Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Spam Gets Personal

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the only-a-matter-of-time dept.

Vitaly Friedman writes "Two researchers demonstrate how much more effective spam could become if its authors used basic data-mining to personalize their messages. From the article: "North America, though no longer the world leader in spam production, still has serious potted meat problems. A recent research paper out of the University of Calgary suggests that those problems could soon be a lot worse if spam creators adopt a few simple data-mining procedures.""

4 of 141 comments (clear)

  1. Why are we helping spammer? by MrBulwark · · Score: 5, Funny

    And while we are at it, lets publish a paper telling people how to do a better job money laundering, or new way to smuggle cocain into the country.

    1. Re:Why are we helping spammer? by fosterNutrition · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Don't be so hasty to attack their research. If you think about it, this isn't really any different from publishing a whitepaper showing how to break the DRM on a file, or how to phreak an old phone. No, this is not intended as flamebait, but it seems to me like any distinction drawn between those actions is based simply on the prevailing culture and attitudes at /. where breaking DRM = good, sending spam = bad.

      Now I'm not trying to argue that we should have more spam, but the people at Sony would also not want to argue that we should have more DRM-cracking. It's simply a matter of perspective. And anyway, I'm sure the paper (no I didn't RTFA) was created to try to address the problem before it really shows up so it's not so bad rather than encouraging the noxious spamlords.

  2. Re:What else do they have? by MadUndergrad · · Score: 5, Funny

    Really, I think papers on how to pick up girls are would be greatly appreciated by the greater /. community. In fact, it seems only natural that nerds would use papers and research to figure this sort of thing out. It's either that or Vader masks.

  3. Recommendations by Viraptor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Fortunately for those who detest spam, the authors also present four new defenses that could help stop this newer, more personalized spam. First, e-mail archives can be encrypted, making it difficult for malware to mine them for information.


    WOW - so I've got to accept that my computer IS broken into and encrypt even local data? Thank you very much - my computer would rather not be broken into.

    Second, these archives can also be "salted" with false information such as spam trap addresses. Third, the authors suggest that all URLs followed from an e-mail client be viewed in a "sandboxed" browser that would prevent automatic downloads.


    Sandboxed browser? Ok - they're joking. Who uses external content displaying in their mail? And anyone hasn't got a "HTML=+80% spam" rule in mail client yet, generated AUTOMATICALLY FROM EXAMPLES?

    Finally, anti-spam filters can be adjusted to better screen for these types of attacks.


    Care to elaborate?

    Ok - this is all going in the wrong direction. Why shouldn't I trust *my system*? Why should I allow my incomming mail to use outside objects? I thought that people, who can build a natural-language-messages data mining / composing system can understand basics of home computer security...
    Besides - if spam will mimic a friend's style and probably send mail as that friend - then you know exactly who to filter out and who needs billing for a "PC security" lessons ;)