Re: [tlug] Using autoresponse

[Godwin Stewart <godwin.stewart@??>]

On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 16:32:10 +0100, Sigurd Urdahl <sigurdur@??>
wrote:

> My impression is that most spamtargets are now harvested from peoples
> addressbooks and Inboxes through bot-activity and malware, not from
> the www.

Think again.

Take a look at the HTML source of http://linux.sgms-centre.com/ (look
at the bottom). One of those e-mail addresses (and not one of the
sales@ addresses which are always targeted as a matter of course) was
receiving spam a matter of hours after it was created and published on
that page.

> > and that are consequently used as spam traps (which, incidentally,
> > feed directly into SpamCop's official spamtrap feed) receive up to
> > 100k messages a day of "background noise".
>
> Jeez, that is impressive and scary. Is there any "protection" in
> front of these adresses?

No. They're spam traps. They're meant to receive spam and inform
SpamCop where the spam is coming from so the source can be blocklisted.
Filtering out spam would be counter-productive in this case.

However, my point was to point out that what you referred to as
"background noise" can be a full-blown mail flood within a matter of
days.

Also, I mistyped the amount of spam hitting the traps. It's nearer 10K
than 100K, but that's still pretty scary.

--
G. Stewart - godwin.stewart@??

If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.

Attachment: pgpewCHrcOdGD.pgp
Description: PGP signature