Slashdot Mirror


A Day with an ISP Spam Investigator

scumbucket writes "Network World Fusion has an interesting article about an abuse investigator for ISP Earthlink and his job of tracking down spammers. It's nice to see that major ISP's are making an effort to shut spammers down and kick them off of their networks."

8 of 167 comments (clear)

  1. How to solve the Spam problem by SimianOverlord · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This si interesting, but you have to say this guy is fighting a losing battle. You have to fight Spam at its source. Look at the Spamhaus statistics: it might sound trollish, but spam is evidently an American problem, which must be combated in America. The Spamhaus stats prove it. 90% of the spam you see is from 200 individuals, of whom 96% are Americans, operating out of america.

    Clean up your act guys. When you're costing the world this much money, it just isn't funny anymore.

    --
    Meine Schwester ist sehr, sehr reizvoll - Nietzsche
  2. Abuse by Michael+Hunt · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What's needed is every ISP having a consistently responsive abuse department. From what i've seen, everbody except the largest tier-1 ISPs do, with most of them having a substantive presence on abuse and anti-spam lists, and responsive to complaints.

    It's the major .us tier-1 ISPs and most of .cn/.kr that are seriously culpable these days; from what I've seen working in the anti-spam arena these last six months, uu.net/MCI and their peers don't give a shit because, well, nobody's going to refuse to peer with them if they host spammers. Same thing in .cn/.kr, their broadband industries net the larger .us providers large $ over the longer term, and it's not in their best interests to be overly proactive.

    Which is a shame; KISA (.kr equivalent of the FCC/ACA/etc) have got a great early-warning system set up, which shows transit traffic between .kr ASs in real time; we were given a demo at AusCERT 2004. The fact that they won't use this more proactively is depressing.

    About 40% of my current spam corpus is from korea, the other 60% is about 30/30/40% china, uu.net, and comcast/verizon open proxies.

  3. White Hat or Censorship? by iamatlas · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As this article from Satire Wire shows, spam can be a work of art or literature.

  4. Re:Self interest (What is the Cost?) by G4from128k · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Well they don't do it because they wont to help the world. But spam means extra bandwidth, so extra cost.

    I've heard many a system admin complain about the "cost of spam" to their networks, but have not seen a quantification of that cost. Given that spams are so small (the ones that I get average 4kB/spam), the storage costs of saving every spam (at 1$/GB) are about only 4 micro$/spam and the transfer costs (at $3/GB of transfer to pick a Google figure) are only 12 micro$/spam. Even CPU time is cheap. If a $2000 server CPU can handle only 10 messages per second (an underestimate?) then the cost in CPU time is only about 6 micro$/spam. In total, a million spams would cost an ISP maybe $20 or $30 which is far less that the burdened labor cost of one hour of a technician's time.

    What am I missing here? Can any admins tell me the true dollar cost per spam? The only other reason, that I can think of, is that Earthlink fights spam to avoid blacklisting because blacklisting would drive up support costs when a million customers call at ask why their emails aren't getting through.

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
  5. But at which cost? by c0p0n · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They seem to monitor their user's passwords...

    (Page 2)...One notorious spammer, whom EarthLink helped put behind bars, repeatedly used the names of sports such as baseball and football as his password...

    I thought that passwords SHOULD not be easily unencrypted... or do they monitor them before encryption?

    --

    Your head a splode
  6. Re:Self interest (What is the Cost?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And how many spam messages pass trough a serious isp's network? I think you'd be surprised...

    Part of the cost is also due to filtering and to the extra admin costs for implementing enough capacity to hold the extra spam..

  7. Interesting article... by Saint+Aardvark · · Score: 5, Interesting
    ...though it would be interesting to know the volume that comes out of willful spammers (as opposed to zombie pcs) operating from throwaway ISP accounts, as opposed to people with pink contracts and truckloads of bandwidth.

    Incidentally, this bit:

    ...a judge...complained that a man with a criminal record who landed in his courtroom was sending malicious e-mail. The harasser was complaining to the judge about such minutia as the fringe on the American flag hanging in his courtroom.

    was interesting to me. This sounds like the oft-repeated assertion that a US flag with a fringe in a courtroom means that you're under Admiralty law, not the law of the United States, and that anyone who appears before that court has lost most of their rights. Of course, They don't want you to know this...or that England still owns the US, or that there is a subtle yet vitally important difference between the United States and the United States of America that means you are 0wn3d by the government...

    I tell you, there are worlds upon worlds of free entertainment out there on the Internet.

  8. Re:Self interest (What is the Cost?) by Saint+Aardvark · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Okay, here's a quantification of that cost.

    I used to work at a small ISP -- lets say 5000 customers. We were getting lots of complaints about spam, so we decided to put in better spam filtering. That required a bigger server. Then the mail server went down for half an hour because of the volume of incoming spam, and there was a suddenly a big rush on getting the new server up and running.

    The server was the cheap part: let's say $2000 (all figures Canadian) for the box, rackmount, hard drives, yadda blah. Thank God for Free software, because FreeBSD and SpamAssassin saved our asses. It took me, conservatively, three full days to set up and get it more or less right; I was doing a lot of learning on the job, and the regular sysadmin was away.

    Now, don't forget that we were down for half an hour. This was from roughly 9am to 9:30am on that day, so that's a busy fucking time for us. There were tons of calls and only three people to handle them; fortunately, I was pressed into service trying to fix things, and wasn't on the phones. We probably lost a couple customers then, but most people were pretty understanding, especially when they were told it was fuckwad spammers who were causing the problem.

    Complaints were a huge deal, both before and after the filtering was put in place; I was dealing with most of them, because I was doing abuse duties, and it wasn't fun. Complaints before the new server was installed went, "Why am I getting all this spam? Why can't you stop it?" Complaints afterward went, "Why am I still getting all this spam? Why isn't your filtering working? What do you mean, I have to set up my mail program to do more work?" (We set the threshold rather high, thinking that customers could use filtering in their mail client to set their own tolerance level. Ha! It is to laugh. Ever tried filtering on random headers in Outlook Express 5.0?)

    Plus, there was maintenance of the server and software; upgrades were never fun; false positives happened and were dealt with; and now, my sources tell me, they've graduated to buying dual-fucking-xeon processors in order to handle spam filtering. Fuck me!

    But hey, we were after a dollar cost, and I did get sidetracked. We already said $2k for the server. Three days of my time, $400 (deal!). Half an hour when everything in the company came to a halt because no one could send mail or do anything but answer the phones: $500, and that's probably very conservative. Two customers' worth of lost revenue for a year: say another $500. Spam complaints before took, oh, probably a good five solid days of my time: $650. Afterward was probably the same, so another $650. I know of at least one customer we lost afterward when the spam filtering wasn't the magic bullet I kept trying to tell them didn't exist, so $250. Bandwidth for all the spam we were accepting but kept from reaching the customers: let's say $50, for a nice round total of $5000.

    Now this is very, very rough back-of-the-envelope calculations for a small dialup ISP I no longer work at; the managers there could probably tell you more about lost good will and so on. More importantly, it doesn't tell you about ongoing costs; that's just a snapshot from when I worked there. But that was $5000 spent by an ISP that was going down the tubes (true story), just to keep up (barely) with a denial-of-service attack that was slowly grinding us into the floor. I can't even imagine what it's like for AOL or Hotmail. Nor will we ever know what that time and effort and money might have done if it wasn't being spent on spam.

    Goddamn fuckwad spammers piss me off.