Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

20,000 Zombie PCs -- $3000

Posted by samzenpus on from the but-I-wanted-30,000-computers dept.

Saint Aardvark writes "From F-Secure blog comes these links to two USA Today articles on spamming. The first gives an example of how a grandmother ended up becoming a security expert after Comcast cut her connection for spamming. The second quotes spammers advertising networks of Zombie PCs for sale. The price? $3000 for 20,000 machines."

2 of 423 comments (clear)

  1. Odd. by nathan+s · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have to say, I don't understand how people get into so much trouble.

    Maybe I've been lucky, but I've ran a Windows XP system for about a year now (and a Windows 98SE system for about 2 years prior under the same conditions), doing the occasional patches from Windows Update, without a virus scanner or firewall. If I do something stupid that makes me suspect that I've contracted something, I'll drop over to http://housecall.antivirus.com/ and do a quick scan. This generally only happens when I'm trying to find a crack for something on a P2P network and the bastards have embedded a keystroke logger or some other little nasty in a trojan crack package.

    Otherwise, I do an occasional glance-over at the list of processes running, and if my modem is lighting up like a Christmas tree I might fire up Sygate Personal Firewall or something just to see what's happening with the traffic, but I've never seen it give me real cause for concern. I still get some port traffic for the old Code Red worms and what not, but nothing that seems to have been really problematic.

    As I said, maybe I'm just lucky. Then again, maybe I don't use Internet Explorer or Outlook Express, and maybe that helps a lot. Who knows.:-)

    --
    picpix image polls. create - share - vote. fun!
  2. Tired of inflated stats by shogarth · · Score: 5, Interesting
    In July, spam made up 94.5% of e-mail traffic, nearly double from a year before, says e-mail management firm MessageLabs.

    Does anyone else wonder where MessageLabs gets their statistics? I can't help but wonder at their methodology (though I suspect rectal extraction). I get daily reports on SpamAssassin and my configured DNS block lists for the servers I manage. Their spam traffic doesn't start to approach 95% of inbound messages. After eliminating all internal email from the statistics, SpamAssassin flags about 20% of incoming email as suspicious and SpamHaus blocks another 10% or so. These are not confidential, hard-to-find addresses. These are university servers where staff and faculty are required to have valid email addresses posted on the department web pages. Any spider worth a damn should have harvested them long ago. I find it very hard to believe that this environment is getting 60% less spam than systems that don't provide a directory of valid addresses.

    Spam is a problem, but it's time journalists (online and otherwise) start taking stats with a grain of salt. Too many organizations are willing to publish questionable numbers in an attempt to sound like they have thoroughly researched the issue.

    Or in the MessageLabs case, to sell a product that will 'solve' the problem.