Slashdot Mirror


Another Millionaire Spammer Story

An anonymous reader writes "Here's another story about a millionaire spammer who thinks he is doing nothing wrong and can't wait to get his hands on the next generation of spamming software." See also the last installment.

21 of 859 comments (clear)

  1. Re:All spammers by sketerpot · · Score: 5, Insightful
    They are disruptive in many of the same ways. They take advantage of other people's resources, and naive users are the ones who keep both going.

    They cause people to distrust each other. I am very cautious about giving a web site my email address for fear that it will be abused.

    They both make email less pleasant.

    Their creators all seem to be unremorseful. If only we could send viruses and trojans to them all.

  2. More of the same... by Cap'n+Canuck · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yet Another Spammer Story, as if we haven't heard enough.

    I recently saw the "Bart gets a job as a bartender for the Mob" episode. The episode ended with
    Bart: "I realize now that crime doesn't pay"
    Fat Tony: "Yeah, I guess you're right"
    At which point Fat Tony and his entourage leave in several strech limos.

    The only point of posting stories like these seems to be:
    1) enraging /. readers to a frenzy
    2) proving that crime DOES pay.

    Why bother?

    1. Re:More of the same... by SecurityGuy · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Why bother?


      Truth, maybe? I don't like it, but it seems useful to know the old line "Spamming doesn't work" isn't true. It provides motivation to find a true solution to the problem. Spamming *does* pay, but as a phenominal pain in the tail, we should look for ways to make it uneconomical.
    2. Re:More of the same... by mattdm · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Note that he isn't making money off of spam directly -- he's making money by sending spam for other people. There's no indication that it's actually working for those people.

  3. Right... by skirch · · Score: 5, Insightful
    "I'll never quit," said the 57-year-old master of spam. "I like what I do. This is the greatest business in the world."

    I like what I do, even though I have to hide from everyone, use unlisted numbers, and pretend like it's not bothering anyone. It's truly the greatest business in the world. And the dog feces that keep coming in the mail don't bother me that much, either.

  4. It will continue as long as it works... by bwalling · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As much as everyone complains about spam, it's not going anywhere. The reason? It works. It's the same problem that all of the new invasive advertising (ads superimposed on football fields during games, etc) has.

    As much as everyone complains about it, there are sufficient people who respond to the advertising and buy the products. As long as that happens, spam will continue.

    1. Re:It will continue as long as it works... by wass · · Score: 4, Insightful
      That's why sane people should try avoiding all offers by spam mail, telemarketers, etc. A few weeks ago my girlfriend and I were thinking about getting dsl and cable tv to set up in our new house, and we got a telemarketer call us about an obscure provider (i forget if it was cable or dsl). She thought the offer sounded reasonable, and was thinking of following up on it (by calling them back at some other number of course, only give your info if you call them, never if they call you). But I adamantly refused to go along with any offer of spam/telemarketing.

      I have a feeling that if we ever bought a product from a telemarketer, we'd be put on the 'sucker' list and get bombarded with even more telemarketing. Maybe same thing with spam, if they could somehow track my purchase to my email address (harder than with telemarketers).

      Of course, as it is now, telemarketers already establish your pattern of when you're in the house by when you answer the phone. Do you semi-regularly get phone calls with no one on the other line? Large chance that is usually a telemarketing autodialer. Maybe with a telemarketer to be eventually connected to you (have you noticed the few second delay before you get them online?), or maybe it's just the autodialer. There was a point last year where I was studying and didn't feel like getting the phone, and the thin literally rang once every 10 minutes, for over an hour and a half! Of course, my girlfriend's caller ID showed the standard 'out of area'.

      Well, enough rambling, but I refuse to EVER buy from a spammer or telemarketer, no matter how good the deals seem to be.

      --

      make world, not war

  5. Good to know he has money... by xchino · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I hope the bastard slips up and get his ass sued off. Or better yet his customers get sued. This guy is a millionaire because spam works for companies who sell this crap and pay him to spam us with it. I imagine I'd have a hard time selling pills to enlarge your penis or free xxx pornsite passwords door to door. In fact I'd probably be arrested, especially after I tried to make the sale to a minor who answered the door. I don't see how e-mail should be any different.

    --
    Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It's just that yours is stupid.
  6. Is he *trying* to get arrested again? by drew_kime · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Ralsky, meanwhile, is looking at new technology. Recently he's been talking to two computer programmers in Romania who have developed what could be called stealth spam.

    It is intricate computer software, said Ralsky, that can detect computers that are online and then be programmed to flash them a pop-up ad, much like the kind that display whenever a particular Web site is opened.

    "This is even better," he said. "You don't have to be on a Web site at all. You can just have your computer on, connected to the Internet, reading e-mail or just idling and, bam, this program detects your presence and up pops the message on your screen, past firewalls, past anti-spam programs, past anything.

    "Isn't technology great?"

    First of all no, this is not great. Second, as soon as he talks about intentionally bypassing a firewall, I start thinking that that sounds suspiciously like "circumventing an access control" which, I believe, is no longer legal.
    --
    Nope, no sig
  7. Expensive House != Net Worth by asv108 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Just because someone has an expensive house or drives a nice car, doesn't mean they have a net worth of a million dollars. One can have very little in the way of assets but can still get mortgages and auto loans. Generally, people who emphasize how much their possessions cost, are the type of people who bought everything on credit. Considering this guy has filed for personal bankruptcy before, he is probably highly leveraged.

    Spam is obviously a profitable activity and the writer of the article is trying to emphasize the "millionaire" aspect, but I doubt this guy is a true millionaire.

  8. Re:I'd like to see if this is *really* possible! by b1t+r0t · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Firstly, can anyone envision what could possibly do this? Does your browser have to be trojoned to accomplish this feat? Could it be an IE-only kind of design bug?

    All you need is a certain popular insecure operating system, which has this "feature" turned on by default, so you can see when your network print job finishes, etc.

    This is one of the many wonderful reasons why I run OS X and Linux at home.

    --

    --
    "Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
    "Open source is evil." - Microsoft
  9. I've decided SPAM isn't that bad... by airrage · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm starting to think real hard about Spam. Inspired, much to my chagrin, by the recent articles concerning AOLs CD spamming campaign. I firmly believe when we wipe ourselves from this rock, and our ruined civilization is discovered, that alien archeologists will assume that an AOL CD is a religious artifact. But I keep thinking about this article, trying to determine why am I really angry. Partly, I'm upset because this person is making alot of money while I'm at work. Partly it's jealousy. I'm conflicted, that hell yes, if you can make 200K+ a year spamming then count me in; and yet, I've been on the net for a while now, before it got really popular, and I also have some of that old code of ethics with me.

    But at least I have to hand it to this person, at least he's got some morals, or so he says. And at least Spam is environmentally friendly -- it doesn't affect the groundwater or the air I breathe.

    And that's a big point. It reminds me that yes, it's upsetting, but at least it's not a lingering mess, environmentally. It's not a SuperFund site.

    I'm reminded of Air-Mail delivery in this country. Airplanes were paid by the pound for mail, so more often than not, they would stuff the US mail bags with rocks to make more money. That's the essence of the point: we realize that there is money to be made in bulk. Pay by the pound, all-you-can-eat, spam-o-rama, and hope that just one sucker is out there.

    The other point this article brings to light for me is the fact that, for the most part, we humans are actually brighter than I thought. The spam rate is horrendous. Something like 2 in a big-freaking-number. So Spam is casting a very wide net to catch a few sardines. I think that is quite a boost to our combined egos. We aren't as dumb as we behave in traffic.

    I know many will make the point that it's clogging routers, servers, and generally a waste of time, but it's a grey area whether that's hard or soft dollars. What's the cost of one more email?

    But we can change this. Why can't email be like instant messaging where only those on my buddy list can email me. The Spammer would have to guess my email address and some complicated guid to send me email.

    So for me, at least until they change the SMTP/POP RFC to allow for end-user authentication, I'm okay with spam ... and frankly that scares me.

    --
    "This isn't a study in computer science, its a study in human behavior"
  10. spammers and drug cartels... by bje2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "There are probably about 150 major spammers who are responsible for 90 percent of all the spam everyone gets"

    does this remind anyone else of the columbian drug cartels?...sure drugs are everywhere, but a small number of columbian drug cartels are responsible for a large portion of the world's drug traffic...another similarity, we're fighting losing battles against spammers and drugs...we're not making up any ground...

    seriously though, why can't some senator or congressman introduce a tough anti-spam bill...does spammers have a strong political lobby like the NRA or big Tobbacco does?...then again, i guess the result would be the same as in this article, spammers would just move more of their actual operations overseas...oh well...

    --

    "Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true." - Homer Simpson
  11. Re:file trading okay, spam not okay by Quixadhal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nice troll, pretty troll. :)

    Last time I checked, nobody just sent me copyrighted software, music or movies without my permission or request. Maybe spammers should start mass-sending copyrighted materials, then at least we might find something useful taking up all our disk space...

  12. Re:damn spammers by suman28 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When people see that you can buy 8000-sq ft homes, this only encourages others to do the same. He truly is not doing any thing illegal and I think that's where the problem is. Why not write to your congressman/congresswoman and see if you can get legislation passed. That would be more helpful in the long run.

  13. Re:file trading okay, spam not okay by mr.nicholas · · Score: 5, Insightful
    You just don't get it, do you? (Though I might argue whether this is true or not) The reason why file-trading, etc. is accepted here and SPAM is not is because of the intrusiveness of SPAM. You CANNOT get away from it. You cannot stop it. You cannot ID where it is coming from. It's a deluge of mail that you can't prevent from hitting your box (even if you have good anti-spam software, it has to hit your box first).

    File-trading isn't intrusive. That's the difference. If P2P applications FORCED you to receive any file that anyone wanted to send you, then yes, people here would then lump it with SPAM.

    It's not a question of legality, it's a question of access control to your system.

  14. Re:All spammers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How about if everyone in the Detroit area who hates spam would find the guy's address, go to his house, and go up and ring the doorbell. When he answers ask him if he wants to buy something. Strive to make the product annoyingly inane. Make the price exhorbitant so that he can't call your bluff and agree to buy your product. If enough people do this, and they space themselves out, time wise, so that he can just get settled in from answering the door before the next ring of the doorbell, the annoyance level can be maximized. Best of all, it roughly duplicates the annoyance of spam.

  15. Ralsky and Spam... no quick fixes here... by NewbieV · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What will make spam and spammers go away? Unfortunately, I don't think there's one 'silver-bullet' solution to the problem (no wisecracks about using the bullet on Ralsky, please ;))

    In part, spam is a technological arms race: spammers use more sophisticated ways of getting their messages out, and anti-spammers counter by developing more advanced ways of blocking them. Building a better mousetrap will only force the mice to get smarter. Hacking is not part of the solution, either: if we complain about legislation permitting corporate hacking, we should refrain from doing it ourselves (it's a moral high ground thing...)

    Part of the spam problem is money: at least a few people have mastered the "1. Send spam 2. ??? 3. Profit!" formula. An article describing "How I got rich in three easy steps" will, unfortunately, inspire at least a few wannabes, which leads to the next part of the problem...

    People. The famous quote that "there's a sucker born every minute" is absolutely true. People can be dumb. People can be greedy. People can be unscrupulous. In an age where someone can blanket the planet with a new get-rich-quick scheme, a pill or cream to enhance sexual prowess, a free vacation to wherever, it's almost guaranteed that their message will find someone who doesn't even hesitate to sign themselves up.

    The final part of the problem is something I've never seen mentioned anywhere else: ego. From the article, it sounds like Ralsky knows exactly what he's doing, and he's reveling in the fact that he's notorious/infamous for being one of the best at doing it.

    So, how to fix the problem? Use not just one, but every tool at our disposal:

    1. Continue developing more sophisticated ways of keeping spam from ever reaching user mailboxes and/or desktops, and try to anticipate how spammers will react in response;

    2. Use the existing laws every country has to deal with fraud. Urge local and/or national prosecutors to go after the big fish, making them examples for the smaller ones. Develop international working groups to attack the problem when spammers move their operations overseas. (okay, that last one's a little optimistic, but hey, at least it's an idea...) Nail the fraudsters, shut down their operations, penalize their profits away. The less profit there is, and the harder it is to keep it, the less people will be tempted to try it;

    3. Educate, educate, educate: spread the word on how to deal with spam (don't click the opt-out link, don't reply to unsubscribe, learn how to keep your e-mail address from being harvested, etc.) On another level, urge the (possibly clueless) people who think it's a good marketing technique that spam just makes them look like every other get-rich-quick artist they hate getting e-mail from.

    4. Marginalize the big fish: the more someone like Ralsky reads about himself in the press or on the Web, the more it feeds his ego. The more dog poop he scrapes off his front steps, the more it eggs him on to keep spamming. Shame and guilt can still be two pretty powerful social-engineering methods, but allowing him to portray himself as a 'victim' of those nasty-evil hackers will only serve to help him and his cause.

    --


    "For every right, an equal responsibility..."
  16. These numbers can't possibly be true... by alispguru · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From the article:

    The response rate is the key to the whole operation, said Ralsky. These days, it's about one-quarter of 1 percent.

    Ralsky has other ways to monitor the success of his campaigns. Buried in every e-mail he sends is a hidden code that sends back a message every time the e-mail is opened. About three-quarters of 1 percent of all the messages are opened by their recipients, he said. The rest are deleted.

    He's claiming that one out of three spams that are opened in something that renders HTML get a response. I always knew the unwashed web-browser-email masses were dumb, but not that dumb...
    --

    To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
  17. Re:Two words: by JohnG · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I hate to respond to the trolls, but since a patent lawyer once told me the same thing about telemarketers I figured I give you the same response I gave him. The first amendment gives the right to free speech. The first amendment does NOT give the right to an audience. Is it any wonder the patent system is so screwed when one of their lawyers doesn't realize the difference between the two?

  18. We don't need no more stinking laws. by LoRider · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A lot folks spout off about creating laws to stop these spammers.

    Do we really want to have our Congressmen/woman making laws regarding the Internet? They don't have a very good track record for making laws period, much less laws dealing with technology. Not to mention the fact that US laws usually only apply to the US, usually.

    I think that the fight needs to be waged at the ISP level. ISP's need to be booting these lowlifes off of their networks. If these people are constantly forced to move servers and get new connections for their servers, it will become unfeasible. We can start with this guys T1. Who provides that T1? File complaints to that provider? Where are his email servers, someone has to be providing access to the 'net for those server. You will be suprised what a few letters can do?

    We don't need to kill anyone or even work that hard to stop these pricks. Just find out where they live and kill them...um... I mean tell their ISPs to either start cutting off connections or else...

    --
    LoRider