full-disclosure - Spam sent via spambots?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <b7bc1b1f04103117126da129c1@mail.gmail.com>
From: uberguidoz at gmail.com (GuidoZ)
Subject: Spam sent via spambots?

I believe the reason Nick created another thread was because he's
starting a new subject. The old thread had moved more into ways to
fight spam. Nick's thoughts seem to be focused on if anyone or group
has even done a legitimate study on the amount being passed through
bots on exploited systems. If so, what kind of numbers were actually
found. (Please correct me if I'm wrong.)

To respond to the question...

> So, has any really good, large-scale sampling of these issues been
> done, perhaps by the large Email/anti-spam managed services folks??

Not that I can think of off hand. Like you, I've seen estimates here
and there, though without any facts to really back them up. It may be
a difficult thing to actually get accurate numbers on unless you base
it solely on IP space. At that point, some of it could be "legit
spam", meaning the IP# responsible for sending it is aware it's being
sent.

If you're just after how much spam is coming from the Cable/DSL IP
space, I'd be happy to donate two of my majorly spammed accounts to
the study. =) It will give a cross section of roughly 5,000 spam per
day. Unfortunately I don't have the time to accurately disect the
headers of each and trace the findings to verify where it originated.
Someone else is welcome to it - I can simply have email forwarded  for
awhile along with the full headers.

--
Peace. ~G

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 23:25:33 +0000, n3td3v <xploitable@...il.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 11:57:13 +1300, Nick FitzGerald
> <nick@...us-l.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > In another thread Hugo van der Kooij wrote:
> 
> Well why didn't you reply to the comment on the thread topic it was
> post on, instead of splitting it into two, to further clog up the list
> with a similar thread.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> n3td3v
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
>