Deutscher Text folgt unten.
--English--
We do not dispatch Spam!
To 12.10.2005 an unknown quantity penetrated in our Mailserver over a system
account and dispatched enamels to 60.000 receivers. The break-down
succeeded over trying different passwords out. Do not have we simple passwords
[Note: Silently crossposted [bcc] to another list due to content fitting
both places.]
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005, Dave Warren wrote:
How much would it cost to put photos on all ATM + credit cards? That
would significantly reduce stolen-card theft, and while it's not their
biggest challenge,
- Forwarded message from Karsten M. Self kmself@ix.netcom.com -
From: Karsten M. Self kmself@ix.netcom.com
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 14:24:55 -0800
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [linux-elitists] Re: MCI boots send-safe (Register) -- adds a net
of 11 more spam hosts
User-Agent
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/02/17/spam_gets_vocal_with_voip/print.html
The Register
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Spam gets vocal with VoIP
By John Leyden (john.leyden at theregister.co.uk)
Published Thursday 17th February 2005 08:47 GMT
RSA 2005 We're all learning to live with spam
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/01/14/malware_mass_net_turn_off/print.html
The Register
Biting the hand that feeds IT
The Register » Internet and Law » eCommerce »
Original URL:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/01/14/malware_mass_net_turn_off/
Malware, spam prompts mass net turn off
---Click
Stop Spam Once and for all!
Eliminates porn too!
Want out of our database? Do not reply to this email.
Copy and paste this link into your browser -
blocjunk.com/rmm.htm
Computer Technologies
848 N. Rainbow Blvd. #316Las Vegas, NV 89107
---Click
Stop Spam Once and for all!
Eliminates porn too!
Want out of our database? Do not reply to this email.
Copy and paste this link into your browser -
blocjunk.com/rmm.htm
Computer Technologies
848 N. Rainbow Blvd. #316Las Vegas, NV 89107
---Click
Stop Spam Once and for all!
Eliminates porn too!
Want out of our database? Do not reply to this email.
Copy and paste this link into your browser -
blocjunk.com/rmm.htm
Computer Technologies
848 N. Rainbow Blvd. #316Las Vegas, NV 89107
---Click
Stop Spam Once and for all!
Eliminates porn too!
Want out of our database? Do not reply to this email.
Copy and paste this link into your browser -
blocjunk.com/rmm.htm
Computer Technologies
848 N. Rainbow Blvd. #316Las Vegas, NV 89107
---Click
Stop Spam Once and for all!
Eliminates porn too!
Want out of our database? Do not reply to this email.
Copy and paste this link into your browser -
blocjunk.com/rmm.htm
Computer Technologies
848 N. Rainbow Blvd. #316Las Vegas, NV 89107
---Click
Stop Spam Once and for all!
Eliminates porn too!
Want out of our database? Do not reply to this email.
Copy and paste this link into your browser -
blocjunk.com/rmm.htm
Computer Technologies
848 N. Rainbow Blvd. #316Las Vegas, NV 89107
---Click
Stop Spam Once and for all!
Eliminates porn too!
Want out of our database? Do not reply to this email.
Copy and paste this link into your browser -
blocjunk.com/rmm.htm
Computer Technologies
848 N. Rainbow Blvd. #316Las Vegas, NV 89107
---Click
Stop Spam Once and for all!
Eliminates porn too!
Want out of our database? Do not reply to this email.
Copy and paste this link into your browser -
mail-svcs.com/rmm.htm
Computer Technologies
848 N. Rainbow Blvd. #316Las Vegas, NV 89107
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/26/lycos_europe_spam_blitz/print.html
The Register
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Original URL: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/26/lycos_europe_spam_blitz/
Lycos screensaver to blitz spam servers
By Jan Libbenga (libbenga at yahoo.com)
Published
---Click
Stop Spam Once and for all!
Eliminates porn too!
Want out of our database? Do not reply to this email.
Copy and paste this link into your browser -
mail-svcs.com/rmm.htm
Computer Technologies
848 N. Rainbow Blvd. #316Las Vegas, NV 89107
---Click
Stop Spam Once and for all!
Eliminates porn too!
Want out of our database? Do not reply to this email.
Copy and paste this link into your browser -
mail-svcs.com/rmm.htm
Computer Technologies
848 N. Rainbow Blvd. #316Las Vegas, NV 89107
on to
insecure client machines. The proper route to control spam is to
involve users in prioritizing their email, so that their friend's
email comes first, followed by anybody they've sent mail to, followed
by people they've gotten email from before, followed by mailing list
mail, followed by email
on to
insecure client machines. The proper route to control spam is to
involve users in prioritizing their email, so that their friend's
email comes first, followed by anybody they've sent mail to, followed
by people they've gotten email from before, followed by mailing list
mail, followed by email
On Thu, Nov 11, 2004 at 04:20:59PM -0500, R.A. Hettinga wrote:
Still, panelists insisted authentication is a vital first step. After that,
they said, could come a system that evaluates the reputation of senders,
perhaps using a process that marks good e-mail with an electronic seal of
Your message
To: Tolbert
Subject: KCO SPAM? Hi Tolbert
Sent:Thu, 18 Nov 2004 10:48:42 -0500
did not reach the following recipient(s):
Tolbert on Fri, 19 Nov 2004 03:38:37 -0500
The recipient name is not recognized
The MTS-ID of the original message is: c=US;a= ;p
R.A. Hettinga writes:
mail, followed by email from strangers (which is where all the spam
is).
A whitelist for my friends, all others pay...
oh, forget it.
Anybody can pay to send email right now. You just go to paypal, type
in the person's email, enter the amount of money you
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At 11:19 AM -0500 11/19/04, Russell Nelson wrote:
Anybody can pay to send email right now.
:-).
Of course, I'm talking about something like postage, at the $MTP level.
Again, forget it.
Cheers,
RAH
- --
- -
R. A. Hettinga mailto:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At 9:15 PM -0500 11/18/04, Russell Nelson wrote:
The proper route to control spam is to
involve users in prioritizing their email, so that their friend's
email comes first, followed by anybody they've sent mail to, followed
by people they've gotten
of the effort spent to secure open
relays was basically wasted effort, because spammers just moved on to
insecure client machines. The proper route to control spam is to
involve users in prioritizing their email, so that their friend's
email comes first, followed by anybody they've sent mail
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At 9:15 PM -0500 11/18/04, Russell Nelson wrote:
The proper route to control spam is to
involve users in prioritizing their email, so that their friend's
email comes first, followed by anybody they've sent mail to, followed
by people they've gotten
to verify senders of e-mail.
:
: In theory, such an authentication system would make it harder for spammers
: to disguise their identities and locations in an attempt to avoid being
: shut down or prosecuted.
(Having watched the IETF group for a while, and spent much time fighting
spam...)
No person
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A41460-2004Nov10?language=printer
The Washington Post
washingtonpost.com
E-Mail Authentication Will Not End Spam, Panelists Say
By Jonathan Krim
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, November 11, 2004; Page E01
For consumers and businesses
to verify senders of e-mail.
:
: In theory, such an authentication system would make it harder for spammers
: to disguise their identities and locations in an attempt to avoid being
: shut down or prosecuted.
(Having watched the IETF group for a while, and spent much time fighting
spam...)
No person
---Click
Stop Spam Once and for all!
Eliminates porn too!
Want out of our database? Do not reply to this email.
Copy and paste this link into your browser -
mail-svcs.com/rmm.htm
Computer Technologies
848 N. Rainbow Blvd. #316Las Vegas, NV 89107
---Click
Stop Spam Once and for all!
Eliminates porn too!
Want out of our database? Do not reply to this email.
Copy and paste this link into your browser -
mail-svcs.com/rmm.htm
Computer Technologies
848 N. Rainbow Blvd. #316Las Vegas, NV 89107
Want out of our database? Do not reply to this
email.
Copy and paste this link into your browser
-
rem0925.biz/rmm.htm
Sponsored by
Previ.a M.arketing848 N. Rainbow Blvd.Las
Vegas, NV 89107
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
--=_NextPart_000_0006_01C4A85C.DC5D5BE0--
Want out of our database? Do not reply to this
email.
Copy and paste this link into your browser
-
rem0925.biz/rmm.htm
Sponsored by
Previ.a M.arketing848 N. Rainbow Blvd.Las
Vegas, NV 89107
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
--=_NextPart_000_0006_01C4A85C.DC5D5BE0--
the stuff, and the worst would be
quasi-spam like Yet Another Invitation
to some crypto-industry marketroid's seminar.
It might be a rant from Detweiler or some other
cypherpunk that you bozofilter, but at least that was a job
for your email program to sort out, not your first-tier spamfilter.
Besides
the stuff, and the worst would be
quasi-spam like Yet Another Invitation
to some crypto-industry marketroid's seminar.
It might be a rant from Detweiler or some other
cypherpunk that you bozofilter, but at least that was a job
for your email program to sort out, not your first-tier spamfilter.
Besides
Bill Stewart wrote:
At 03:15 PM 9/6/2004, Hadmut Danisch wrote:
On Mon, Sep 06, 2004 at 11:52:03AM -0600, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
E-mail security company MX Logic Inc. will report this week that 10
percent
of all spam includes such SPF records,
I have mentioned this problem more than a year ago
At 1:33 PM +0100 9/13/04, Ben Laurie wrote:
Surely you should check that:
a) The signature works
b) Is someone in your list of good keys
before whitelisting?
Amen.
A (cryptographic) whitelist for my friends, all others pay cash. :-)
Cheers,
RAH
--
-
R. A. Hettinga mailto:
At 1:33 PM +0100 9/13/04, Ben Laurie wrote:
Surely you should check that:
a) The signature works
b) Is someone in your list of good keys
before whitelisting?
Amen.
A (cryptographic) whitelist for my friends, all others pay cash. :-)
Cheers,
RAH
--
-
R. A. Hettinga mailto:
At 03:15 PM 9/6/2004, Hadmut Danisch wrote:
On Mon, Sep 06, 2004 at 11:52:03AM -0600, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
E-mail security company MX Logic Inc. will report this week that 10 percent
of all spam includes such SPF records,
I have mentioned this problem more than a year ago in context of
my RMX
At 03:15 PM 9/6/2004, Hadmut Danisch wrote:
On Mon, Sep 06, 2004 at 11:52:03AM -0600, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
E-mail security company MX Logic Inc. will report this week that 10 percent
of all spam includes such SPF records,
I have mentioned this problem more than a year ago in context of
my RMX
http://www.eweek.com/print_article/0,1761,a=134748,00.asp
EWeek
Spam Spotlight on Reputation
Spam Spotlight on Reputation
September 6, 2004
By Dennis Callaghan
As enterprises continue to register Sender Protection Framework records,
hoping to thwart spam and phishing attacks, spammers
On Mon, Sep 06, 2004 at 11:52:03AM -0600, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
E-mail security company MX Logic Inc. will report this week that 10 percent
of all spam includes such SPF records,
I have mentioned this problem more than a year ago in context of
my RMX draft (SPF, CallerID and SenderID
On Mon, Sep 06, 2004 at 11:52:03AM -0600, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
E-mail security company MX Logic Inc. will report this week that 10 percent
of all spam includes such SPF records,
I have mentioned this problem more than a year ago in context of
my RMX draft (SPF, CallerID and SenderID
http://www.eweek.com/print_article/0,1761,a=134748,00.asp
EWeek
Spam Spotlight on Reputation
Spam Spotlight on Reputation
September 6, 2004
By Dennis Callaghan
As enterprises continue to register Sender Protection Framework records,
hoping to thwart spam and phishing attacks, spammers
Your message
To: Hkhenson
Subject: [SPAM] 81% - [VIRUS] Site changes
Sent:Tue, 31 Aug 2004 20:17:22 -0400
did not reach the following recipient(s):
c=CA;a= ;p=Cogeco;o=Ontario;dda:[EMAIL PROTECTED]; on Tue, 31 Aug
2004 19:19:07 -0400
The recipient name is not recognized
providers test ways to outsmart spam
Sunday, July 25, 2004
By Chris Gaither, Los Angeles Times
Be liberal in what you accept and conservative in what you send.
That was the philosophy when computer scientists sent the first
electronic-mail messages over the Internet more than 30 years ago
providers test ways to outsmart spam
Sunday, July 25, 2004
By Chris Gaither, Los Angeles Times
Be liberal in what you accept and conservative in what you send.
That was the philosophy when computer scientists sent the first
electronic-mail messages over the Internet more than 30 years ago
...A whitelist for my friends...
Cheers,
RAH
---
http://news.com.com/2102-7355_3-5250010.html?tag=st.util.print
CNET News
VeriSign service takes on spam
By Dinesh C. Sharma
Special to CNET News.com
http://news.com.com/2100-7355-5250010.html
Story last modified June 28, 2004, 8:11
Oh, the irony! A spammer selling anti-spam services!
//Alif
On Tue, 29 Jun 2004, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 11:56:28 -0400
From: R. A. Hettinga [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: VeriSign service takes on spam
...A whitelist for my
..A whitelist for my friends...
Cheers,
RAH
---
http://news.com.com/2102-7355_3-5250010.html?tag=st.util.print
CNET News
VeriSign service takes on spam
By Dinesh C. Sharma
Special to CNET News.com
http://news.com.com/2100-7355-5250010.html
Story last modified June 28, 2004, 8:11 AM
http://english.pravda.ru/printed.html?news_id=13170
Spam sender sentenced in Russia for the first time - 06/23/2004 19:32
On June 22 student Dmitry Anosov from the city of Chelybinsk was sentenced
forcreating software causing uncontrolled blocking computers and copying
information?.
His
http://english.pravda.ru/printed.html?news_id=13170
Spam sender sentenced in Russia for the first time - 06/23/2004 19:32
On June 22 student Dmitry Anosov from the city of Chelybinsk was sentenced
forcreating software causing uncontrolled blocking computers and copying
information?.
His
Title: Important Info
Hello, how are you doing?
Better than all other Spam filters -
Only Delivers The Email You Want!
This is the ultimate solution that is guaranteed to stop all spam
without
losing any of your important email! This system protects you 100%.
We didn't believe it either
Your message
To: Beltran
Subject: SPAM: Re: My ordered Adult movies - 8973 Beltran : 876
Sent:Sun, 6 Jun 2004 01:15:11 -0400
did not reach the following recipient(s):
Beltran on Sat, 5 Jun 2004 09:55:13 -0400
The recipient name is not recognized
The MTS-ID
Your message
To: Mickeyv
Subject: Spam: Re: Hi there Mickeyv
Sent:Fri, 28 May 2004 17:48:53 -0600
did not reach the following recipient(s):
[EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, 28 May 2004 02:43:52 -0600
The recipient name is not recognized
The MTS-ID of the original message
Thank you for verifying your email address with Spam Arrest!
Your email has been forwarded to [EMAIL PROTECTED]'s inbox. All of your
future emails to [EMAIL PROTECTED] will also be delivered directly into
their inbox.
You can protect your own email account using Spam Arrest.
Please
Scenarios/Undefined/F-Secure Anti-Virus: Error 0xc2060a08, W32/[EMAIL PROTECTED],
F-Secure Orion, W32/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Die E-Mail von [EMAIL PROTECTED] an [EMAIL PROTECTED]
enthielt einen Computer Virus. Eine Zustellung erfolgt nicht. Bitte lassen Sie
umgehend ihr Computer-System pruefen!
--- begin forwarded text
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 22:31:27 -0400
From: Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.6 (Macintosh/20040502)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Politech] Here's someone who actually likes political spam [sp]
List
--- begin forwarded text
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 22:31:27 -0400
From: Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.6 (Macintosh/20040502)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Politech] Here's someone who actually likes political spam [sp]
List
as an anti-spam
measure. The idea is that to send email, the sender has to create a
proof of work token, something which takes a relatively long time to
compute but which can be checked quickly. The simplest proposal is a
hash collision, as suggested by Adam Back at http://www.hashcash.org/.
Spam
--- begin forwarded text
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 14:41:31 +0100
To: R. A. Hettinga [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Fearghas McKay [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Reusable hashcash for spam prevention
Cc: Richard Clayton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and the data
--- begin forwarded text
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 14:41:16 +0100
To: R. A. Hettinga [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Fearghas McKay [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Reusable hashcash for spam prevention
Cc: Richard Clayton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This was posted
as an anti-spam
measure. The idea is that to send email, the sender has to create a
proof of work token, something which takes a relatively long time to
compute but which can be checked quickly. The simplest proposal is a
hash collision, as suggested by Adam Back at http://www.hashcash.org/.
Spam
--- begin forwarded text
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 14:41:31 +0100
To: R. A. Hettinga [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Fearghas McKay [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Reusable hashcash for spam prevention
Cc: Richard Clayton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and the data
--- begin forwarded text
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 14:41:16 +0100
To: R. A. Hettinga [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Fearghas McKay [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Reusable hashcash for spam prevention
Cc: Richard Clayton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This was posted
Title: Important Info
How's it going?
Better than all other Spam filters -
Only Delivers The Email You Want!
This is the ultimate solution that is guaranteed to stop all spam
without
losing any of your important email! This system protects you 100%.
We didn't believe it either until we
Title: Important Info
How are you doing?
Better than all other Spam filters -
Only Delivers The Email You Want!
This is the ultimate solution that is guaranteed to stop all spam
without
losing any of your important email! This system protects you 100%.
We didn't believe it either until we
http://news.com.com/2102-1038_3-5190826.html?tag=st.util.print
CNET News
http://www.news.com/
E-mail lists choke on spam
By John Borland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
http://news.com.com/2100-1038-5190826.html
Story last modified April 13, 2004, 1:36 PM PDT
For close to half
Thank you for verifying your email address with Spam Arrest!
Your email has been forwarded to Peter D. Marshall's inbox. All of your
future emails to Peter D. Marshall will also be delivered directly into
their inbox.
You can protect your own email account using Spam Arrest.
Please
Thank you for verifying your email address with Spam Arrest!
Your email has been forwarded to Mark Tucci - Custom Blends's inbox. All of your
future emails to Mark Tucci - Custom Blends will also be delivered directly into
their inbox.
You can protect your own email account using Spam
eManager Notification *
The following mail was blocked since it contains sensitive content.
Source mailbox: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Destination mailbox(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Policy: Attachment Removal
Attachment file name: document.zip - application/octet-stream
eManager Notification *
The following mail was blocked since it contains sensitive content.
Source mailbox: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Destination mailbox(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Policy: Attachment Removal
Attachment file name: test.pif - application/octet-stream
Action:
Bah, I really miss the crap-filtered version of cypherpunks
can anyone recommend a better node than the one I am using now?
Dave Howe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bah, I really miss the crap-filtered version of cypherpunks
can anyone recommend a better node than the one I am using now?
Well, you might consider me slightly biased (since I run the node),
but I recommend [EMAIL PROTECTED] Filtered in essentially the
same
Your message
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Spam Suspected:
Sent:Tue, 27 Jan 2004 06:03:48 -0800
did not reach the following recipient(s):
[EMAIL PROTECTED] on Tue, 27 Jan 2004 10:22:19 -0800
The maximum time for delivering the message expired
The MTS-ID
There is a problem here how to killfile (or spamfilter) the more repeated
nothing-saying posts without losing also his good stuff as the collateral
damage.
The good ruleset could be (translate to the syntax of whatever you use):
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Body contains: smoke
Body contains:
--
Alan Brown wrote:
I just hope you're right
about the CPUs burning up - it doesn't happen when machines
are running OGR calculations, so I suspect that you just
ran into a particularly badly built example.
Eric S. Johansson
no, it was a stock Intel motherboard, CPU, CPU fan in a
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Bill Stewart wrote:
The reason it's partly a cryptographic problem is forgeries.
Once everybody starts whitelisting, spammers are going to
start forging headers to pretend to come from big mailing lists
and popular machines and authors, so now you'll not only
need to
Ben Laurie wrote:
Richard Clayton wrote:
and in these schemes, where does our esteemed moderator get _his_ stamps
from ? remember that not all bulk email is spam by any means... or do
we end up with whitelists all over the place and the focus of attacks
moves to the ingress to the mailing lists
Richard Clayton wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
But using your spam size, , the slowdown factor becomes roughly
73 times. So they would need 73 machines running full tilt all the time
to regain their old throughput.
Believe me
On Thu, 1 Jan 2004, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
the easynet.nl list (recently demised) listed nearly 700K machines that
had been detected (allegedly) sending spam... so since their detection
was not universal it would certainly be more than 700K :(
that is a nasty bit of news. I'll run some
Alan Brown wrote:
They are currently tracking around 1.5 million compromised machines.
*ouch*. on 24x7 both power and connectivity?
The Swen and blaster worms install various spamware and backdoors. These
have been estimated to have infected millions of machines worldwide and
later versions
Eric S. Johansson writes:
Ben Laurie wrote:
Richard Clayton wrote:
and in these schemes, where does our esteemed moderator get _his_ stamps
from ? remember that not all bulk email is spam by any means... or do
we end up with whitelists all over the place and the focus of attacks
moves
Eric S. Johansson writes:
Ben Laurie wrote:
Richard Clayton wrote:
and in these schemes, where does our esteemed moderator get _his_ stamps
from ? remember that not all bulk email is spam by any means... or do
we end up with whitelists all over the place and the focus of attacks
moves
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Bill Stewart wrote:
The reason it's partly a cryptographic problem is forgeries.
Once everybody starts whitelisting, spammers are going to
start forging headers to pretend to come from big mailing lists
and popular machines and authors, so now you'll not only
need to
Richard Clayton wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
But using your spam size, , the slowdown factor becomes roughly
73 times. So they would need 73 machines running full tilt all the time
to regain their old throughput.
Believe me
On Thu, 1 Jan 2004, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
the easynet.nl list (recently demised) listed nearly 700K machines that
had been detected (allegedly) sending spam... so since their detection
was not universal it would certainly be more than 700K :(
that is a nasty bit of news. I'll run some
--
Alan Brown wrote:
I just hope you're right
about the CPUs burning up - it doesn't happen when machines
are running OGR calculations, so I suspect that you just
ran into a particularly badly built example.
Eric S. Johansson
no, it was a stock Intel motherboard, CPU, CPU fan in a
Alan Brown wrote:
They are currently tracking around 1.5 million compromised machines.
*ouch*. on 24x7 both power and connectivity?
The Swen and blaster worms install various spamware and backdoors. These
have been estimated to have infected millions of machines worldwide and
later versions
Richard Clayton wrote:
and in these schemes, where does our esteemed moderator get _his_ stamps
from ? remember that not all bulk email is spam by any means... or do
we end up with whitelists all over the place and the focus of attacks
moves to the ingress to the mailing lists :(
He uses
Ben Laurie wrote:
Richard Clayton wrote:
and in these schemes, where does our esteemed moderator get _his_ stamps
from ? remember that not all bulk email is spam by any means... or do
we end up with whitelists all over the place and the focus of attacks
moves to the ingress to the mailing lists
-mail is *really*
small. The cost I care about is my time, specifically my time spent
leafing through my likely-spam folder checking to see if someone I actually
want to hear from sent me something worth seeing. (This is a hassle,
because sometimes people e-mail me with questions or comments
Scott Nelson wrote:
d*b
---
s
where: d = stamp delay in seconds
s = spam size in bytes
b = bandwidth in bytes per second
I don't understand this equation at all.
It's the rate limiting factor that counts, not a combination of
stamp speed + bandwidth.
well, stamp speed is method
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
But using your spam size, , the slowdown factor becomes roughly
73 times. So they would need 73 machines running full tilt all the time
to regain their old throughput.
Believe me, the professionals have enough 0wned machines that this is
trivial
(The use of memory speed leads to an interesting notion: Functions that are
designed to be differentially expensive on different kinds of fielded hardware.
On a theoretical basis, of course, all hardware is interchangeable; but in
practice, something differentially expensive to calculate on an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
But using your spam size, , the slowdown factor becomes roughly
73 times. So they would need 73 machines running full tilt all the time
to regain their old throughput.
Believe me, the professionals
At 7:46 PM + 12/30/03, Richard Clayton wrote:
where does our esteemed moderator get _his_ stamps
from ?
A whitelist for my friends, etc...
Whitelist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cheers,
RAH
--
-
R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation
On Dec 30, 2003, at 1:01 PM, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
At 7:46 PM + 12/30/03, Richard Clayton wrote:
where does our esteemed moderator get _his_ stamps
from ?
A whitelist for my friends, etc...
We're not moderated. Get used to it.
Or are people _again_ spamming the Cypherpunks list with crap
At 07:46 PM 12/30/2003 +, Richard Clayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[what about mailing lists]
Obviously you'd have to whitelist anybody's list you're joining
if you don't want your spam filters to robo-discard it.
moan
I never understand why people think spam is a technical problem :( let
lists]
Obviously you'd have to whitelist anybody's list you're joining
if you don't want your spam filters to robo-discard it.
moan
I never understand why people think spam is a technical problem :( let
alone a cryptographic one :-(
/moan
The reason it's partly a cryptographic problem is forgeries
Scott Nelson wrote:
d*b
---
s
where: d = stamp delay in seconds
s = spam size in bytes
b = bandwidth in bytes per second
I don't understand this equation at all.
It's the rate limiting factor that counts, not a combination of
stamp speed + bandwidth.
well, stamp speed is method
1 - 100 of 441 matches
Mail list logo
