Spam

Link: Putting my Job Where my Mouth Is

I hate to kick a guy when he's down, but if Larry Lessig likes teaching law, he'd better hope Congress doesn't pass a spam labeling law.

Last fall, Larry proposed a law requiring an ADV label on spam, with a novel twist: a bounty. He proposed that if a spammer fails to label their email, the first person to hunt them down can collect a $10,000 bounty, payable by the spammer.

Now that I finally got off my ass and posted the year-end spam numbers, I can at long last announce the winner of the First Annual IJTLCSH Guess-the-Spam Contest.

The goal of the contest was to see who could guess the amount of spam I received in 2002. The article I just posted reported the amount of spam hitting my mailbox was about 10,000 messages. So, the winner is Anthony, with the winning guess of "16425ish." Congratulations!

As far as 2003, here is my prediction: 2002 ended at a rate of about 38 spams/day. The spam rate seems to be increasing linearly, so I estimate it will be about 60 spams/day at year end. That would put the 2003 total at 18,250 total spam messages in my mailbox. Check back a year from now to see what really happens.

Throughout 2002, on average, some imbecile tried to spam me every 12 minutes. My total spam count for the year was about 45,000 messages. That's about 120 spams a day--one every 12 minutes.

Link: Spammers Grab Hotmail and MSN addresses

MSN and Hotmail users are awash with spam. Microsoft is so bad, it fails the "Mom Test." My mother pays the Microsoft premium for MSN connectivity, but hosts her emailbox on my server because the spam is so bad. My friend Mark ran an experiment by opening up a Hotmail account and seeing how long it was before the first spam arrived. It took less than a day.

Many people look at incidents such as these and conclude Microsoft is selling names to spammers. That's unlikely. Even if Microsoft was brokering email addresses, it probably wouldn't sell them to work-at-home scam and penis enlargement spammers.

Link: The Spam Problem: Moving Beyond RBLs

This recently posted article really does not advance the spam discussion in any helpful fashion. It's particularly unfortunate that Slashdot chose to post it, thus giving it more attention than it deserves.

Link: Issue #32: Harming Spammers Fiscally Proves Tricky

The December email newsletter from Spamcon has just been published. It talks about why AOL's anti-spam lawsuits are helpful, even though AOL has been unable to collect on the judgements. It also discusses the angry backlash at infamous spammer Alan Ralsky.

The Spamcon is one of the most positive and effective forces in the battle against spam. Hope you'll consider supporting them.

Here is another update--maybe the final update--on my "invasion of privacy" spammer. (first posted Dec 23 and updated Dec 29)

It appears that our spammer is no longer with us. Their DNS is offline. If you ping their web host (63.164.122.10) you get back a Destination Host Unreachable error from a router buried in the Sprint network.

This is a good sign that spammer has left the building. While there is some satisfaction in seeing a spammer squished, there is the frustration knowing, like cockroaches, there are ten more to take their place.

This blog has unrelentingly denounced network service providers who shirk their duties to stop spam. This time let's recognize one for a job well done: good going, Sprint!

With great fanfare, I'm pleased to announce the First Annual IJTLCSH Guess-the-Spam Contest. It's good clean fun for the whole family, and your chance to win a fabulous prize.

The goal of the contest is to guess how much spam I received (number of email messages) in 2002. The person who guesses the closest wins.

Post your guess as a comment to this entry. You have until noon CST on Sunday, January 5 to submit your guess.

If you win, you'll get some wonderful--albeit cheap--crap. The grand prize is your choice of either: a ten dollar gift certificate redeemable online at Powell's Books, or a used 3COM 3C509-TP0 ISA Ethernet NIC.

Contest rules: One entry per person. Purchase not required, but bribery is always appreciated. Decision of the judges (that's me, buster) is final (and probably a little capricious). I'll only ship within continental U.S. If you live elsewhere, you have to come pick up your winnings. Void where prohibited. Spammers need not apply.

Last week, I wrote about a horribly rude and invasive spam I received for a web site hosted at www.amazinghealthconcepts.com. (View a copy of the original spam here.)

The network that hosts this spammer has been listed in the SPEWS block list. Yesterday, the administrator for that network appeared in news.admin.net-abuse.email and posted a message saying they don't spam.

This person is either a terrible victim or a spammer with amazing chutzpah.

Jan 1 update: I have posted an update to this entry.

When you receive dozens of spams a day, not much shocks you anymore. Yesterday's inbox, however, provided a surprising new low. Here is an excerpt:

    Click Here: http://www.amazinghealthconcepts.com/mortgage1/

    Mark Harper
    Mortgage Consultant

    Your Information:
    chip rosenthal  -  austin, tx  -  ph= 512-442-XXXX

Notice the bit of personal information tagged onto the end. This invasion of privacy is a remarkable new spam low.

I wondered, "How the hell did the spammer get this information?" I do have my mailing address and phone number on my resume, but there my name is listed as "Leonard." So, I don't think it came from there.

There is a sleazy marketing practice called e-pending, where companies try to correlate your email address with personal information without your permission. I'd be surprised, however, to see chickenboner spammers spending the money on these services. So, I remain perplexed as to how he got it.

Then I wondered, "Why the hell did the spammer do this?" Is he trying to intimidate me? We know who you are! We know where you live! Maybe he thought by presenting this piece of personal information, I'd believe he had some right to spam me. Instead, I am creeped out and offended, which I suspect is not what the spammer wanted.

This incident brings together the worst of two worlds: spam and data (non-)privacy. It's a pity our Federal legislators are too busy attending Enron and Global Crossing fundraisers to do anything about these problems. Over on the other side of the globe, the Europeans have instituted strong personal protections. As somebody on a mailing list noted, "With the EU data-protection laws, the spammer would be looking at a jail term."

Dec 29 update: I have posted an update to this entry.