Slashdot Mirror


I am the Most Spammed Person in the World

jefp writes "In November 2004, Microsoft's second-in-command Steve Ballmer made some headlines by mentioning that Chairman Bill Gates was getting four million spams per day. At the time, I was dealing with a little spam problem of my own - I was getting around a million spams per day. I found it a little comforting that my problem wasn't quite as bad as Bill's. However, a couple of weeks later Ballmer corrected himself, saying he mis-remembered the stat and Gates actually gets four million per year. This means I was getting one hundred times as much spam as Bill Gates. I've written a tutorial explaining why I get so much crapmail and how I deal with it."

9 of 478 comments (clear)

  1. Greylisting by nocomment · · Score: 5, Informative

    Just yesterday I enabled Greylisting in OpenBSD spamd, and today I got 6 spams, compared with my usual 150. (per day).

    It's easy to set up and works with your existing mail server. OUr mail server is qmail on red hat, but openbsd just ahppily redirects the legit (what it suspects might be legit rather) to the mail server. The load has dramatically decreaed on the mail server.

    --
    /* oops I accidentally made a comment, sorry */
    /* http://allyourbasearebelongto.us */
  2. Mirror by schnurble · · Score: 4, Informative

    Just to alleviate some of his bandwidth, I have mirrored the mail_filtering pages. Looks like it's all there. Let me know if you want me to take it down.

    --
    "To err is human, to forgive is simply not my policy." --root
  3. Re:nowhere by abulafia · · Score: 4, Informative

    I know the owner of that domain, and yes, she got so much mail that she ended up turning MX off for it.

    --
    I forget what 8 was for.
  4. Coral cache by gregbaker · · Score: 3, Informative

    The site seems to be slowing down, but the coral cache is going strong.

  5. Full text - it's Slashdoted (minus img and tables) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Mail Filtering

    Or, how to block a few million spams per day without breaking a sweat.

    © 2005 by Jef Poskanzer.

    Introduction

    In November 2004, Microsoft's second-in-command Steve Ballmer made some headlines by mentioning that Chairman Bill Gates was getting four million spams per day. At the time, I was dealing with a little spam problem of my own - I was getting around a million spams per day. I found it a little comforting that my problem wasn't quite as bad as Bill's. However, a couple of weeks later Ballmer corrected himself, saying he mis-remembered the stat and Gates actually gets four million per year.

    This means I was getting one hundred times as much spam as Bill Gates.

    Nevertheless, after filtering we both get about the same amount: around ten spams per day in our inboxes. Ballmer says that Microsoft has an entire department dedicated to protecting their mailboxes from spam. At ACME Labs there's just one guy, one server, and a T1 line. And yet my filters are a hundred times as effective as Microsoft's. How do I do it?

    These pages will show you how, and help you deploy similar filters on your own system.

    Goals

    What am I trying to do here?

    • Keep my email service running and useful.
    • Keep my web service running too, since it's on the same machine.
    • Avoid losing real email by mistake.
    • Delay growth in resource use, so I can delay spending money on hardware upgrades.
    • Spend as little time as possible on the above, so I can get more important things done.
    • Help other people do the same.

    Results

    For those who like to read the end of a novel first, here are some overall stats showing how the filters are performing.

    Environment

    This is all based on a Unix system running sendmail. If you're not using Unix, or you're using a different Unix-based mail system, most of the specific advice here will not help you. You may still find some value in the general ideas.

    Sendmail Config

    The first layer of spam defense is sendmail itself, because that's the first piece of software to touch each message. Sendmail has a number of different config options that can help you block spam and keep your machine stable.

    greet_pause

    As of version 8.13, sendmail added an anti-spam feature called "greet_pause". It is both simple and clever.

    In a normal SMTP transaction, first the client connects, then the server sends back a "220" greeting message, then the client sends its HELO command. Some spam programs, however, don't wait for the greeting message. They just send their commands immediately without listening.

    The greet_pause feature detects this misbehavior by pausing briefly before sending out the "220" greeting message. If any commands arrive during that pause, then the connection is marked bad and anything coming over it is ignored.

    This one is interesting because it actually cuts down on the number of spam attempts, not just the spam deliveries. I figure when the spammers hit the pause they are somehow getting stuck. I'll have a graph of this later - before I enabled greet_pause, I was getting a couple million spam attempts per day; after, only 600,000.

    To enable the feature, you need to make two changes. First, in your sendmail.mc file:

    FEATURE(access_db)dnl FEATURE(`greet_pause',5000)

    You probably already have access_db defined; it just needs to appear somewhere prior to greet_pause. The number is how many milliseconds to pause; 5000 = five seconds. Then in your access file you should add this:

    GreetPause:localhost 0

    The second change prevents the pause from applying

  6. Re:Before it was Slashdotted.. by LuckyStarr · · Score: 3, Informative

    In fact his Webserver still runs perfectly. Why do I know? Because I am reading his article. Slashdottings occur when webservers use more RAM than the system has. Kernel swaps, webserver allocates some more memory, tilt. So the obvious solution is to configure your webserver not to. :) I guess this is what he did. All incoming connects get queued by the kernel and handed over to the webserver if a slot gets available. It gets terribly slow (I can tell!), but if the user has a high timeout-value (of a minute or 2) then no error will occur at his end either.

    Very reliable tech I guess. :)

    --
    Meme of the day: I browse "Disable Sigs: Checked". So should you.
  7. Re:nowhere by njcoder · · Score: 3, Informative

    I used to use asdf.com all the time too.. Then one day I decided to see if it actually existed. This is a funny read. :)

  8. Re:qmail by spun · · Score: 5, Informative
    Short Answer: No, but other people do.

    Long Answer: The concern is the misdirected bounce. By default and in accordance with the RFC, qmail bounces messages it accepts then later decides it can't deliver back to the sender. Spammers use false return addresses, so you end up bouncing spam back to innocent third parties. When used with naive spam-filtering techniques, this can be a problem i.e. qmail accepts the message, but a spam filter rejects it, and it is bounced. Here's what SpamCop.net has to say about it:

    Qmail: Qmail is one popular mail exchanger which suffers from this problem by default. If you use qmail, please apply a patch: spamcontrol or qmail-ldap.

    There is also an experimental patch for qmail which allows you to send bounces, but isolate them on a different IP address (so that spamcop can block them without blocking other mail): Richard Lyons BOUNCEQUEUE patch

    PZInternet.com reports chkuser is a very good qmail patch to avoid misdirected bounces - very easy to install too! http://www.interazioni.it/opensource/chkuser/

    For users of qmail-toasters, check out the simscan patch

    Everything anti-spam is done by people other than djb. I love qmail, but it really isn't the easiest server to set up for spam control. One needs about a dozen patches to get it working right.
    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  9. Re:What hardware is your site running on, Jef? by jefp · · Score: 5, Informative

    Hardware info here. It's a 3.2 GHz P4. I was struggling along on a 450 MHz box until only a year ago, but finally had to upgrade.