Comments for thespamwar.com http://www.thespamwar.com A war is going on. Join the fight! Mon, 12 Sep 2005 13:41:32 +0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 Comment on Trace spam by Spamhuntress http://www.thespamwar.com/?p=8&cpage=1#comment-4 Spamhuntress Mon, 12 Sep 2005 13:41:32 +0000 http://thespamwar.com/?p=8#comment-4 Most of these spammers do not use zombies. They use open proxies. I don't know which category this spammer falls into, since I haven't seen the IP numbers. Try opening up the IP numbers in your browser. If they have regular sites on there, or cpanl or exim panels, chances are it's a proxy, not a zombie. Also check Google for the IP number. Quite often you can find the IP number in lists of open proxies, with a note of an odd port number. The bad guys scan for open proxies... Oh, I've seen those domain names before. A long time ago. Spammed then too. Most of these spammers do not use zombies. They use open proxies. I don’t know which category this spammer falls into, since I haven’t seen the IP numbers. Try opening up the IP numbers in your browser. If they have regular sites on there, or cpanl or exim panels, chances are it’s a proxy, not a zombie.

Also check Google for the IP number. Quite often you can find the IP number in lists of open proxies, with a note of an odd port number.

The bad guys scan for open proxies…

Oh, I’ve seen those domain names before. A long time ago. Spammed then too.

]]> Comment on Spam is harmful by Quel http://www.thespamwar.com/?p=3&cpage=1#comment-3 Quel Sat, 03 Sep 2005 07:56:46 +0000 http://thespamwar.com/?p=3#comment-3 100% in agreeement it's an annoyance. Really big one. But not an argument for productivity lost at the user's hand. It affects productivity in IT. But I know this is more difficult to sell than to 'scare' management about their people not working. However, if you do the math, 100 spam a day, per 2 seconds, it's around 3 minutes a day. In a company, 3 minutes are lost and recovered inmediately. This argument is not based in studies, but in just adding up: 3 minutes*1000 employess is 100K$ lost. But this is where I do not agree. At one person level, you take more time going to the bathroom one day and less the other. Does it mean the first day you do more work? Not always, right? 3 minutes per person cannot just be added up to get a big number and state it's lost time. :-) But that's only the commercial argument that I do not agree with. They should be honest and sell that arguing that helps IT in preventing spam. Where everyone is in agreement is that spam is bad. And has to be defeated. Q 100% in agreeement it’s an annoyance. Really big one. But not an argument for productivity lost at the user’s hand.

It affects productivity in IT. But I know this is more difficult to sell than to ’scare’ management about their people not working. However, if you do the math, 100 spam a day, per 2 seconds, it’s around 3 minutes a day. In a company, 3 minutes are lost and recovered inmediately. This argument is not based in studies, but in just adding up: 3 minutes*1000 employess is 100K$ lost. But this is where I do not agree. At one person level, you take more time going to the bathroom one day and less the other. Does it mean the first day you do more work? Not always, right? 3 minutes per person cannot just be added up to get a big number and state it’s lost time. :-)

But that’s only the commercial argument that I do not agree with. They should be honest and sell that arguing that helps IT in preventing spam. Where everyone is in agreement is that spam is bad. And has to be defeated.

Q

]]> Comment on Spam is harmful by JoeChongq http://www.thespamwar.com/?p=3&cpage=1#comment-2 JoeChongq Fri, 02 Sep 2005 21:48:35 +0000 http://thespamwar.com/?p=3#comment-2 I agree though that much of the problem with email is bandwith and server resources and I agree many people waste a lot of time at work browsing the net. But dealing with spam does take time if you don't have a good filter. And many people and companies don't. Those of us familiar with spam can usually easily identify most spam from its subject and sender. But the average email user isn't trained to do that or is just so unsure that they must check. Once it is open I don't believe most people actually sit there and read the whole spam, but it does take a couple seconds each. Even if they were just killing time I don't think too many people would want to read spam. I agree though that much of the problem with email is bandwith and server resources and I agree many people waste a lot of time at work browsing the net. But dealing with spam does take time if you don’t have a good filter. And many people and companies don’t.

Those of us familiar with spam can usually easily identify most spam from its subject and sender. But the average email user isn’t trained to do that or is just so unsure that they must check. Once it is open I don’t believe most people actually sit there and read the whole spam, but it does take a couple seconds each. Even if they were just killing time I don’t think too many people would want to read spam.

]]>