Slashdot Mirror


Spam Is Back (theoutline.com)

Jon Christian, writing for The Outline: For a while, spam -- unsolicited bulk messages sent for commercial or fraudulent purposes -- seemed to be fading away. The 2003 CAN-SPAM Act mandated unsubscribe links in email marketing campaigns and criminalized attempts to hide the sender's identity, while sophisticated filters on what were then cutting-edge email providers like Gmail buried unwanted messages in out-of-sight spam folders. In 2004, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates told a crowd at the World Economic Forum that "two years from now, spam will be solved." In 2011, cybersecurity reporter Brian Krebs noted that increasingly tech savvy law enforcement efforts were shutting down major spam operators -- including SpamIt.com, alleged to be a major hub in a Russian digital criminal organization that was responsible for an estimated fifth of the world's spam. These efforts meant that the proportion of all emails that are spam has slowly fallen to a low of about 50 percent in recent years, according to Symantec research.

But it's 2017, and spam has clawed itself back from the grave. It shows up on social media and dating sites as bots hoping to lure you into downloading malware or clicking an affiliate link. It creeps onto your phone as text messages and robocalls that ring you five times a day about luxury cruises and fictitious tax bills. Networks associated with the buzzy new cryptocurrency system Ethereum have been plagued with spam. Facebook recently fought a six-month battle against a spam operation that was administering fake accounts in Bangladesh, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, and other countries. Last year, a Chicago resident sued the Trump campaign for allegedly sending unsolicited text message spam; this past November, ZDNet reported that voters were being inundated with political text messages they never signed up for. Apps can be horrid spam vectors, too. Repeated mass data breaches that include contact information, such as the Yahoo breach in which 3 billion user accounts were exposed, surely haven't helped. Meanwhile, you, me, and everyone we know is being plagued by robocalls.

91 of 154 comments (clear)

  1. When I answer my phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And it's a spam caller, I set the phone down and wait for the call to end. Make those guys use some of their resources.

    1. Re:When I answer my phone by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Interesting

      And it's a spam caller, I set the phone down and wait for the call to end. Make those guys use some of their resources.

      I receive more and more calls that are voice-recognition bots. They ask questions, and are programmed to respond to the replies. If I go "off script" and start asking questions or giving nonsensical replies, they will loop a few times and hang up. They will also loop and then hang up if I just stop replying.

      If your caller is one of these bots, then they aren't using any human time. If you want to cost them, you need to give a few "right" answers so you can be transferred to a human.

      These bots are clearly the future of robo-calls. They will get more sophisticated, and it will get harder and harder to tell that you aren't talking to a human. The obvious countermeasure is to have your own bot answer your phone and screen your calls before passing them on to you.

    2. Re:When I answer my phone by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      The obvious countermeasure is to have your own bot answer your phone

      That's what I do. If I don't recognize the number, I'll let the answering machine take the call.

    3. Re:When I answer my phone by ls671 · · Score: 1

      I have a personal database of spam callers and when such a number calls, I just pretend the phone rings but it doesn't. After a while, they are sent to a spammer voicemail box that sounds just like my real one. I review this voicemail box once in a while just in case since I also send anonymous caller there.

      I have a special number that I only give to people I know that have anonymous showing up as their callerID. They need to enter a special code on top of this to join me.

      I don't answer when I don't recognize the callerID and often add the number to the blacklist if relevant after they leave a voicemail or I search in Internet databases for well known spammers.

      Pretty easy to do when you run your own VOIP switch. I wonder why phone companies don't offer the same functionality to their customers.

      I don't give my cell phone number to anybody. The VOIP switch just makes the cell phone ring when it deems it is a valid call.

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    4. Re:When I answer my phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yep, I started screening all my calls as well.

      One interesting tid-bit, is they seem to like to match my area code, and the first 3 digits of my number when calling, I guess to make the number look more authentic? To me it's a suspicious coincidence that tips me off.

      Here's the funny thing though:
      I let it go to my machine, and my message is setup to piss people off.
      "Hello? ... ... ... I'm not here right now... etc."
      Before I set it up my voice mail, they would just hang up if it went to VM. Now I often times get messages from them, usually going through their pre-programed bit.
      It's pretty funny.

    5. Re:When I answer my phone by Rakarra · · Score: 3, Insightful

      One interesting tid-bit, is they seem to like to match my area code, and the first 3 digits of my number when calling,

      I have noticed this quite a bit as well. My default assumption now when I see my area code and the first 3 digits of number on CallerID is that it's a spam call, and I don't answer. The call-number spoofing problem has gotten out of hand.

    6. Re: When I answer my phone by peragrin · · Score: 2

      I do the same as I have moved 4 different times since I received my cell number. So unless it comes up as family I ignore it.

      Each time I moved it was to a new area code.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    7. Re:When I answer my phone by InterGuru · · Score: 2

      I set my default ring to silent, and only give an audible ring to those I know. If I ignore a genuine call they can leave me a voicemail. I put ignored calls on my auto-refect list.
      I wish Verizon would allow two default rings, one for callers on your contact list, and one for other callers.

    8. Re:When I answer my phone by gman003 · · Score: 2

      That's why I answer calls from unrecognized numbers in Classical Latin. Nobody programs bots for it. Hell, nobody programs PEOPLE for it - it's not in their script anywhere.

      And it's a really beautiful language for telling people to go fuck themselves in.

    9. Re: When I answer my phone by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      whitelist. Unless I know you already, you are a spammer.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    10. Re:When I answer my phone by GumphMaster · · Score: 1

      Do tell, "How shall we fuck off, oh Lord?"

      --
      Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
    11. Re:When I answer my phone by gman003 · · Score: 1

      It's mostly that Latin has a bunch of different words for "fuck", not just one, and they vary by "configuration". It's like if we had words for "ass-fuck" and "face-fuck" without having a general "fuck".

      So one might say "pedica se", to tell them to go fuck their own ass (with an implication of pederasty), or "irruma sororem tuum", to tell them to go skull-fuck their sister (or possibly cousin, because the Romans had weird priorities when it came to giving things words). You've also got "cevere" for "get fucked in the ass", and of course "futuere" for "fuck a cunt" (and the corresponding "crisare" for the female act), because the Romans did have to occasionally have to have reproductive sex and not just fun.

      (Although, that quote you said gave me an idea for the next call I get. To recite in my best Church Latin: "In illo tempore, dixit Iesus hoc parabulus discipulis suis: vir erat, quo interrupebat cenam aliorum, sperarem defraudare. Illo vir erat malus, et in laco stercoris aestuabit ad diem iudicamentem. Amen.")

    12. Re:When I answer my phone by vlueboy · · Score: 2

      Would love to get a dialer option to reject the low-hanging fruit that is (xxx)yyy-nnnn with a single checkbox. Unfortunately phone companies make some cash on blocking features such as autoblock hidden numbers (aka private callers) and that's something I've only seen on landline providers anyway. My cell company used to have a web-customizable SMS spam blacklist but it mysteriously went away

      Sucks that I also can't blacklist numbers until AFTER they've called... Regex functionality would be nice, and the best I can do is create a single contact to pile up unwanted numbers after the fact, then block the contact once. This fails on account of the (xxx)yyy-nnnn system because nnnn gives them almost 10000 random numbers that I can't be expected to manually block ahead of time

    13. Re:When I answer my phone by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      I like Catullus' novem continuas fututiones.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    14. Re:When I answer my phone by geekymachoman · · Score: 1

      > The obvious countermeasure is to have your own bot answer your phone and screen your calls before passing them on to you.

      LOL... if I had some robot screening my phone calls when I call my friends, they wouldn't be my friends anymore.. seriously... only a nerd can think of something like this and get away with it.

    15. Re:When I answer my phone by ls671 · · Score: 1
      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
  2. "Scam Likely" calling.... by magarity · · Score: 2

    Does anyone else get these a lot on their cell? It seems as if Mr. Likely calls me daily. I wish I could just block him but he changes number frequently.

    1. Re:"Scam Likely" calling.... by Night+Goat · · Score: 1

      I believe that's a feature of the T-Mobile network. I don't know how it works, but I like it!

    2. Re:"Scam Likely" calling.... by vlueboy · · Score: 1

      I believe that's a feature of the T-Mobile network. I don't know how it works, but I like it!

      Some people have apparently even mis-credited Apple for the feature.
      Unfortunately all these features ("Scam ID" and "Scam block" and "Name ID") require a post-paid plan to work - https://explore.t-mobile.com/c...

      Their Prepaid service has a static monthly price tag but lacks Visual voicemail and the above features.

  3. Oh? by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

    I never knew it decreased. When I check, I see that I still get tons, but my spam filters keep it at bay for the most part. If anything, the new kind (random phone calls on my cell/mobile everyday) is even worse than the old kind.

    --

    Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
  4. Pay me to read it. by Kludge · · Score: 1

    We need a micropayment system where all messages contain some payment. I then set my email reader to only preserve messages that contain at least 10 cents. My friends can pony up that money if they want me to read something.

    And do not post the "why your email solution won't work" check list. That is perfect being the enemy of good.

    1. Re:Pay me to read it. by Wootery · · Score: 2

      Get Google to implement it with Google Pay, and integrate it into Gmail. Other email services could opt-in using secure payment tokens in email headers.

      The micropayments should roughly balance... just not for spammers.

      Emails which don't include a micropayment can continue to be spam-filtered as usual.

    2. Re:Pay me to read it. by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

      >And do not post the "why your email solution won't work" check list.

      So you already know your solution won't work, you've been told many times, and yet you still propose the same, unworkable solution.

      Why?

    3. Re:Pay me to read it. by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      What happens when the spammers have a larger email budget than your friends?

    4. Re:Pay me to read it. by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      Then I actually will get rich quick from their stupid schemes.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    5. Re:Pay me to read it. by MrLogic17 · · Score: 1

      Great idea! You first. Set up a server and start by paying other people to read your E-Mail.

      I'll wait.

    6. Re:Pay me to read it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Your post advocates a

      ( X ) technical ( ) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante

      approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)

      ( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
      ( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
      ( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
      ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
      ( X ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
      ( ) Users of email will not put up with it
      ( ) Microsoft will not put up with it
      ( ) The police will not put up with it
      ( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
      ( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
      ( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
      ( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
      ( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business

      Specifically, your plan fails to account for

      ( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
      ( ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
      ( ) Open relays in foreign countries
      ( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
      ( ) Asshats
      ( ) Jurisdictional problems
      ( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
      ( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
      ( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
      ( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
      ( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
      ( ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
      ( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
      ( X ) Extreme profitability of spam
      ( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
      ( ) Technically illiterate politicians
      ( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
      ( ) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
      ( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
      ( X ) The amount of wealth spammers have to use.
      ( ) Outlook

      and the following philosophical objections may also apply:

      ( ) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever
      been shown practical
      ( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
      ( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
      ( ) Blacklists suck
      ( ) Whitelists suck
      ( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
      ( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
      ( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
      ( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
      ( X ) Sending email should be free
      ( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
      ( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
      ( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
      ( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
      ( ) I don't want the government reading my email
      ( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough

      Furthermore, this is what I think about you:

      ( X ) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
      ( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
      ( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your
      house down!

    7. Re:Pay me to read it. by ctilsie242 · · Score: 1

      We sort of have that with Outlook creating a postmark which served as a proof of work. However, with spammers having plenty of CPU cycles available, this seems to have been phased out.

      What might be interesting might be a proof of work system with a very small granularity, so one could mine a unit of currency with a relatively small amount of CPU spent, and then send that as part of the E-mail. That way, one could set E-mail thresholds fairly easily, and even if the message was crap, it at least added something to your wallet.

  5. A modest proposal by nightfire-unique · · Score: 1

    Retrain DEA agents to go after spammers.

    --
    A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
    1. Re:A modest proposal by nightfire-unique · · Score: 1

      Alcoholic, but nice try. :p

      --
      A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
    2. Re:A modest proposal by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 1

      Cool, you found a pothead. But are you going to vote for him yet? Or do we have to have things get a little more fucked up before you finally switch?

      --
      "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
    3. Re:A modest proposal by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      You should switch. You'll live longer.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  6. Junk mail is worse than any e-spam... by Entropius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Junk paper mail -- the local grocery stores all sending out circulars to "current resident" telling me how much ham costs -- is a worse plague than anything electronic. There are no laws against it (since the USPS gets cash from the spammers), there's no way to filter it (since it's physical), you're required to constantly check it (or else the box gets full and USPS gets butthurt), and you can't stop using that communication channel (since the government uses it, and if you don't get their shit then they get butthurt and they have guns).

    I suspect that the drain on the environment from paper spam is orders of magnitude higher than for e-spam, too.

    1. Re:Junk mail is worse than any e-spam... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Paper spam at least can be useful for tinder, protecting surfaces while doing dirty work, stuffing into shoes and many more. Can't say the same for electronic spam.

    2. Re:Junk mail is worse than any e-spam... by tquasar · · Score: 1

      My trash and recycling cans are near my mailbox, I subscribe to several magazines and one newspaper. The junk mail goes directly into the trash. The USPS has a special rate for junk mail, bulk rate that costs much less than what you or I pay to mail a letter or bill. So I pay twice-once for the junk subsidy and again for a 49 cent stamp. Screw that. https://pe.usps.com/businessma... .

    3. Re:Junk mail is worse than any e-spam... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      1 simple law and a sticker on the mailbox solve this problem effectively. http://community.expatica.com/...

    4. Re:Junk mail is worse than any e-spam... by sinij · · Score: 2

      Have you tried "Please no junk mail" label in/on your mail box?

    5. Re:Junk mail is worse than any e-spam... by Entropius · · Score: 1

      Yes, and I've tried talking to the post office and mail carrier. They insist that they are being paid to deliver junk mail and that no action on my part can make them stop delivering it.

    6. Re:Junk mail is worse than any e-spam... by Entropius · · Score: 1

      Congrats to the Dutch for actually making a solution to this.

    7. Re:Junk mail is worse than any e-spam... by technothrasher · · Score: 2

      I solved this problem by physically removing my mailbox, and having all my mail sent to my office. I still get crappy catalogs and occasional credit card offers, but all the bulk mail junk is gone as they don't deliver it to business addresses. But I do now have to constantly explain to exasperated people that I'm not some kind of Ted Kaczynski style freak simply because I have no mailbox at my house.

    8. Re:Junk mail is worse than any e-spam... by sinij · · Score: 1

      I think additional social engineering could help you find a solution. Is it possible for you to have two mail boxes, one for junk mail and one for addressed letters? Perhaps they would do sorting for you?

    9. Re:Junk mail is worse than any e-spam... by jonwil · · Score: 1

      I actually like getting the junk mail. More than once I have seen something in the junk mail that has caused me to go to a different supermarket that's further away because they have meat or other things at a significantly cheaper price than either of my local supermarkets.

    10. Re:Junk mail is worse than any e-spam... by Trogre · · Score: 2

      It's like your entire country has never heard of No Junk Mail stickers.

      Amazing.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    11. Re:Junk mail is worse than any e-spam... by barrygrommit · · Score: 1

      I get two types of junk mail: local (from super markets, local businesses, etc) and national (jewelery, clothes, etc). Both types include a phone number to call to get removed from these mailings. I tried. It worked. No more junk mail.

  7. Spam never went away by damn_registrars · · Score: 5, Informative

    The spam never changed much, we just put more money and time into pushing it away. Now those efforts are failing in more obvious ways - the ways that those of us who were paying attention knew would happen.

    Filtering cannot solve the spam problem, as it only creates a race to the bottom of the signal:noise ratio. Spammers keep working on ways to get around filters by changing how they craft their messages; eventually making it so that more emails that should pass are not - at which point people start to complain that the filters aren't working.

    Similarly, law enforcement cannot solve it either unless there is a single set of international laws against it that apply to all people equally regardless of where they or their targets are. Obviously this will never happen. People call for all kinds of terrible things to be done to spammers but not only will that not happen it won't make the situation better as there is a nearly endless supply of spammers out there ready to fill the void.

    The only thing that works is to approach spam as the economic problem that it is. We need to stop pretending that spammers send out spam to piss people off; that is one of the dumbest lies on the internet. Spammers send out spam to make money. If you don't want spam, you need to do something to prevent spammers from getting paid. Cut off their cash flow and they go on to doing other things with their botnets instead.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:Spam never went away by H3lldr0p · · Score: 1

      The only thing that works is to approach spam as the economic problem that it is. We need to stop pretending that spammers send out spam to piss people off; that is one of the dumbest lies on the internet. Spammers send out spam to make money. If you don't want spam, you need to do something to prevent spammers from getting paid. Cut off their cash flow and they go on to doing other things with their botnets instead.

      Or find way to employ the people who create spam such that the creation of said spam is less economically tenable. The idea of targeting them economically is a great idea but instead of doing so in a way which will leave them poorer why not try to employ their creativity in ways which benefit everyone?

      It might be harder but it would seem like a better choice for long term stability. Set a trend which demonstrates how spam creation doesn't lead to the fulfillment desired and you've now cut off air to the next generation that would be going into that business.

    2. Re:Spam never went away by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      The only thing that works is to approach spam as the economic problem that it is. We need to stop pretending that spammers send out spam to piss people off; that is one of the dumbest lies on the internet. Spammers send out spam to make money. If you don't want spam, you need to do something to prevent spammers from getting paid. Cut off their cash flow and they go on to doing other things with their botnets instead.

      Or find way to employ the people who create spam such that the creation of said spam is less economically tenable. The idea of targeting them economically is a great idea but instead of doing so in a way which will leave them poorer why not try to employ their creativity in ways which benefit everyone?

      That is a noble idea but it requires knowing who the spammers are and getting through to them on some sort of personal level. If you make it so that they cannot pay their bills by creating and sending spam, wouldn't you accomplish a similar end? I don't seek to harm the spammers though I do acknowledge that some of them are pretty awful people, who I probably don't want to associate too closely with.

      Perhaps if we could incentivize more beneficial applications of their talents, then we could get there as well. As I stated before, spammers go to spam because it makes money. If they could make money doing something else they would do that.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    3. Re:Spam never went away by H3lldr0p · · Score: 1

      Indeed, my suggest relies heavily on some assumptions that may not bear out after further examination. Such as the spam isn't being conducted by a state actor for propaganda or other nefarious reasons. Which certainly exists and presents an entire different category of problems to handle.

      It seems like the first step to any solution would be to see who exactly is doing it.

    4. Re:Spam never went away by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      To be fair I was taking - perhaps narrowly - the view of spam as being limited to the commercial variety that wants to sell shit. Indeed we know that there are other types of unwanted mail that get categorized as spam (even if they are not attempting to sell any product for money). Those are somewhat a different matter though if they are being propagated through traditional spam channels then the same economic approach could well apply.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    5. Re:Spam never went away by sydbarrett74 · · Score: 1

      That is a noble idea but it requires knowing who the spammers are and getting through to them on some sort of personal level.

      Agreed. My guess is that the vast majority of people are clever un(der)employed Africans and Eastern Europeans who don't give two shits about using their knowledge for public welfare. They are either greedy organised criminals or people wanting to put food on the table for their families. Unfortunately, spam is one phenomenon emerging from a multifarious global social problem (poverty on the one hand, brilliant physicists/mathematicians/computer scientists who lost their jobs when the USSR collapsed on the other).

      --
      'He who has to break a thing to find out what it is, has left the path of wisdom.' -- Gandalf to Saruman
  8. Private Numbers by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

    Private numbers are the ones which piss me off. There's no reason someone should be able to call my cellphone without me seeing their number, I always file a police report for harassment when it happens.

    1. Re:Private Numbers by infosinger · · Score: 1

      Even worse--fake numbers. Only real numbers should be allowed on caller ID. At least there you have some chance of blocking and someone who constantly changes their phone number can be identified as a potential spammer/scammer.

    2. Re:Private Numbers by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      Nope, it's legitimate harassment and the phone company won't reveal the number when you call unless the request is made after filing a police report and the police are the ones to make the request. It's the only means possible to apply pressure to phone companies to deal with people abusing the service you pay for and is the appropriate legal recourse.

  9. Never received robocalls by houghi · · Score: 1

    I get spam. No idea if it is more or less than what it used to be. But no robocalls since ever. I believe that has to do with how things work in Europe (Belgium in my case)
    It is forbidden to sell customer data. You can also only send commercial information if you are a customer of a company. The law is a bit vague about when you stop being a customer. e.g. if you bought a car, when will they stop sending stuff without you asking them to stop it, is not really predefined. Just asking to stop will be honored in 99.9% of the cases. The rest will be either standard spam that I already receive or human error where they actually forgot to unsubscribe you.

    Then there is the thing about the calls. In Europe the person who call will have to pay, not the person who gets the call (Unless he is outside Europe and has to pay roaming fees). Combine that with the fact that data can not be sold and you end up with only being able to call your own customers that have not yet opted out.

    That leaves the calls from the Microsoft Support. They hardly do any cold calling and rely on standard spam and people calling them most of the time.

    And even if the company tries to call their customer, people are extremely hesitant to give information.

    But then that could also be all just me as I hardly give out my phone. I even ask why they wouild sue it to contact me and I often refuse to give it as I do not see why they need it. And for companies I use the email address like e.g. Slashdot.org@example.com so I know who is sending it.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    1. Re:Never received robocalls by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      Over here in the Netherlands, companies can place unsollicited calls, but there's a national "do not call me" register that is respected by pretty much all Dutch companies. Similarly, there are stickers for the mailslot to indicate whether or not you want unsolicited crap and/or the free local newspapers, and those are respected as well. Pretty much all spam from European companies comes from firms that got your email address through legitimate means, e.g. you ordered something from them, and all contain an unsubscribe link that actually works.
      I'm all for free enterprise but I am glad that in this regard we do have some laws with teeth.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  10. Spam "is back"? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

    It never left... at least, if my email is at all representative.

    Really the only thing CAN-SPAM changed is that, now, the spam I get mostly contains "unsubscribe" links which take you to a non-functional web form (on those rare occasions I even bother to check).

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  11. Google by sycodon · · Score: 2

    Gmail apparently doesn't distinguish between a.b@gmail.com and ab@gmail.com

    Now I get many emails that are similar to mine, but different names....so if mine was JPDough@gmail.com, I get emails to J.PDough@gmail.com, JP.Dough@gmail.com, JPD.ough@gmail.com with the correspondence referencing John, Jason, Jerry, etc.

    Invariable is it is some legal, medical, or insurance thing that requires my signature...so click this link.

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    1. Re: Google by peragrin · · Score: 1

      Gmail also doesn't distinguish jpsmith@mail.google.com and j.psmith@mail.google.co.uk. very well either.

      I get emails from Australia Canada and uk to people with the same or similar username all the time.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    2. Re:Google by ahadsell · · Score: 2

      You are correct, in that Google ignores periods in gmail account names. a.b.c@gmail.com, ab.c@gmail.com and abc@.gmail.com are all the same account.

    3. Re:Google by Albert71292 · · Score: 1

      I constantly get those in Gmail also. That's the main reason I NEVER use Gmail for anything 'sensitive". I never get those kinds of emails in Yahoo or Hotmail, ONLY Gmail.

      --
      "A Bird In The Hand Will Poop On Your Wrist"-Benny Hill,1982
    4. Re:Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What does spam or ignoring the . have to do with your sensitive emails?

    5. Re:Google by wardrich86 · · Score: 1

      Yup - I get a ton of this crap... often times its receipts. Sometimes it's people on Gumtree asking if I'm still interested in their item, which is funny because I'm not even from AUS.

    6. Re:Google by c-A-d · · Score: 1

      I have this same problem. I routinely get mail for someone with the same name but he has no punctuation. Lots of legal stuff too.

      Part of the reason I'm getting off of Google.

      --
      some karma... and kinda lukewarm about it.
  12. Spam advertising by thereitis · · Score: 1

    Spam never went away, it just moved: consider the many fraudulent advertisements scatted throughout the web. Same desired outcome, different medium.

  13. Re:wall of text by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Paragraphs went the same way as capitalisation, apparently.

  14. Progressive orgs are pretty bad about this by ScienceofSpock · · Score: 2

    I was signed up to Change.org's mailing list at one point. They would send out email alerts with links to petitions, sometimes from other progressive orgs. When you signed those petitions, you were automatically added to those other org's mailing lists.

    After about a week of this, something like 30% of my email was petition requests.

    I understand that getting the message out and making people aware of certain issues is important, but that just completely turned me off and I am no longer subscribed to ANY of those orgs.

    I also realize that these particular emails are not *technically* spam, since they do notify you in the fine print at the bottom of the petition, but my point is that these types of emails have become the new "spam" for me. Gmail filters the "normal" spam for me. I never see it, but these chain-mailing-list progressive orgs have got to stop. "Hey, thanks for signing that petition! As a reward, here's another progressive mailing list subscription for a cause you don't really care that much abut!" The one GOOD thing about these is at least they obey unsub requests.

  15. The biggest spammer on slashdot complains? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    A man who made $600 spamming slashdot comments complains when someone inappropriately monetizes their relationship? Oh the irony.

    Remember when you said that buying a child bride was "getting the most for your retirement dollar"? I remember that. Maybe you could make it into an ad campaign for a human trafficking service?

  16. Re: Despite Bill Gatesâ(TM) lies... by gnick · · Score: 2

    Bill G is a very generous man. He's going to pay me $.25 every time I forward the email I just got from him.

    --
    He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
  17. Re:e-receipts by ctilsie242 · · Score: 1

    That's why one has throwaway addresses, be it foo+bar@gmail.com, or aliases on your own domain, so you can pinpoint which group of schlubs decided to break their pinky promise of not spamming, as well as to just delete the alias or filter it to /dev/null. Some places, I just use mailinator.

    You just have to assume that if you give your phone or E-mail address out, it will be hawked to third parties and spammed to Hell and gone.

  18. Is this an article telling me that spam exists? by j2.718ff · · Score: 1

    ...As if I didn't already know.

  19. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  20. Robocalls by duke_cheetah2003 · · Score: 5, Informative

    About the only spam that bothers me is the robocalls. They are getting pretty bad. It ranges from 1-5 calls a day now. Very obnoxious. Do-not-call does seem to help, but the idiots who implemented that, it's expires after like what 6 months or a year, I dunno, but as soon as it expires, the calls skyrocket like the same day.

    What I'd really like to have on my smartphone is a whitelist for callers. I'm just done with these idiots. Not in my contact list: shunt to voicemail and pretend it never happened.

    1. Re:Robocalls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Do-not-call does seem to help, but the idiots who implemented that, it's expires after like what 6 months or a year, I dunno, but as soon as it expires, the calls skyrocket like the same day.

      The FTC Do Not Call Registry does not expire. What you may get is idiot companies thinking it does, or spammer groups adding you to their list without checking the list. Report violations. The FTC really doesn't have any way to go after violators if they aren't reported. It's rather quick to do online, and in my experience it does help eventually. (I imagine with enough people reporting a certain robocaller, the FTC eventually tracks them down and fines their ass into oblivion.)

    2. Re:Robocalls by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

      There are a few apps which will do this. I stopped using them though since they are add-ons, which means the call will still come through and generate a missed call notification or even sometimes ring once. More trouble than it was worth IMO

      --
      This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
    3. Re:Robocalls by duke_cheetah2003 · · Score: 1

      Do-not-call does seem to help, but the idiots who implemented that, it's expires after like what 6 months or a year, I dunno, but as soon as it expires, the calls skyrocket like the same day.

      The FTC Do Not Call Registry does not expire. What you may get is idiot companies thinking it does, or spammer groups adding you to their list without checking the list. Report violations. The FTC really doesn't have any way to go after violators if they aren't reported. It's rather quick to do online, and in my experience it does help eventually. (I imagine with enough people reporting a certain robocaller, the FTC eventually tracks them down and fines their ass into oblivion.)

      Pardon me a moment while I laugh hytserically. OK, all good. You really think Trump's FTC is going to give a flying F? They're probably working to dismantle the do-not-call list.

  21. All political orgs do that by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    I sent a nasty letter to my congress critter about the Obamacare repeal and got signed up for their 'send us money' email list.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  22. Re:Spam volume down on my server by arth1 · · Score: 1

    I administer the spam filter / email relay at work and our spam volume is one one-hundredth what it was in 2010. So that's at least antidotal evidence that spam volume is down.

    As a mail server admin, my observation is that spam is perhaps slightly down, but scams are rising. Almost all sent through botnets.

    What has helped me the most is scoring e-mail based on which countries the e-mails are relayed through, and what timezone they were apparently sent from, and where URLs lead to.
    The currently worst ratio of spam/scam to legitimate e-mail are:
    Timezones: +0530, +0800, +0700, +0300, +0200
    Relay countries: CN, DE, IN, AR, IR
    URL countries: DE, GB, RU, AR, CN

    So if you get an e-mail sent from India (+0530), relayed through Argentina, and with an URL in Russia, chances are almost parity that it's spam or a scam, and that you can firewall the connecting host for a year with no ill effects.

  23. Spam is back by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1
    • - Egg and bacon
    • - Egg, sausage and bacon
    • - Egg and Spam
    • - Egg, bacon and Spam
    • - Egg, bacon, sausage and Spam
    • - Spam, bacon, sausage and Spam
    • - Spam, egg, Spam, Spam, bacon and Spam
    • - Spam, Spam, Spam, egg and Spam
    • - Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam, baked beans, Spam, Spam, Spam and Spam
    • - Lobster Thermidor aux crevettes with a Mornay sauce, garnished with truffle pâté, brandy and a fried egg on top, and Spam.
    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  24. Re:e-receipts by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

    This is why I never ask for an ereceipt. The amount of paper used is trivial, and it keeps my email address off of their spam list.

    --
    Good, inexpensive web hosting
  25. I am only getting weird spam by CustomSolvers2 · · Score: 1

    I haven't been getting too much spam since quite long time ago. But the one I get is very weird like the one which I received right now (Slashdot doesn't support those characters).

    I have been getting an email similar to that one about 2-5 times per week for over the last quite a few months. They are always written in a language I cannot understand (sorry about that, obsessive spammers, but I can only understand Spanish, English and bit of German) and usually include the word SPAM in the title!! I have never replied to any of them, visited anything referred by them or even made the tiniest effort to translate what they say.

    --
    Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
    1. Re:I am only getting weird spam by toddestan · · Score: 1

      I've been getting a fair amount of weird spam too, in addition to the typical vi@ggraa and c1a!as spam. A lot of it is in Spanish, and from what I can it's mostly B2B type spam targetting businesses in Latin and South America selling things like bulk wine for restaurants (huh?), training for HR departments (umm..??), and consulting services for dealing with regulatory issues with selling cosmetics (uhh...what???).

      At first I thought that maybe this stuff was a mistake or my email had somehow mistakenly got listed as the contact for some business, but checking Project Honey Pot with the offending IPs shows that they're just blasting this stuff out to harvested email addresses. Furthermore many of the emails use typical spammer munging techniques - they especially like to munge the word capacitación ("training"), which I find interesting. The majority of it seems to come from AR and from what I can the network providers there really don't give a shit about their spam problem, or are in cahoots with the spammers, or are even the spammers themselves.

    2. Re:I am only getting weird spam by CustomSolvers2 · · Score: 1

      A lot of it is in Spanish

      Curiously, I have never got this kind of nonsensical bulk spam in Spanish despite being a Spaniard myself currently living in Spain! Other than the languages I cannot understand as what is being shown in the link above, most of the spam of this sort which I get is in English.

      blasting this stuff out to harvested email addresses

      Yes, I guess that this is the most logical explanation: blindly targeting random email addresses. But such a level of carelessness seems ridiculously inefficient for them, even by bearing in mind that spamming in this way is already too inefficient (who is nowadays caring about anything of what one of these emails say?). At least, they should make sure that they send their crap to people able to understand it and, ideally, interested in whatever they are offering.

      --
      Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
    3. Re:I am only getting weird spam by toddestan · · Score: 1

      I find it odd too. Note that it's almost entirely Latin/South America, though I do occasionally get something that looks like it might have to do with Spain.

      I do get a fair number of Spanish spam from spammers trying to sell me "targeted" lists of email addresses. Amusingly many of these spammers seem to party like it's 1998, with free email dropboxes to contact them (Hotmail, Yahoo, etc.) and it appears that the lists themselves would to mailed on CD or DVD should someone actually buy them. I can only assume I somehow are on these lists, and these lists are obviously dirty if they also have spam honeypot addresses on them.

      I agree about the inefficiency. Bulk sending an email is cheap, but is it worth it to send millions and millions of emails when there's perhaps only a few dozen or hundred people in the world who would even be interested in what you are spamvertising? My theory is that the actual money in spamming is in selling spamming services, not in the spam itself. Basically a spamming service(*) convinces a client to pay them to run an "email marketing campaign". The spammer gets paid in any case, doesn't care whether the spamming was actually generated leads or sales, and millions get spammed with irrelevant and unwanted emails. Eventually, the client probably figures out they are throwing their money away and hurting their reputation, but so long as these spamming services can convince someone else to give them money to send spam, we'll have this problem.

      (*) which I suspect may also be a network provider/ISP, especially as Argentina goes

    4. Re:I am only getting weird spam by CustomSolvers2 · · Score: 1

      not in the spam itself. Basically a spamming service

      Interesting theory. It seems to make more sense than any other version. In any case and as said, I am not too concerned about anything of this for various reasons. I don't get almost any spam and ignore/make fun of the little amount which I get. I have never spammed anyone (unless when fighting back some spammer :)) and, in fact, consider that "technique" extremely negative for any business/activity. My work has never been even slightly related to spam or any other generic, invasive, crappy, lazy, dishonest, etc. way to earn money; note that I am person eminently concerned about the means rather than the final goal and being very proud of what I do and how I do is way much more important for me than money (although I do expect my work to be fairly rewarded). I have never been contacted by a spammer or similar to develop whatever piece of software and will certainly reject any request on these lines; much more now, when I am extremely demanding regarding the kind of projects/clients I want. It was a kind of interesting chat anyway.

      --
      Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
  26. Phone spam is the worst. by jcr · · Score: 1

    The e-mail spam that evades my filters is down to one or two a week now, but I'm getting around one call a day from some Desi asswipe pretending to be an IRS agent or a Marriott employee offering me a free vacation. I'd like to know how we in the west can support India's Serious Fraud Office in hunting down and beating the crap out of them.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  27. Re:e-receipts by nukenerd · · Score: 1

    Why TF would anyone want an email receipt? I was taken aback when I was first asked if I wanted one, it is so obviously for collecting addresses for spam. It surely takes longer for you to give them your email address than it does for them to give you a paper receipt anyway.

  28. Blame Russian for spam infestation? by najajomo · · Score: 1

    "including SpamIt.com, alleged to be a major hub in a Russian digital criminal organization that was responsible for an estimated fifth of the world's spam"

    It's bullshit statements like the above that only tend to discredit slashdot. The primary source of spam on the planet is all those compromised Microsoft Windows out there being co-opted into DDOD attacks and spewing email spam to the Internet.

  29. Yes, PS Form 1500 can stop junk mail by KWTm · · Score: 2

    I've tried talking to the post office and mail carrier. They insist that they are being paid to deliver junk mail and that no action on my part can make them stop delivering it.

    That's not true: there's a way to stop them, if you want to take the trouble to implement it. You might have to google around for it, but I'll provide a link to get you started.

    So, basically, your post office has a form that you can fill for blocking "erotically arousing or sexually provocative" junk mail: PS Form 1500.

    You must be thinking, "Well, that's all well and good, but I'm talking about ads from the local grocery store, not sexually provocative stuff." This is where Rowan vs USPS comes in. You see, the only person who can decide what you find sexually provocative is YOU. So, you can say, "I find the logo of my local grocery store, and these pictures of low-priced vegetables, to be EROTICALLY AROUSING OR SEXUALLY PROVOCATIVE," and no one can say otherwise. The US Postal Service must stop delivering it. This was upheld by the Supreme Court.

    So, go for it. Stop the junk mail.

    --
    404555974007725459910684486621289147856453481154 in hex is "You sank my Battleship?"
    [GPG key in journal]
  30. Re:Despite Bill Gatesâ(TM) lies... by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

    Only Apple users are pretentious enough to use non-English characters on the American internet.

  31. SPAM phone-call killer by therealbev · · Score: 1

    At the risk of promoting a commercial item, I will nonetheless recommend the Sentry 2 device for VOIP phones. It rejects (without ringing through) ALL robocalls and calls from its own list of spammers. Your friends press 0 to go through and be whitelisted ONCE. If a telemarketer lies and presses 0 you can do what you want and then press REJECT so he's added to the blacklist. We used to get half a dozen telemarketer/robocalls per day. Now it's down to one or two lying bastards a month. Best $50 I ever spent.

  32. but lobbyright is c00 by KingBenny · · Score: 1

    so tell that to the mafiAA, breinbaf and the happy-go-trolly bunch sending mass extortion mails hoping a few will pay up so their wage is paid that month ... face it, who's the only ones making money in the witchhunt ?

    --
    Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?