Re: SpamCop Issues - Just Curious

On 30.04.2006 10:26, Mike Easter wrote:

 --- Original Message ---

> User wrote:
> 
>> What "good" is SpamCop doing to abate spam?
> 
> ... also add 'abusive servers' which also get SC reported for such as
> backscatter.  Abusive servers definitely remedy themselves and abate
> that abusive activity.

Yes, but in a minority of cases, IMHO of course, as witnessed by the
proliferation of spam coming from the same source(s) day after day.
Different spam, same server(s).

> Generally the 'good' effect is not to abate spam, but to contribute to
> the various overall processes of spamfiltering mechanisms.
> 
>  - Rarely there is the possibilty that reporting to a spamvertiser
> provider can inform a whitish-hatted provider about spamvertising and
> result in that provider taking action against the spamvertiser.  The
> more general situation is that the spamvertiser provider's hat is not
> white and the provider is not interested in the courtesy SC report

Unfortunately the "white hats" are outnumbered by the "black hats".
There's LOTS of $$$$ to be made in all facets of "spamvertising", eg.,
the beneficiary of the spam, the advertiser and the server owner.

>  - Occasionally the spamsource providers who are notified about their
> spamsources which are generally abused open proxy trojan user IPs will
> take note of their insecurity and remedy it.  It is not uncommon that
> some whitehat server 'discovers' an insecurity as a result of spamcop
> source reports or listings or blocked mail.

Agree

>> The same spam just keeps
>> coming in day after day, week after week, advertising the same stuff,
> 
> Correct.  SC doesn't do much of anything to actually descrease the
> incoming spam.

And THAT is where I think my disillusionment is centered.

>> appears to be from the same central sources and we continue reporting
>> to what seems like no avail.
> 
> The avail is to contribute to the SCbl which aids me and many others
> with one of our dnsbl spamfilters.  There are antispam effects of
> filtering the spam even when the filtering isn't actually a reduction in
> spam.  The more effective filtration is, the less people actually
> 'encounter' or see their spam subjects or have an opportunity to open
> their spam and profit the spam process.

Filtering only hides it, doesn't address it but I understand what you're
saying.

> The spamvertisers which are 'indirectly' reported to the sc-surbl help
> those who are using the surbl as a body filter.
> 
>> Also appears that a great deal of this spam is channeled through
>> open-relays.
> 
> The term 'open relay' applies to open smtp relays.  I see virtually no
> spam coming thru' open relays these days.  Perhaps you mean injected an
> an 'open' or available proxy trojan user IP.  That is a different
> mechanism than an open smtp relay.

Approximately 25% of all spam I report to SC says:

  xxx.xxx.xxx is an "open relay"

>> Looks to me like spam is just too large an entity to be addressed by
>> conventional methods ... Hmmm, perhaps a .44 Magnum would be a
>> solution? :-D
> 
> I tend to interpret those remarks as encompassing some 'frustration'
> with spamload.  IMO, the management of one's mailbox should be very
> 'painless' -- not frustrated by spamload.  For me, virtually 100% of my
> spam is channeled into a Junk folder which doesn't even appear 'before
> my eyes' or in my 'range of consciousness' unless I choose to go visit
> it.  When I choose to visit it, in a matter of seconds it is reported to
> SC.  That reporting contributes to the SCbl.  That SCbl is part of my
> armamentarium of dnsbl/s which make up the 'shield' which channels the
> spam into the Junk folder.  So, my mailbox and my spamhandling is both
> painless and self-reinforcing.

Not "frustrated" but rather puzzled as to the enormity of the spam load
and why "something" cannot be done. Passing any sort of legislation in
the U.S. is nothing less than laughable. It's BIG business, maybe too big.

-----------------
My Son, the *NIX guru to end all gurus (teaches *nix at the college
level) and the proverbial "can find humor in most anything", had nothing
better to do one day when he got another one of those "increase the size
of your penis" spams.

He calculated that if he took just ONE pill from EACH spam purporting to
lenthen by x number of inches, his member would have reached a total
length of 28.58341 FEET by now.

-----------------

Thanks for the "enlightenment" and I'm off to once again to edit my
server's SpamAssassin prefs.