3 · · Score: 3, Informative
  42. Better Addresses To Feed Spiders by billstewart · · Score: 3, Informative
    I've posted a separate article about fun tricks with round-robin DNS to feed spammers FQDNs that resolve to open relays, which will forward to other open relays. And if you know machines running Teergrubes, they're excellent addresses to feed spiders.*

    If you're not messing with DNS, though, there are lots of addresses that can cause trouble:

    • sales@spammerdomain.com, where the domain may be your spammer (if you customize your spidertrap) or a random spammer. They'll probably reject abuse@ and other obvious administrators, but names like "sales" and "purchasing" and "marketing" and anything that might get a real user is good.
    • randomjunkuser@spammerdomain.com. If they're not verifying the list before using it, this is good.
    • randomjunkuser@randomjunksubdomain.spammerdomain .c om
    • randomjunkuser@spamhausdomain.com, at some site that encourages spammer customers.
    • randomjunkuser@randomjunksubdomain.spammers-ISP. ne t - does the spammer's ISP check for bad DNS hits?
    • randomjunkuser@othercustomer-of-spammers-hosting -I SP.net. Your mission is to get the spammer's ISP to throw off the spammer. If you want to be much ruder, you can use real-presidents-name@othercustomer-of-spammers-hos ting-ISP.net .but both of those attacks require more customization to hit spammers you're having ongoing problems with, as opposed to shotgunning them all.
    • unsubscribeme-address@unsubscribemedomain.com - anything not immediately recognizable as "remove@". Give some other spammer's list builder a bunch of addresses to work with.
    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  43. Teergrubes and other traps for spammers by billstewart · · Score: 3, Informative
    Teergrubes are tarpits to stick spammers in. They look like perfectly correct SMTP servers, e.x.c.e.p.t. t.h.e.y. a.n.s.w.e.r. v..e..r..y.. s..l..o..w..l..y.. and maybe generate lots of error messages requiring repetition, and basically they leave the spammer's machine tied up for a long time with very little effort. A legitimate mailing list server that encounters a teergrube will normally survive, because it's usually multithreaded, or at least has almost all its recipients as legitimate users, but an occasional few minutes of one thread stuck in a trap isn't a major problem. But a spammer who's encountering a large number of teergrubes (especially if he picked them all up at once from a spidertrap) will have lots of threads tied up for a long time and may not have enough spare capacity to bother real targets. There are a number of implementations around.

    And somewhere out there is a far nastier variant on a teergrube that can keep a typical smtp session up for hours with only a few kilobits/minute, using tricks like setting TCP windows very small, NAKing lots of packets so TCP retransmits them, etc. (It basically works by saying "No, SMTP/TCP/IP isn't a set of protocol drivers in my Linux kernel, it's a definition of a set of messages and there's no reason I should user a bunch of well-tuned efficient reliable kernel routines when I can send raw IP packets myself designed for maximal ugliness."

    • Spamido is an automated tool for collecting spammers' addresses so they can be fed back to other spammers.
    • Wpoison and Sugarplum are spidertraps that generate lots of fake addresses for a long time.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks