Slashdot Mirror


Unplugging Email To Combat Spam

monkeyserver.com writes "from Reuters (via CNN) we hear that 'Consumers who allow their infected computers to send out millions of 'spam' messages could be unplugged from the Internet under a proposal released Tuesday by six large e-mail providers.' They are looking at 100 per hour or 500 per day; this doesn't really sound like a bad idea, though it could cause problems for a few people trying to run companies from their basement..." On the other side of the coin, rastakid writes "It appears that Microsoft is taking its actions against spamming a little bit too far: Hotmail accounts which are suspected of sending spam are closed without a single investigation. This article states that Maariv International registered a new Hotmail account and sent an abuse message about spamming activities from that account, while not a single message was sent from it. Microsoft closed the account immediately, without investigating."

39 of 332 comments (clear)

  1. Open relays by SIGALRM · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Internet companies should make sure that their equipment has been properly secured so spammers can't route their messages through them

    I agree. Open relays, apparently not as common as they used to be, are still a huge source of the spam we intercept. I'd be in favor penalties for open relays (in theory), but how would that be effective, being that a lot of it originates from outside the US?

    --
    Sigs cause cancer.
    1. Re:Open relays by Bob+Zer+Fish · · Score: 4, Insightful

      perhaps something like SPF could be used? That would ensure that spam was sent from the correct mail servers, and hence not spoofed. This would reduce a large amount of spam appearing to come from other users.
      Once this has been done we can then clamp down on the dodgey email servers.

    2. Re:Open relays by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The newest threat for spamming are now machines that aren't meant to be mail servers being turned into relays by viruses and worms. They aren't open per se because they work for only one master, but they end up putting the full resources of the computer to sending spam and that's not good.

      Maybe some sort of "reconnection fee" from the ISP in the $35-50 range would be a good enough speedbump to make consumers aware that this kind of threat exists and it will be their problem if they don't protect themselves from it. Afterall, there isn't much real cost for a bank to bounce a check, but they're allowed to charge so much because a bounced check is a preventable situation that is very annoying... the fee is there mostly to discurage people from trying to write a bad check.

    3. Re:Open relays by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Maybe some sort of "reconnection fee" from the ISP in the $35-50 range would be a good enough speedbump to make consumers aware that this kind of threat exists and it will be their problem if they don't protect themselves from it.

      Probably a baddddd idea.

      The issue is that, in practice, a vast number of boxes on the internet are all vulnerable to attack- there's bound to be some hidden flaw in the incredible number of packages out there.

      So the system can be up-to-date with all known patches, and still be attacked. Fining people for things that flat-out aren't their fault is likely to be, at best, contrary to the ISPs customers idea about what makes a good ISP.

      --

      -WolfWithoutAClause

      "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
    4. Re:Open relays by CyanDisaster · · Score: 5, Informative

      ...So the system can be up-to-date with all known patches, and still be attacked. Fining people for things that flat-out aren't their fault is likely to be, at best, contrary to the ISPs customers idea about what makes a good ISP...

      I work at an ISP where we do virus removals on customers computers. If someone comes in with a virus, we determine whether it slipped through the email virus scanning. If so, we don't charge them. Otherwise it's usually about half an hour labour to clean the system up. Sooo...basically, if it isn't their fault, there's no charge. Mind you, that's if our system doesn't keep the customer's email clean. Whether their Norton or AVG is up to date or not, and the virus didn't come through email, or they're not on email virus scanning, then we charge them for labour regardless where the virus came from.

      Hope be with ye,
      Cyan

    5. Re:Open relays by Jim_Maryland · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I don't know about charging the reconnect fee to the customer in all cases. If a security flaw in your system allows your system to be compromised, is it really the end users fault? If the user chooses not to impliment patches, then maybe your proposal would work, but maybe a user doesn't impliment a patches because an application they use hasn't been certified to work with a particular patch.

      While $35-$50 isn't much of a reconnect fee, disconnecting probably shouldn't be the first step. Ideally the process would go something like this:

      ISP notices a lot of email generated from your node.

      Emails registered address inquiring if the volume of email (send statistics) is known to the user.

      User responds to confirm they are legitimately sending the volume of email or they respond that they are unaware of the volume.

      NOTE: If user does not respond, follow with registered letter or a phone call to the registered user.

      If user resolves the problem (patch/removal) system remains intact. If user is unable to resolve the problem, provide options for resolving it. This may include free support, charged support, or recommendation to other support services (The DC metro area has a company called "Geeks on Call").

      If user doesn't resolve the problem within an alloted time period, disconnect them.

      Charge a reconnect fee.

  2. hate to point out the obvious... by darth_MALL · · Score: 3, Informative

    Microsoft closed the account immediately, without investigating.
    They own the account! Not to mention, it's a free account...you get what you pay for. Caveat Emptor, Greg...

    1. Re:hate to point out the obvious... by EvanED · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That doesn't mean that it isn't a stupid or asinine thing to do. It just means that they wouldn't be held culpable.

    2. Re:hate to point out the obvious... by gnu-generation-one · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Microsoft closed the account immediately, without investigating. Reply: They own the account! Not to mention, it's a free account...you get what you pay for. Caveat Emptor, Greg..."

      Whoo! Easy way to shut-down friends on hotmail...

      Dude, we deleted your email!

    3. Re:hate to point out the obvious... by Tatarize · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You overlook some of the more obvious effects of this policy. Basicly if I disliked you, and you had a fairly important hotmail account... It would become trivial to mess with you out of spite.

      Many people use their email accounts for very critical information or personal correspondence. Getting them shutdown because somebody said it was used for spam is wrong.

      Another thing. What if spammers took to spamming the support mail with huge amounts of this account used for spamming messages while using some accounts for spamming. Backlogging the folks while raising heck on the side. The more you think about any solution to spam the more you think of ways around it, if you were a spammer.

      --

      It is no longer uncommon to be uncommon.
  3. The General of Hotmail by Roadkills-R-Us · · Score: 3, Funny

    Was it Patton or Macarthur who said, "Shoot 'em all, and let God sort them out"? Apparently Microsoft has cloned him and he's now running Hotmail!

  4. I can vouch for cancellations on hotmail by cybrthng · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I had a hotmail account from before microsoft owned it and i got killed because someone reported me as spamming the newsgroups - simply because i used my hotmail account to post to the old Deja news web news interface selling sun hardware on the comp.sun.hardware.forsale :) I had linked to an ebay auction so i guess it was considered "spam" to link to an ebay auction at that time.


    I'm just curious if you have any rights and how the ever popular Gmail and growing yahoo mail will treat complaints as in my case it was someone upset with something i did claiming spam and not abuse by anymeans worth of terminating a long standing account and prohibiting me from accessing years of archived mail that was lost because of the cancellation.


    They did email me i got a free passport account though. Funny i'm terminated but then they try and push something with real potential for abuse and sensitivity :)

  5. Hotmail DOS? by kpansky · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Doesn't this pose a risk for effectively DOS'ing all hotmail users? Just create a script to aggregate Hotmail accounts through google and send complaints? Thats mildly annoying.

    --

    --Kevin
  6. Private mailing lists.. by drdreff · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... will be affected too. I guess that would probably mean the death of MailMan

    --
    As seen on Wired: Get a free desktop PC
  7. Karma-Whoring-Free Article Posting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Before this gets slashdotted:

    Exclusive: Hotmail shuts down "spammers" who don't spam

    Complain you got spam from a Hotmail user, and Hotmail's abuse team will shut down their account, no questions asked.

    Hotmail.com shuts down Hotmail accounts shortly after receiving complaints about spam being sent from them, without checking if the user has actually sent spam, NRG Maariv has learned. Thus, malicious users can cause the shutting down of accounts, as an act of revenge or just for kicks.

    In its haste to fight spam, Hotmail has foregone looking into abuse reports it gets from email users. In three instances documented by NRG Maariv, Hotmail's abuse team shut down Hotmail accounts less than 24 hours after receiving complaints about spam being sent from them, even though the spam mail clearly did not originate from those accounts.

    In two of the instances, the spammers spoofed the sender's address so it looked like it was sent from a Hotmail account, while they were actually sent through an Israeli ISP. In both instances, the spoofed accounts were shut down.

    The third instance was a test: NRG Maariv opened a new account with Hotmail and sent no email whatsoever from it. Using a different email, we filed a spam complaint, saying it came from the new Hotmail account. Attached were Internet headers from an old spam, where the sender's address was replaced with that of the new account.

    Within less than 24 hours, we received a message saying the new account was shut down.

    "My name is Claire, and from what I have read in your message, you are complaining about the unsolicited email you received from a Hotmail account", said the message written by Claire C. with MSN Hotmail Technical Support. "I have closed the account you reported in accordance with the Hotmail Terms of Use (TOU). It is a strict violation of the TOU for our members to send objectionable material of any kind or nature using our service".

    Trying to log on to the Hotmail account, we found it closed. No explanation was provided, just a laconic message saying "Account Closed. Access Denied". No appeal procedure was mentioned. The account was shut down for good.

    Hotmail's public relations representative, Waggener Edstrom, has yet to respond to the story.

  8. DOS by False Accusation? by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's a bit creepy that somebody was able to register a new Hotmail account, send nothing, and then get it closed by sending a spam complaint. Even the dumbest safety check would have proven the alligation to be false because Microsoft should be able to tell from logs that zero messages were ever sent from the account, so even if that was 100% spam that's still zero spam messages!

    The risk of having an account stripped from you because somebody who knows your address falsely accuses you of being a spamer is a bit high to take. Then again, anybody who takes their e-mail seriously shouldn't be on Hotmail anyway...

  9. It's kind of ironic, isn't it? by bennomatic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I gave up on Hotmail a long time ago, not because of spam sent from those accounts, but because any time I opened up a hotmail account, it was immediately deluged by SPAM

    --
    The CB App. What's your 20?
  10. hotmail closing accounts by networkBoy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Not too sure how I feel about this....
    On one hand I applaud the proactive stance of shutting down spammers, but on the other hand I feel that an account should maybe be sent one warning which, if not answered within 1 day or so would then result in account suspension.
    Or, you are prevented from sending out any more e-mails until you respond to a "human test" e-mail.

    Just my thoughts...
    -nB

    --
    whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
  11. A solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think something like this could work, but not on it's own.

    ISPs should send a letter or e-mail to all their customers (i.e.
    make sure they get it) stating that they are about to introduce
    rate-limiting both from their smtp servers for that IP address/subnet
    and from port 25 from the IP(s).

    Customers who don't know what this means or who aren't bothered will
    ignore it, and will be rate-limited (so they basically won't be
    affected since they either a) aren't bothered, or b) aren't heavy
    e-mail users).

    Customers who know they will be affected or otherwise want to be
    rate-unlimited can e-mail the ISP and request the rate be removed.
    Perhaps they could be asked to prove they are worthy by describing
    what they've done ("I've patched and secured my Windows box, and
    my other boxen run BSD and run no mail daemons").

    This way, no one has their service unfairly cut back, and unknowledgable
    users (those responsible for zombie-Windows systems) will be protected
    (or everyone else protected from them..).

  12. LOL by RealityMogul · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ok, so what'll happen if you send a message about spam from "abuse@hotmail.com" to "abuse@hotmail.com"???

  13. Dupe! by mattjb0010 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Slashdot, more repetitive than spam

  14. I am Impressed by Mashiki · · Score: 4, Informative

    Really. Those types of machines really are the bane, since Comcast actually started 'doing' something I've seen *nothing* from them. My inbox was empty for the better part of 2-3 weeks, no spam just e-mail. Then yesterday, I start getting a barage of spam from asian open relays. 35 e-mails to 70 spams a day and now it's climbing through the roof, really now. Pop online and I see 207 spams. Gah.

    I mean come off it. And you *wonder* why entire asian hosts are blocked. It's because of crap like that, secure your machines or boot the bloody idijits off of them.

    I don't care if you are too stupid to figure out *how* to do it, pay someone, call that smart 12 year old who knows how but do it. But bloody well do it.

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
  15. Companies from Basements? by pridkett · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The poster makes the claim that 100 per hour or 500 per day would only cause problems for people running companies from their basements. I heartily disagree. Think of people who run mailing lists from their home servers, these can easily send out more than 500 messages a day. Another example, when I recently got engaged, I sent out an email to a LOT of people. Probably over the course of that first hour after I sent out the original notice I sent out well more than 100 emails. I wasn't doing anything wrong.

    The real fact of the matter is that this will do nothing to stem the tide of spam when one considers that most spam is now generated by zombies. Also, don't think they won't just find a way around it. This is like the DMCA, it only stops the honest people.

    Fortunately, there has been some movement on SPF.
    I suppose I can be happy about that.

    --
    My Slashdot account is old enough to drink...
  16. Re:Blame the victim? by AmigaAvenger · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Guess what, the most exploited open relays are running unix/linux variants, either because they are in a country that doesn't care about spam, or because some wannabe system admin-computer geek set up linux and doesn't know how to secure sendmail.

  17. OT: Quote source by Platinum+Dragon · · Score: 3, Informative

    Neither.

    "Caedite eos! Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius"
    "Slay them all! God will known his own!"
    -Abbe Arnaud-Amaury, before the slaughter of Beziers during the Albigensian Crusade

    --

    Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
  18. Already happens in the UK by CdBee · · Score: 5, Interesting

    At least one UK ISP (NTL Cable) started doing this at the time of the Blaster worm to reduce the rate of infection among their subscribers. Machines which were infected and transmitting infected packets were booted off the network and not allowed to reconnect until they were clean. Owners had to contact NTL to get theirconnections unblocked.

    As a techy, I ended up cleaning up several machines so their internet-porn deprived owners could feed their fixations. That said, I can't blame NTL for doing this, it was the responsible action and was done at the right time.

    I believe that the duty of ISPs to prevent their customers destroying the internet by inadvertent DDOS should be at least as important as the contractual duty to the consumer.

    --
    I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
  19. Membership impact by BoomThing · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So if I email an event notice to my club membership list of 208 addresses, (given freely for this purpose) I'll be labelled a spammer unless I split the mailing up over 3 hours? There are other ways to find spammers besides shear output.

    --

    ~~~~~

    If you throw it, it will come.

    1. Re:Membership impact by fishbowl · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You might find it much more effective to put your club calendar on a web page, doesn't have to be any fancier than whatever you email out. All 208 members of your club know to look there for updates.

      This approach beats the "spamming out the newsletter to a list" approach, hands down. Especially when your list grows past manageable sizes.

      If you want to operate a mailing list for your interest group, there are good ways to go about that. If you want to dissemenate information periodically, there are much more effective ways than email, more reliable, an overall better use of resources, easier to manage, and just plain the right way to do things.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  20. Collusion? by sfjoe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Consumers who allow their infected computers to send out millions of "spam" messages could be unplugged from the Internet under a proposal released Tuesday by six large e-mail providers.

    Isn't conspiring to restrain trade illegal? Comcast, AOL and others might be opening themselves up to suits from legitimate businesses.
    From businesslaw.gov:
    "Antitrust laws make it illegal to conspire to restrain trade or commerce in any marketplace, regardless of size."

    --
    It's simple: I demand prosecution for torture.
  21. strange by WormholeFiend · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Back when I was still clueless about spoofing, I sent an abuse complaint to Hotmail about some spam I had received that looked like it came from a hotmail account...

    They replied with an explanation of what spoofing was.

    Then again, maybe the spoofed hotmail address didnt exist in the first place, so they couldnt shut it down sight unseen as they seem to be doing now.

  22. Distributing patches on sign-up disks by CdBee · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A lot of people's hijacked systems could have been kept clean were they fully patched:

    I've been saying for a while now, if an ISPs sign-up disk had all current Windows service packs and critical patches loaded into it and installed them as part of the setup procedure -"You consent to Windows update patches being applied to your system during install"- then I'm sure a lot of network and support load could be lifted off the ISP and the net as a whole. If they could broker a deal to install Zonealarm or Sygate Personal firewall at the same time even better.

    It isn't an unreasonable expectation that a machine connecting to a public network shouldn't have gaping security gaps. In fact, IMO, it is a public duty that it should not.

    --
    I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
  23. Dear Microsoft, by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 4, Funny

    It has come to my attention that the email address
    [*@hotmail.com] has been sending out large quantities of spam.

    Please correct the situation as you see fit.

    --
    "I only speak the truth"
    Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
  24. One problem by Apreche · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The one problem I see is this. You get virussed and your pc starts spamming. You get cut off. Good, that's what you deserve. Your ISP will reconnect you , but if you send spam again you get cut off again. How can you clean out your pc without downloading some cleaning software from the net?

    This pretty much forces users to take one of 4 paths
    1) reinstall
    2) buy software at the store
    3) switch to linux (same as 1 really)
    4) find another net connected computer

    4 is easy for people like /.ers, but almost impossible for average folk, like my parents. 2 really shouldn't be encouraged, ever. 1 and 3 are daunting tasks for the average person also. So what your really doing by cutting them off is permanently cutting them off.

    I think what has to be done is this. Don't cut them off entirely. Just force them to a page hosted by your ISP that helps them fix their problem. Provide some cleaning software. Maybe some harsh informative words. You know, that sort of thing. Until they fix up just route all the mail they spew out to /dev/null.

    --
    The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
  25. Don't disconnect, redirect. by AnotherBlackHat · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Instead of a complete disconnect, why not redirect all traffic to a proxy that permits connections only to specific anti-virus and update sites, and directs all other web traffic to a page that says "your machine has been quarantined for {spamming|DDoSing|Whatever}, here's what you need to do to fix it..."

    Allow them to reach microsoft update and redhat.com and they're more likely to be able to fix the problem.

    -- not a .sig

  26. Lose/Lose Situation by Cornflake917 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My mom basically runs a country dance club in my hometown. It has well over 500 members in it. Every month she sends out a newsletter by email to all the members that request it. She's already have had problems with spam. Her ISP's spam protection labeled her address as a spammer so she couln't get these newsletters to anyone for a while. Her dialup ISP seemed be pretty cool about it when she called them, and were able to resolve the problem immediately. But if her ISP would follow the ways of these email providers, it would probably force her to email the newsletter over the course of a few days, which would be really annoying and cause problems. Assuming she doesn't get "unplugged."

    I can understand that spamming has got really out of hand, and that something needs to be done about it. But I think the countermeasures might screw other people (like my mom) who are running non-profit orginazations and are sending information on their member's request. It's unfortunate that a handful of people who want to make a few dollars by abusing a system screw over the people who use that system ethically.

  27. Re:Get another hosting provider right away? by TheMCP · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Their attitude is just assinie, and quite frankly shows that they don't know anything abuot how the internet works (hint: anyone can send email claming to be from anyone else. And almost all spam is faked this way)
    I got through to talk to someone. Basically, they do understand what's going on, but they say that it doesn't matter if I sent it or not, if AOL complains enough and they don't terminate my account, AOL will blacklist them and that will cost them too much business. They were able to tell me the subject line of the message being complained about, and it very definitely is spam that I didn't send. (and I'm the only user on my domain.) And, they did tell me that the complaint came from AOL.
    You do own your own domain, right?
    Yup, I do, but I'm really poor because I'm unemployed, and I prepaid my hosting service for a year. So, if they cut me off, I'll have to scrape together money to get a new hosting service (my web site hosts my resume and portfolio) and that would be a hardship to me at the moment. I did my homework on hosting services before signing up, and the one I selected had the best customer ratings in its price class. It upsets me that I'm still having these problems.
    The worst part of being jo-jobbed is that there's really nothing you can do about it, since you can't track down the offender. And the hundreds of bounce messages you get every day...
    Fortunately, Mailblocks filtered out the hundreds of bounce messages, but they didn't include the original message so I can't report it to the FTC. I really want a copy of that original so I can have the spammer prosecuted, which is why I'm trying to get a copy from the hosting service.
  28. A problem with deactivating accounts on sight.. by nurb432 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The problem with an ISP ( or email service ) canceling an account due to JUST a complaint is that most e-mail's are spoofed..

    If you just take the 'shown' send-from, and complain, you just had an innocent bystander's account wiped...

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  29. You are not allowed to send email anymore... by evilviper · · Score: 4, Informative
    They are looking at 100 per hour or 500 per day; this doesn't really sound like a bad idea, though it could cause problems for a few people trying to run companies from their basement...

    Umm, no. The days when you could send emails from your own SMTP server are long gone now.

    First, the cheapest ISPs blocked port 25 entirely, except to their own SMTP server. The idea caught on, and most are blocking port 25.

    Now, even with the very good ISPs, you can send mail over port 25, but even major ISPs are using different spam lists like the SORBs DUL, that blocks ALL EMAIL from dynamic IP addresses, bar none.

    In the near future, having a static IP and one of the better ISPs won't help still. You'll also need to be running your own DNS server, and provide SPF records.

    Frankly, limiting people to 500 emails per day is rather benign compared to all the other measures that have already been taken up to this point. All signs point to the future being even worse for anyone who doesn't want their e-mail service provided by one of the big ISPs.
    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  30. Re:Open relays - SPF by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 3, Interesting

    SPF is a good idea in theory, but it can cause nightmarish problems in some situations.

    One of my customers has their website hosted by one company, and their internet access provided by another company. Their email clients were set up to use their ISP's mail servers, rather than their webhost's, but still use their domain name for the outgoing address.
    The webhoster implemented SPF, and all of a sudden, they couldn't send emails within the company, because they were coming in from mail.isp.com, as opposed to mail.webhoster.com.
    The webhost company's solution was: "Use our mail server."
    This would be fine, other than the ISP blocks outgoing port 25 to prevent spam, thereby prohibiting the use of any mail server other than mail.isp.com.
    If everybody used the same anti-spam solutions, it would be fine, but they don't, and the mish-mash makes legitimate email very difficult to send sometimes.

    --
    "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......