On Mon, 17 Dec 2001 05:51:04 -0500 (EST), Thomas Mueller wrote:

>> l have recently been receiving some spams consisting of HTML
> attachments as base64 MIME encoded!

>> The spams are advertisements for purportedly cracked and pirated
> versions of Windows XP and other expensive payware products.

>> Why do they send these attachments as base 64 MIME encoded?
> Is it for the purpose of attempting to conceal the fact that
> fraud and piracy is being promulgated thru spam as we report
> the spam to the machines at the abuse reporting addresses?

>> The abuse examining machines probably aren't likely to care to
> decode the messages for content and they probably don't care
> about the content.  The machines are probably interested only in
> reading the headers in order to determine the origin of the spam.

>> The ISPs that send me this kind of spam don't seem to have any
> interest in stopping my spam.  Do you think the payware outfits
> whose software is being pirated would take an active interest in
> stopping this kind of spam?  If so, if anyone knows the email
> addresses of the MicroSoft and Symantec piracy investigation people,
> please let me know.

>> Regards,

>> Sam Heywood

> I too get spams consisting of base64-encoded HTML attachments, charset =
"big5",
> and Subject: line containing an undecipherable bunch of upper-ASCII
characters.
> Usually I just delete, don't bother to decode the base64.  Once I decoded and
> viewed the attachment offline, and saw a bunch of strange stuff, since I don't
> have the software to render Chinese or Korean.  So I deleted.  I don't want to
> view online, because that would indicate to the senders that the recipient was
> responding to the spam.  Besides, strange Javascript or VBScript can have
> deleterious, as in Trojan, effects.

I to have read about such deleterious effects, but if you are
viewing these attachments with Arachne on a pure DOS machine,
which has no support for JavaScript or VBS, would there really
be any danger in viewing this stuff online?

> I also notice many spam messages say I responded to some form, to make it
appear
> to have been solicited.  One such message even said it was a response to a
> feedback form I submitted in 19101, which is 17100 years in the future!

> Below is the result of your feedback form.  It was submitted by
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) on Saturday, December 15, 19101 at 23:07:50

> That was evidently sexy stuff, women with live web cams.

I also get spams like that saying that they are coming to me as a
result of my alledgedly having submitted a feedback form.  All
of these spams have something to do with promoting pornography.
I know some heterosexual women who get the same kind of spams
advertising porn sites that could not possibly offer anything
of any interest to any heterosexual women.  I know these women
would never even think of visiting a porn site designed to appeal
to heterosexual men.  Some of the women who get these spams
are old maids and Saint Frigidaire types who aren't interested in
sex at all.  They are absolutely shocked to find themselves the
targets of such spams!

> I have received pirate-software spams but not so recently, and not in HTML
that
> I could recognize.  Maybe I missed something?  But I get a lot of chain-letter
> pyramid-scheme spams.

Most all of the pirate software spams I get are from ISPs in Argentina,
and almost all of the ads are written in the Spanish language.  I do
get a few similar spams in the English language from the same ISPs in
Argentina.  Maybe people can easily get away with openly pirating
software in that country.  This kind of activity makes the country
look bad in the international community.  Shame on them.

> I think MS and Symantec investigators would take an active interest in
pursuing
> spammers selling pirate versions of their software.  There is the Business
> Software Alliance, though I don't have their contact info handy.

I will look up that outfit.  I do not use pirated software and normally
I wouldn't tell on those who do.  I especially wouldn't want to do
anything to help out MicroSoft, but now MicroSoft and I have a common
enemy, the spammers.  I wouldn't be at all interested in acquiring even
a legitimate version of XP, even if MicroSoft offered to give me a copy
for free.  Even most Windows users I know have the same attitude about
XP.  It is often the case that people who normally would not
cooperate with each other will get together to form partnerships to
unite against a common enemy.  The spammers should not be so stupid as
to fail to realize this, but they are indeed just that stupid.

Sam Heywood
-- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser - http://arachne.cz/

Reply via email to