The Growing Field Guide To Spam Techniques
Aneusomy writes "From Activestate: 'Compiled by Dr. John Graham-Cumming, a leading anti-spam researcher and member of the ActiveState Anti-Spam Task Force, the ActiveState Field Guide to Spam is a selection of the tricks spammers use to hide their messages from filters, providing examples taken from real-world spam messages.' The hope is that Activestate and others can contribute to continually expand this guide, so that anti-spam filters improve."
I use Thunderbird, and found it to be a good system.
Before I used PopFile but he blocked some good mails. That was reason enough to drop it..
One purpose of hiding text is to fool anti spam filters.
Let's say that everything between '[/]' is visually hidden. I can send you the message:
Fre[dom for th]e pen[ and th]is enl[ist l]argement.
The 'filter' will see:
Fredom for the pen and this enlist largement.
The user will see:
Free penis enlargement.
Cheers,
--fred
I think the purpose is to vary the hidden text to fool anti-spam systems which rely on blocking mail based on signatures of the message body.
If you send 150,000 messages which say "Free Porn Here" systems such as Britemail are going to quickly generate one signature for the mail and block most of it. If however you have the following example (using the fictional HTML HIDE tag)
Free [HIDE] from your meeting at 10:30 [/HIDE] porn [HIDE} cate suggested meeting for coffee [/HIDE] here [HIDE] I will be in work late today [/HIDE}
The message is still displayed in the browser as "Free porn here". However, filters such as those used by Mac Mail and Mozilla may not pick it up as junk because the hidden words look like real email. If you change the hidden sentences every 100 emails then the signature based spam blocking systems won't pick it up as every signature is different and (in this example) you are using real words.
One of the best solutions to this I have seen is KMail, this displays HTML mail as text and you can click a button to then render as HTML. This doesn't stop the spam, but does give you the abaility not to see many images you rather wouldn't at 10am on a Monday morning and allows you to stop web bugs (HTML code in images which can be used to indicate successful message delivery).
Hormel Foods has this to say on the subject
"We do not object to use of this slang term to describe UCE (unsolicited commercial email), although we do object to the use of our product image in association with that term. Also, if the term is to be used, it should be used in all lower-case letters to distinguish it from our trademark SPAM, which should be used with all uppercase letters."
so....
"SPAM" is Pork and Ham
"spam" is unsolicited email
"SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM
SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM
Lovely SPAM, wonderful SPAM!"
is a Monty Python song
This will all be blindingly obvious to most readers of /., but just for the record:
Don't use your personal email address for anything online. Don't post to usenet with it, don't use it to register for anything, don't ever use it where there's any chance of it being sold to a third party or picked up by a web crawler. Use a free throwaway web-based account like hotmail or yahoo, that's what they're for. I have a verizon.net primary email address, and I've never received a single piece of spam from it.
However, I still have a forward-only email address from my university circa 1992. Back then, there was no spam and that address has to be on every spammer's list on the planet. I still get a legitimate email every year or two, but spam outnumbers these by at least 10,000 to 1. SpamAssassin does a surprisingly good job of identifying the garbage.
I also use a proxy to surf the web, as well as a large hosts file that reroutes requests to adservers to 127.0.0.1:80, combined with a utility that returns a transparent 1x1 gif to any request on port 80. And of course I use mozilla to block pop-ups and whatnot. I'm so used to surfing in this way that I always recoil in horror when I have to use IE on a naked, unprotected box. How on earth can anyone stand it?
As for more traditional types of spam such as telemarketers, there's the national do not call list. It's free, so there's nothing to lose. You'll also want to check out the many excellent resources at the Junkbusters website. One of the most useful features is a Junkbusters Declare page, which builds custom form letters for you that you can use to opt out of Direct Marketing Association junkmail, as well as telling your financial institutions, etc., not to sell your name to third parties. I used it, it's painless, and my privacy is protected.
Of course, it would be much better if we didn't have to jump through hoop after hoop just to get through the day without being pestered by morons.
If SpamAssassin did nothing but content analysis, that might work. But, SpamAssassin (by default) also checks several real-time blacklists and uses Bayesian filtering.
I've found that it's the combination of all of these factors that identifies almost every spam. I've had only two or three spams slip through in the 3-4 months since I installed SpamAssassin, with no false positives.
+4, insightful?
I beg to differ!
While this system is not perfect and, yes it may cause some headaches for most, having sendmail match the MX record to the IP of the sendind server would eliminate almost 100% of all the SPAM that I have encountered in the last 3 months.
You're right, this system is not perfect, and would cause a *lot* of headaches for almost all users (or at least, us admins).
Firstly, it creates a lot of technical headaches..
The way I see it, the only way I could send email under your proposed system would be through a relay whose IP address was the same as the server listed in the domain's MX record, right?
So, in order to send email from myaddress@somedomain.com, my MTA has to have the same IP address as somedomain.com's mail exchanger?
Not. Gonna. Work.
I send mail from several different physical locations (home, work, etc), as several different addresses/domains. This means in order to send email as my home address while I'm at work, I'd have to send through my home ISP's mail relay. Which I can't do, because I'm not on their network (and they don't have an open relay, to prevent *spam*).
I also send email as being from a couple of domains I own, but I send this email thru whatever system I happen to be on (ISP or work, whatever), as my domain just points at things, rather than running a full-time MTA just to deliver my email..
Not to mention the fact that most ISPs I can think of would have more than one server in charge of mail, and it would be possible, if not likely, that the outgoing mail relay is a different machine than the one that accepts incoming mail (ie, the one in the MX record).
But let's just assume, for argument's sake, that everything was working as you outline. Everyone sends mail thru a relay whose IP corresponds to the domain they're sending from.
All I need to do to send spam is get an account at an ISP, let's say I get username foo at ISP isp.com. Now I dial up, and send a big bunch of spam, from false.address@isp.com. So your domain/mx/ip check works ok, but it's still a false address. Sure, my IP address will be in the headers, but how different is that from the current situation?
Next you'll be suggesting that to combat terrorism, before getting on a plane passengers should have to pass a 1/2 hour series of tests with questions like 'are you a terrorist?' and 'Is this flight for: a) business; b) pleasure; or c) terrorism?'
Not going to make it any harder for the terrorists (except the really dumb ones), but a big pain in the ass for Joe Citizen.
(sorry, in a bit of a ranting mood)