Slashdot Mirror


Spam Solutions from an Expert

Mod N writes "SecurityFocus has posted a nice survey of anti-spam technologies by spam expert Neal Krawetz, in which he delves deeply into the specifics and pitfalls of the numerous proposed solutions. Krawetz makes it obvious that securing the email infrastructure is a very complex problem that many of the current (simple) solutions can't solve alone."

3 of 420 comments (clear)

  1. Solution: Stop Spam at the Source by ElliotLee · · Score: 5, Insightful
    According to the article, there is no good lasting solution to spam. Indeed, there isn't, but we need to consider more the reason behind the spamming.

    Why has spam grown to what it is today? It is an undeniably effective means of cheap marketing. What we need to do is come up with a way to stop this not on our end, but by looking at as a social problem or making it non-worthwhile to the spammers. If nobody ever responded to spam, spammer wouldn't bother.

  2. Re:Proof? by ookabooka · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I cant even get my scanner to correctly identify a regular text document, it gets most of it, but it still misses a lot of letters. A computer program could do this, but you would need either a very large database of the letter pictures (most places use all different kinds of text pictures, and add in a degree of randomness). Or you would need a very developed algorithm to detect the letters (in which case you would be making oodles of money from the scanner industry. . . spam would be the least of your worries.
    In the end i think it is inevitable that software will eventually break this system, but as soon as it does, there will be another system in place. . . .

    --
    If you are about to mod me down, keep in mind that this post was most likely sarcastic.
  3. most effective by mabu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Make no mistake...

    The most effective spam solution at this time is RBL blacklisting. Bottom line.

    When you take into account that the biggest problem of spamming is bandwidth consumption and network resources, there is NO better way than blacklisting spam sources and refusing to communicate with them.

    Services like Spamcop's RBL really piss off the spammers. All client-side filtering is counterproductive and ultimately useless as you constantly have to update the systems to catch new efforts on the part of spammers to thwart the filters. At least with RBLs, the spammers' connections are immediately refused as soon as they're ID'd.

    If you want to identify what is the most effective solutions, it's simple. Look at what pisses off the sleazebag spam community the most. That's relay blacklisting. They don't DDOS the moronic client-side filtering companies because the spammers know they're useless, and even if they're not, the spammers can't tell. What hurts them are when systems say, 'screw you spammer, (click)' and that's done via relay blacklisting.

    Why are spammers increasingly changing mail relays and pursuing open proxies? Because of RBLs. Even AOL uses RBLs (including Spamcop). All the major ISPs look at the RBLs because they are THE most effective way of stopping spam. And they're the only way to actually shut down the spammers.

    Forget client or server-side content-based filtering. They will NEVER work. RBLs are responsible for forcing spammers into corners of IP space, forcing them to deploy worms and viruses to infiltrate new IP space (which exposes them to more prosecution). RBLs ** WORK ** !