Slashdot Mirror


Spam Hits 95% of All Email

An anonymous reader writes "Commtouch released its Email Threats Trend Report based on the automated analysis of billions of email messages weekly. The report examines the appearance of new kinds of attachment spamsuch as PDF spam and Excel spam together with the decline of image spam, as well as the growing threat of innocent appearing spam containing links to malicious web sites. Image spam declined to a level of less than 5% of all spam, down from 30% in the first quarter of 2007; also, image pump-and-dump spam has all but disappeared, with pornographic images taking its place."

4 of 270 comments (clear)

  1. That's not an unrealistic number by SaDan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I work at an ISP and we do SPAM detection and elimination at our border routers. We scan both incoming and outgoing email, and will auto blacklist our own internal IPs if we detect SPAM.

    The highest two-week percentage of rejected incoming email that I've seen broke 97% a few months ago. It's normally between 90% and 95%.

    It's loads of fun dealing with this crap.

  2. OK, another data point by CustomDesigned · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Checking my mail stats, since 4 am this morning, I've received 51985 emails, 51909 of which were filtered as spam. That's 99%. Checking the bandwidth monitor, the spam has consumed a steady 100Kbit/s since 4 am, despite being mostly blocked in SMTP envelope via SPF and reputation (SPF blocks forgeries, reputation blocks spammers with the balls to use their own domain).

  3. Why we can't stop spam with our current techniques by damn_registrars · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We can't stop it because we aren't addressing the real problem. Spam is an economic problem. People send out spam because they make money off of it. And they will therefore continue to send out spam as long as they make money off of it.

    If you want to stop spam, you have to remove the economic incentive. To do that, you need to cut off the co-conspirators that are allowing the spamvertised domains to be established and hosted. If you can either prevent them from getting a cut off the action, or punish them severely for taking their cut, then you can stop spam.

    Until then, if all we do is try to filter spam out, we'll just continue to see the costs of inaction. Beyond that, we're ignoring the fact that filtering has real costs, as well. Filtering doesn't prevent the spam from traversing the internet, and furthermore it requires human time to update as the spammers change their tactics.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  4. Email is dead, long live Email by kthejoker · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As email asymptotically reachs 100% spam, we will have essentially created a mechanism whose sole goal is to deliver us undesired ads and scams. Talking about spam detectors and blockers and blacklists is irrelevant. Why devote all of this energy to ensure that maybe 5, 10, or 20 people can contact you or your business a day? Or even 20,000, which only highlights the issue that separating spam from valid emails is just bad juju. Simply put, there is no solution to asynchronous communication that is not too tedious or too restrictive. We'd be a lot better off if we blew up all the email servers, and put all of the energy and cost savings into developing encrypted telepathy. You think I'm kidding.