Slashdot Mirror
AOL Cans 1 billion Spams In One Day
linuxwrangler writes "AOL announced today that its spam filters hit the 1 billion reject mark for a 24 hour period. This is an average of 28 rejects per day per member. In addition, AOL spam engineers say they receive 5.5 million spam submissions each day from AOL users. Other reports here(1) and here(2)."
28 per subcriber per day caught.
Only leaves 103 apeice...
TODO: Something witty here...
...only 15 originated outside of AOHell in the first place.
Are they responsible for creating the spam, or stopping it?
If you get an error, type "OVERRIDE" or "SECURITY OVERRIDE" and then try the optimize command again.
...how much of that was outgoing? i.e, how much did AOL users themselves generate? Probably more than they want to let on...
We recently had heard in the office over one of the Yellow Machine that's made by Anthology Solutions.
And how many got through?
Well, maybe they are, but that's not what's reported in the article.
AOL users are reporting 5.5 million spam messages a day to customer service.
I can see it now:
*bing*You got mail!
"You have 10 new messages"
"You have 293 rejected messages"
...I'll procrastinate tomorrow...
To measure the LEGIT email going through AOL?
I had a sucky sig.
every other letter i write to my mom gets rejected. if i am not allowed to spam my mom, who else should be????
"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." - Rahm Emanuel
And it is under the most correct section: Your Rights Online.
Today 1 billion voices were silenced. This is not some make believe movie where Alderan gets blown up. It is about the actual usurpation of the Freedom of Speech.
AOL has taken it upon themselves to decide for their users what is appropriate speech and what is not. That is sad. If you think Microsoft is taking away your freedoms because they own 90%+ in the OS market it is time to recheck your bad guys. AOL has just proven itself to be an enemy to Free Speech. That is a much more grave violation of your rights online than anything Microsoft has ever done.
The laughable part of all this is that AOL is the biggest real-world spammer with their tons and tons of CDs that have to be dumped into landfills every year.
Fuck you AOL for making yourself judge, jury, and executioner of the First Amendment.
I have been pwned because my
This may not be the crowd that wants to hear this, but some radical changes need to be made in the email protocol to minimize the amount of spam that users deal with these days. Bottom line is that the goal should be for email communications to be as trustworthy as phone calls - sure, there are some telemarketers and crank callers out there, but if the noise level from your phone was as high as in your email, there would be marches on Washington to demand a solution.
I would think the most likely candidate would be to build-in verification of the sender, and bring about the end of anonymous email. That's sure to raise the hackles of many here, but so far, nothing's working.
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
In the AOL "Mail Center" there is an option to "Allow ALL mail". I take it this doesn't work, or that AOL should change it to "Allow all mail that we decide to let through..." ?
If this is true, can you imagine how much bandwidth and disk space is wasted by spam. I'd be willing to bet that the money lost to spam exceeds the money lost to pirate software and mp3's combined.
The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
I'm on a mailing list and our AOL-based members frequently post "did the list die? I haven't gotten any email in the last couple days". AOL doesn't even reject the messages, they just get blackholed. Someone in the bowels of AOL's mailservers is a cache of tens of thousands of messages about pickup trucks.
Our listmaster has been around and around in circles with AOL on it several times. It's almost not worth fighting anymore. Use AOL, accept the fact that email you want will not always get to you.
Does this mean I'm gonna get screwed on my mortgage and have to settle for an average sized penis?
Now my penis enlagrement products won't be drowned out by useless spam.
Don't exaggerate.
When you compare spam-blocking with Nazi atrocities, you're belittling the horror that Nazi victims experienced.
Many of those Communists, Jews, trade unionists, Catholics were often killed in all manner of horrific ways.
By contrast, AOL isn't killing anybody. If AOL blocks spam, somebody looses some money, and an AOL user gains some time, money & sanity.
There can be no fair comparison of these two activities.
"Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
I'm kind of torn on this issue. On the one hand, I hate spam and those who allow it to proliferate. On the other hand, I abhor censorship in any form. I wouldn't have an issue with this at all if AOL simply provided its users with the *tools* to eliminate their own spam if they choose to do so. My problem with this is that AOL itself is deciding to filter its members' email, and making the determination itself as to what is and is not "spam". That's a reckless step down a slippery slope, in my opinion.
I happen to believe in the sanctity of the Freedom of Speech. I do not subscribe to your concept of corporate control of rights.
I don't know where this idea comes from that just because you are a business it means that you can do whatever you want, including infringing upon rights guaranteed by the government.
This is a sad double standard being applied to "unwanted" emails. The KKK and the NOI can publicly advertise their unwanted speech because the First Amendment protects them. They cannot be barred from advertising in newspapers, they cannot be barred from advertising on billboards, and they cannot be barred from posting in open forums. But spammers don't have these rights?
You better think about that position a little.
I have been pwned because my
I would guess that deleting spam is about as expensive as transmitting it for an ISP. that is the processor intensive task of scoring and removing a spam probably is a wash with the processor light task of tranmitting and storing it. Now for the sake of argument lets just guess a wild number for the cost of filtering or passing along a spam. lets say 0.001 dollars.
if that were true then a billion spam deleted would cost AOL 1million dollars per day (plus the ones that got through). that would be a third of a billion dollars a year. THat seems way to high. So it must be less. SO maybe its 0.000001 cents?? that would come to a third of a million dollars a year.
My guess is that the latter is probably a good guess. why? well how many engineers has AOL assigned to the de spamination? perhaps a third of a million dollars worth every year? it would of course not make sense to spend more on de spamination than the harm it costs.
so anyhow assuming this wild guessing is within an order of magnitude then the proper charge to fine a spammer would be some multiple of 0.000001 dollars per spam sent. which is not an awful lot.
so is spam really that costly to ISPs??? Maybe not
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
*shaking head*
psxndc
The emacs religion: to be saved, control excess.
Apparently AOL users can set up their accounts to reject ALL email originating outside AOL (as if the rest of the internet were worse SPAMmers than AOL folks). Amazingly, this setting is turned on on some accounts (many, I suspect) without them even knowing it. I run a webserver for a few businesses, and we get LOTS of mail bounced back from AOL account for this reason. It's a real pain when, for example, an AOL customer is trying to sign up on our site, and their account activation key gets bounced back to us because of this stupid setting. I bet they're counting all these messages in their total.
Convert RSS to HTML - integrate webfeeds into your website
I remember some survey from years ago that asked "if you could press a button and someone on the other side of the World would die, but you'd recieve 1,000,000 dollars, would you do it?". I'm now wondering, if you could press a button, and a spammer, somewhere would die - would YOU do it? Scary as it seems to me, I'd probably say "yes"...
Code, Hardware, stuff like that.
Having all email routed to my inbox means that my figures above include dictionary attacks.
Using tagged addresses also runs up the total a lot. Every time I give out my email address, either on a registration form or in a public posting, I use a different tag.
I started tagging addresses in the early days of spam. Remember when we foolishly thought we could attach a disclaimer to usenet posts along the lines of "send me spam, and I'll bill you $50 under the anti-fax laws"? Well, I was dumb. I figured that in order to "prove" that unsolicited email was unsolicited, I had to have some proof of how the spammer got my email address, and that I had a clear disclaimer.
The good news: I have a pretty good idea of which of my online activities generate spam (e.g., posts to control.cancel and *.test, my NIC registrations, and usenet group-creation votes all seem to be popular for the spam-database trollers)
The bad news: I can easily get hit 30, 40, or 50 times for any one mass-spewing a spammer decides to do.
The totals above contain NO false positives -- they're all tied to tagged addresses which only produce spam. Not included are the 50 or so false negatives I get a day, which get tackled through other means.
* ^From:[ ]*[a-z0-9_]+@aol\.com$
:0c:formail.lock /' > return.tmp
:0:formail.lock /usr/sbin/sendmail -t
#
* ! ^X-Loop:.*mydomain
* ^TO_me@mydomain\.com
#
{
# Make a temporary file of the message to be returned
# Discard whitespaces, insert a leading blank
| expand | sed -e 's/[ ]*$//g' | sed -e 's/^/
# Prepare and send the rejection
| (formail -r -I"Subject: Rejected mail: Recipient refusal" \
-A"X-Loop: rejected-mail@mydomain.com" ; \
echo "Sorry, but your e-mail was rejected because the From: header" ; \
echo "didn't seem to include your real name. This is an automated" ; \
echo "message; replying to it won't work." ; \
echo "--- begin rejected mail ---" ; \
cat return.tmp ; \
echo "--- end rejected mail ---" ; \
rm -f return.tmp) \
|
}
Find free books.
If you want to get rid of spam, do this:
1. Create a "secret" email account from a reputable provider. Make it unguessable. Add some digits or weird long strings. Don't give it to anyone.
2.Go to spamgourmet.com and create an account. It's free and open source. In the "forward emails to" field, enter your secret email.
3. Give spamgourmet addresses to your friends. If your account name is Joe6Pack, give your pal Jack Daniels an address Jack.Daniels.Joe6Pack at spamgourmet dot com. To greatdeal.com, give greatdeal.com.Joe6Pack at spamgourmet dot com. This way you know who has what address. Those spamgourmet addresses are disposable.
All the emails sent to your various spamgourmet addresses are forwarded to your secret account.
4. If Jack, who is a friggin' idiot running XP and Outlook, gets yet another Kletz-like virus, the content of his Outlook address book will be compromized and all these addresses harvested by spammers. Just go to spamgourmet.com and disable the compromized address. Tell Jack he's a fool. Give him another disposable address if needed... Until next time.
If greatdeal.com turns out to be a spammer, just disable their address.
5. After a couple of months, disable your old email accounts, the ones that are spammed to death right now.
6. No more spam. Or if you get spam, just disable the spammed address and report the spammer to spamhaus.org. You'll never be spammed more than once.
Works for me.
--
Mad science! Robots! Underwear! Cute girls! Full comic online! http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/
Spam became a huge problem here roughly a year ago, and it started taking up too much employee time. So roughly six months ago, we started using Spam Assassin. In that six months, Spam assassin has caught roughly 90% of the spam we get, totalling well over 500,000 spam mails.
Am I crazy, or is 1/2 million spams for only 7 people in less than six months absolutely insane or what? How can anyone argue that these spammers are running legitamite businesses?
I think it's high-time for some legis-fuckin-lation to curb this insanity :)
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden