Slashdot Mirror
Gates' Resolve in Bringing Spammers to Justice
An anonymous reader writes "It didn't seem to me like any single company had the stomach to keep after the scum that are ruining the Net for the rest of us. Unless that company is Microsoft. Since the beginning of 2003, Microsoft has filed 96 lawsuits against spammers, and 119 lawsuits against phishers. By any measure, 215 lawsuits constitutes a legal juggernaut. "
Wow - Microsoft/Gates usually gets a bad rap on /., but
kudos to them for going after the
scumbags
of the Internet. Another group I find annoying is the folks
who do
referrer
log spamming. Even though I don't publish those log stats (so their
efforts are to naught), they continue to send their stupid traffic
and it's a bit annoying to see in the web log analysis.
Hulk SMASH Celiac Disease
Don't you realize that every time you say something nice about Microsoft, Bill and Melinda dine on one of those Indian babies they've "saved" from HIV? How to serve man, indeed!
In all seriousness, the spam epidemic is actually caused by a relatively tiny number of people, so it would seem that this is a workable strategy - but the cause will just be taken up by people outside of our jurisdiction (Russians, mostly.)
The good and new comes from no quarter where it is looked for, and is always something different from what is expected.
How exactly would you suggest that they improve their software to prevent spam and phishing?
Sometimes a little stick can be a good thing...
Here's what I do: Bitty Browser & Andromeda
All the big ISPs have been after spammers for quite a while now. I believe that AOL is owed a few million by that bankrupt spammer who featured in another /. story quite recently.
Strange: If any one company out there has the install base to actually do something technical about spam, it's Microsoft, yet they'd rather sue than improve their product.
I'm surprised ISP's aren't filing hundreds of lawsuits. They claim their servers are so overworked by all the spam, but they aren't doing anything effective about it (legally or technically).
Reducing Spam makes people use MS computers (and Exchange) more (as opposed to the alternatives).
:)
- Investing in spam filter technology reduces spam.
- Sueing spammers also reduces spam.
The optimal strategy will be to persue both strategies till they yield the same rate of spam reduction.
And that rate should be determined by whatever they think they earn on spam reduction.
My bet is that someone at MS has done the math.
And it keeps their lawyers sharp, who knows how and when that will come in handy
...probably just got tired of getting spam and 419ers in his Hotmail inbox / Outlook Express. So instead of developing better filters, he decided to take them out.
Someone might as well invite BillG to Gmail already.
In any battle, technology is only a small bit of it. Policy is an area that is far more important than technology in most situations, even when you don't know it. Would you rather they sit on their hands and let the spammers continue to ruin the internet?
I don't see you taking an active step to stop spammers other than maybe a little filtering and deletion here and there.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
Can Slashdot ever accept the fact that Microsoft can do some good? I'd be willing to bet that 30% of the comments on this article will be "OMG MICRO$OFT IS GOOD?!". Accept the fact that they really can do good things and shut with the Microsoft bashing.
.
The next step is improving their software and improving the security on their platform. Just keeping regular security updates is good. Hopefully they will continue with their Anti-Spyware tool which isn't bad.
If there's one place Microsoft should feel right at home, it's in court. . .
The only acceptable defense of scientific results is to say that they were the product of the Scientific Method.
I know it's very hard for some of you people to get over your silly fanboy-ish attitude, but when MS does something good, why not praise them. Yes, they have bad business practices. Doesn't mean you have have crap on their image every single time.
This is somewhat like P2P. They might not be able to get whomever is joining these spamming companies for work, but it would certainly discourage people from getting jobs in these places. I think just that would prove a significant blow to these places.
My two cents.
Do notice that MS isn't suing virus writers. In fact, didn't they just forgive a huge amount against a virus writer in exchange of community service??
No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. - Cmdr. Susan Ivanova
But.... what will we talk about then?? Star Wars isn't out yet, and Linus can't release a new kernel every few hours. We NEED MS bashing to keep our over-active/over-worked minds finely-tuned.
No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. - Cmdr. Susan Ivanova
All joking aside, we have long considered Micro$oft an evil corporation. Sure on the side Bill Gate$ donates a lot of money, mostly to create little Micro$oft $chools that will plaster the logo all over the place and burn it into little growing consumers heads.
With all the evil they have done, is there any way that they could do enough good for the evil to be forgotten, or at least to break even thus making them a "Corporation" not an "Evil Corporation"?
Sure this is a start, but it is done more to protect themselves and their products than it is to better the lives of consumers. Suing spammers is just a way to hopefully get hotmail back to a point where you can actually use it.
This sig has been removed pending an investigation.
You may be talking about this:
He's still got time, then.
That means that spammers have continued to be able to fake the headers out, and it makes it harder to filter off the spam (particularly on the send side of email- in other words, stopping spam enter the internet in the first place).
So, Microsoft have taken the decision to fund lawyers, rather than fund technology that is likely to massively reduce spam; Microsoft have sided with a bunch of lawyers.
-WolfWithoutAClause
"Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"Funny you say that, I've started responding to so-called spam recently.
I now have a 14" long penis, a £500,000 mortgage (on income of a twentieth of that!), more software than I know what to do with and some very nice pictures of Brintey Spears (well, that's who they said she was, but I'm sure she doesn't spell her name like that...).
I get medicines at exceptionally low prices (though I'm a bit concerned about the side effects I've been having from that the last batch of aspirin), and my printer is unlikely to run out of ink until 2009. Provided it doesn't explode like my last one did when I put those special chinese cartridges in. Damn cheap printers.
Of course, none of this comes cheap. But when a nice man in Nigeria has promised you 25% of $20,000,000, you can afford to splash out now and then...
While it may be de rigueur here on /. to bash Microsoft, sometimes one has to put the tinfoil hat away and commend them for doing something good.
Sure, you can pull out some commercial motive behind this act, but hey, so what? When they annouce their fantastic new anti spam OS, we can bash them here, but if these lawsuits do help in reducing Spam, then hooray for MS!
Apropos, I remember reading that billg@microsoft.com gets one million messages every day, 98% of which is Spam. I suppose he just got plain old PISSED OFF!!
If they become the unofficial police of the internet, they will be first in line to be the official ones, when government (with a little help from microsoft) decides that such a body should exist.
Where are the supposed "good guys"?
I realize the OSS community is doing things with their software to try and defeat spammers and phishers, but let's face it, legal action is the only real course of action to stop these guys (or at least whittle down their numbers).
Phishers and spammers will always find ways around filters, no matter what intelligence is brought to bear with new algorithms. New mail protocols would help, but we are hopelessly mired in a standard that will take a miracle to topple at this point (perhaps some new multi-media e-mail standard?). People won't buy into an e-mail system other than SMTP/POP unless it brings something significant to the table, and is as simple and easy to use.
The OSS community has for-profit companies out there... why aren't they flexing their muscle to help stop these scammers? Microsoft is at least doing something... and it demonstrates exactly what a big corporation like that can do when that lkind of capital is directed at doing something worthwhile.
I think in the fervor to attack the supposed "evil monolith" people here tag as "Micro$oft", they forget exactly how much Gates, his company, and his employees donate to good causes around the world.
The IETF standard for crypto-signed email headers was substantially derailed by Microsoft not wanting to 'play nicely' with the extremely large proportion of the email servers out there that run on open source.
So, Microsoft imposed licensing requirements that the open source community couldn't meet. Yeah, to that extent, I blame Microsoft. That's not an Open Source failure, it's a deliberate licensing decision by Microsoft to write the license that way; even after it was clear what the effect would be- ultimately to help spammers.
-WolfWithoutAClause
"Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"no argument its a good start , however it would be nice if they would
.. .couples this with some basic computer security knowlidge(dont open LOVEYOU.jpg.VIRUS.WORM) and i assure you it would reduce spam far more in one year than 10 years of legal action
1: make sure active X is patched to make it far more secure.(killing it would be nice , but wont hapen for a while due to a hell of alot of websites using controlls)
2: make sure each user knows that they should not be running as an admin all the time and allow them an easy way to become and admin for installs etc
3: a large list of phising techniques and how they spoof browsers is easily avaliable and could be use to create a few fixes (all browser makers should do this).
In my mind the only way to stop spam properly is education , people need to learn to not accept it and not to buy from it
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
They're damned if they do, and damned if they don't.
/. where no Microsoft action (good or bad) goes unpunished.
If they sued them, people would yell David and Goliath. If they let them go, people say they're not helping the community.
This is
My Tech Posts on Twitter
... as long as spammers believe that there is money to be made by spamming. And that means that spamming will continue as long as email is so cheap to send and as long as there are sufficiently many dimwits who respond to spam. And there doesn't have to be very many such dimwits. You can sue as many spammers as you like; as long as there is money to be made, new spammers will appear in their place. The only irreplaceable part of the equation is the low cost of email compared to the money to be made even from a very low response rate.
I don't know what the typical response rates for spam are, but even if one in a thousand or ten thousand recipients is an idiot who answers the spam and sends money, or even one in a million, then it's worth it to spam, because the cost of sending a thousand or ten thousand or even a million emails is nearly nothing. At any rate, it can easily be much less than what spammers charge for their product.
One conceivable alternative is to make it more expensive to send email. If there were some way to establish "postage" for email, then even infintesimal costs for sending email, say 1/100th of a cent per email, would probably be effective, because then spammers would lose money by sending a million spams. But I can't see how such a system could be enforced, and I doubt that most people would go along with it, even if the costs for normal email use is very low.
I also doubt that any amount of education or cajoling could reduce that rate of idiots in the general public to less than one in a thousand, certainly not less than one in a million. Putting all these thoughts together, I come to the depressing conclusion that we will never, ever be able to make spam go away, no matter what we do.
Always keep a sapphire in your mind
By any measure, 215 lawsuits constitutes a legal juggernaut.
I guess you've never heard of a little group known as the RIAA.
"3: a large list of phising techniques and how they spoof browsers is easily avaliable and could be use to create a few fixes (all browser makers should do this). .."
A better way would be to turn OFF HTML in email by default. Most of the phishing scams as well as spams I have recieved have goofy lines of trash text to fool the spam checkers. I always thought it was stupid to use HTML email anyway.
B.
This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.
I'm glad to see that somebody is going after these theives. Now, if only law enforcement agencies would press criminal charges against them, and help ordinary people out the way they do for corporations, we'd be all set.
"Do I dare disturb the universe?"
Usually the damages awarded are beyond the paying capacity of the spammers and phishers.
Microsoft will never see any money from this Scum bags.
With the legal costs involved Microsoft is losing money.
And leave it to some people to term all good actions as PR moves.
1. To the general public it looks as if they are solving the issue, where we know here that most spam is send by proxy on Wintendo machines.
2. By solving it this way they do not have to solve the technical unsafety.
3. If they win they make money out of the spammers.
Now if I were Microsoft, I would just start suing everybody. As long as you see that the case will be more expensive then what they can afford, people will settle out of court. Where you took Joe "the bonecracker" Seipacchetti to meetings to 'convince' people of the advantages of insurence, you now just take a lawer with you, take their money and don't even bother about delivering anything.
As long as 'suing till they are broke' is possible, I fail to see justice. Sorry. No matter how much I hate spam, I hate justice by money even more.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Robbing banks is VERY lucrative.
Yet your corner bank isn't robbed every day (or week or month or year).
There might be strong incentive to send spam and make lots of money, but the spam still has to go out on technological avenues. All you have to do is to identify those and limit their effectiveness.
#1. Zombies.
#2. Open Relays.
#3. Individual email accounts (30 day AOL free!)
#4. Sites owned by the spammer.
If you look at it that way, you'll see why MULTIPLE measures are needed. What will work against zombies will NOT work against Individual email accounts.
If you deal with the tech, then the incentive won't matter because there won't be any way to implement it.
Since this is about Microsoft's involvment, I'll focus on what they could do.
#1. Zombies. Microsoft announces a partnership with the ISP's and those ISP's block outgoing port 25 on their home connections. Microsoft offsets the cost of this with a couple $$Million$$ to each ISP for hardware upgrades and support calls. Anyone who needs port 25 access (people who work from home and don't have systems setup to handle it) can call and have enabled for their address.
#2. Open Relays. Microsoft forms a partnership with spamhaus, spamcop, etc to mirror the open relay databases of those people. Since Microsoft also has Hotmail and MSN, Microsoft is in a great position to identify new open relays and add them to the list as they are abused.
#3. Individual email accounts. Not much that Microsoft needs to do here. All the ISP's need to do is to limit the outgoing email to 10 unique connections per minute.
#4. Spammer sites. Again, Microsoft helps by hosting a mirror of the blacklists.
There, the spam problem is down to a tiny fraction of what it was. The spammers might still WANT to send spam, but HOW are they going to do it?
Is Gates going after spammers per se, or going after competition They still sell out their Hotmail and MSN mailing lists to interested advertisers, don't they?