Slashdot Mirror


My Short Life As An Unintentional Porn Spammer

Freerange writes "Mike Masnick wrote up his experience getting slammed by a somewhat new kind of spam attack that doesn't get much hype (yet?). A spammer spoofed his personal email address as the 'reply-to' for a batch of spam, with interesting results for Mike: "I can now answer the questions 'who replies to spam?' and (should anyone ever wonder) 'what are the hundreds of variations on bounced messages?'" From Politech."

12 of 557 comments (clear)

  1. Reverse spam really isn't that new... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Spammers have been spoofing legit addresses for a while. I know a lot of times they'll simply use webmaster@somelegitdomain.com and basically cause that person a bunch of grief and headaches. Most users are too clueless to realize it's really not coming from that address.

    1. Re:Reverse spam really isn't that new... by entrylevel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What is even less interesting about this is that the Reply-To header can be set to anything you want by most e-mail clients and processors. There are plenty of legitimate reasons for doing this, such as wanting all incoming mail to go to one account, or making people have to think about whether they want to reply to a mailing list or just the default of the original poster. The From header is the one that requires a tiny bit of knowledge to "forge".

      This sounds to me sort of like referring to someone who discovers an unpublished URL by trial and error as a "hacker". Of course, I didn't RTFA, but I will once it is un-slashdotted.

      --
      Karma: Incomprehensible (Mostly affected by posting at +5, reading at -1, and metamoderating everything unfair.)
  2. Spam needs a technical solution. by Sheetrock · · Score: 5, Insightful
    This adds more weight to my assessment of spam as being a technical problem with a need for a technical solution. Why are address spoofing and open mail relays still a problem after over a decade of spam-related problems?

    Obviously, legislation isn't catching up and as evidenced by the junk fax law is useless when it does. Technical minds built the Internet, and I have little doubt that a solution could be found once we quit looking for the quick fix.

    --

    Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
    -- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.




  3. Everyone call your State Rep! by Mustang+Matt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I gave Testimony to the Missouri House of Reps on Jan. 29th.

    It's easy to get things in motion, everyone is too lazy to try though.

    --
    The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
    1. Re:Everyone call your State Rep! by scottm52 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Read your stuff... pretty good, actually. However, your assumption that a "do not call" type list would be unusable is slightly off target.

      It can be done....

      From my post of last Friday Evening...

      "I'm from Missouri "And this version of the proposed law sucks big-time. How about they put a million bucks in a pool, open up 50 or 60 tracking bank accounts, and buy whatever it is the spam is selling.... Thus creating a $$$ trail that can be followed, and a judge can just take and put back into the state coffers. Him em where it hurts... in the pocket!

      Think about this now....

      1) Recieve Spam
      2) Report Spam (forward to spam-abuse somewhere official)
      3) More than X number received complaints, State goes into action.
      4) State dude/dudette actually buys whatever the spam is selling...
      5) state office then traces the $$$, get's a judge to freeze the $$$, apply an ADMINISTRATIVE FINE and keep the spammers frozen $$$ til the fine is paid.
      6) spammer learns to not screw with Missouri if they can help it (tough, but doable).

      Is this easy? No.. Can it be done? Yes, absolutly... If they're gonna write a law, write one that works...
      And yes, I'm chatting with several MO Reps and State Senators about it too.

  4. and in other news by mark_lybarger · · Score: 3, Insightful

    it's now illegal to provide any false information while using oral communication. specifically related to, but not limited to, false information regarding the name of the communicator.

    spam spam spam. if spam should be illegal, so should any form of unsolicited communication. that includes conversing to persons without their permission at the local pub.

    i'm personally in favor of a more liberated
    government system, but if we want our legislatures to make rules, let's make it a level playing field , not just fix the annoying problem we have of spam (that is created because of a technical deficiency in the overall system of itself).

    1. Re:and in other news by Fluffy+the+Cat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      spam spam spam. if spam should be illegal, so should any form of unsolicited communication. that includes conversing to persons without their permission at the local pub.

      Spam is grossly different to most other forms of unsolicited communication in one simple respect - the total cost to the recipiants is hugely larger than the total cost to the sender. This isn't true of (say) unsolicited email from an individual directly to you, unsolicted junk mail, unsolicited telephone calls or unsolicited personal conversation.

  5. Flowers.com by The+Turd+Report · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This domain was used by a spammer, they sued and won. http://www.mids.org/mn/803/spamset.html

  6. Re:No way to contact spammer by Drakonian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Can I turn off HTML email in Outlook? Sorry for the stupid question that Google would probably answer for me.

    --
    Random is the New Order.
  7. Re:3 little words by ahrenritter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Um.. those are three very pretty all caps words... but they don't have a lot to do with this article. They aren't talking about open-relay abuse here.. During the course of an SMTP transaction, there are two important identifying lines:
    HELO
    and
    MAIL FROM:

    Many SMTP servers will do some sort of verification on the HELO line, but very little can be done about the FROM line. You can't easily kill addresses that don't match the HELO domain because legitimate mail relays would be unable to forward your mail on then.

    I can send you a piece of mail that will display bob.hope@whitehouse.gov as the from address. If Bob had that address, and people replied to the forged address, he'd be getting the blame for my spam.

    It sucks.

    --

    All I wanted was a rock to wind a piece of string around, and I ended up with the biggest ball of twine in Minnesota
  8. My personal experience with the "joe job" tactic by mojotooth · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I was the target of a joe-job since last April. A spammer advertising a Human Growth Hormone website based in China was sending out tens of thousands of spams over a long period, with my long-held email addy in the From: address.

    The vast majority of the mails you get back are administrative emails saying that "the user does not exist." There is also a small amount that you get that are ill-informed, ignorant, and often very inflamed responses from people who respond.

    At the peak of the attack, I got over 14,000 emails in a single day. It almost caused me to have to give up my email address, which I had held for almost seven years at the time. I didn't want to give it up so easily.

    My solution was to install and use the Tagged Message Delivery Agent (http://www.tmda.net), which is a whitelisting service. It has my admiration for rejecting 100% of the unwanted emails for two reasons. First administrative accounts don't reply to their whitelisting requests, and second, ignorant angry users don't bother to reply to get whitelisted anyways.

    As for the question of why someone would do this, I have thought of three reasons:

    - To make their spam look more legitimate.
    - Just to cause general havoc
    - Because I have, in the past, not hesitated to complain to service providers about spam. This was probably retribution.

    I did attempt to bring some form of legal action into the fray. I talked informally to Scott Frewing, a US attorney (one of the prime players in the Skylarov case), about the attack. He referred me to the FBI's online fraud folks, but couldn't really give me much encouragement on the chance of the success, since the spammer's website was located in the China Telecom domain, although the company it claimed to represent was in New Jersey. In fact, he told me I would probably be better off pursuing the case strictly on the basis of fraud and possible identity theft (the use of my email address) rather than as a spam case.

    I stopped pursuing it after talking to Frewing.

    In any event, I have won the battle in the sense that I will never see the unwanted mails. But I have lost the war in the sense that I can't really make the F*CKER stop doing it, and it does consume resources on my linux box.

    --
    -- Mojo Tooth : exploring our world as only an idiot can.
  9. Re:IQ Test by gidds · · Score: 4, Insightful
    LOL!

    I've never understood why people don't put "Press a key" instead. The intelligence-challenged can search out the `a' key, which will work, and the rest of us will know that all the others'll work too. Plus it's two characters shorter -- benefits all round!

    --

    Ceterum censeo subscriptionem esse delendam.