|
> So no one has any idea what
the purpose of these emails
are?
The bad guys aren't telling. The good guys have lots
of theories, such as:
and also:
which
in turn points to this UseNet thread:
which
has a rather low signal to noise ratio. Suffice it to say that in that
thread, they eventually come up with "spammers fake the from address on a
regular basis, yes, even yours" and "hey, we don't know what this
is".
The
bad guys have certainly spewed out broken junk before, which doesn't seem to
suit their purpose; all I can see it accomplishing is exposing previously clean
IP addresses as zombies with no commercial gain.
(Hmm... ok, to follow that previous sentence you need to share my
understanding that the bad guys regularly burn many previously clean IP
addresses at one go by using the zombies on those machines to pump out
a new spam run, thus evading the IP based blacklists until those blacklists
catch up. Since their commercial messages gets through to mailboxes in the
meantime, that is a good tradeoff from their point of view. No payload in
the numeric spam means no commercial gain.)
The
only theories that I can get behind revolve around
information-gathering. Since the MAILFROM is not an address under their
control, the bad guys could glean a little information to clean their address
lists by collecting 500-level SMTP error messages from each of their
zombies.
That
would only give them partial information and would require that they co-ordinate
the data back from their many zombies. And it supposes that the bad guys
care about list scrubbing. The greatest supposition is that they would do
this without commercial gain; after all, they could have done this without a
special spam run.
I
think they just screwed up again.
Andrew
8)
|
- [sniffer]Numeric spam Markus Gufler
- Re: [sniffer]Numeric spam Heimir Eidskrem
- Re: [sniffer]Numeric spam Goran Jovanovic
- Re: [sniffer]Numeric spam Pete McNeil
- Re: [sniffer]Numeric spam Steve Guluk
- Re: [sniffer]Numeric spam Steve Guluk
- Re: [sniffer]Numeric spam Colbeck, Andrew
- Re: [sniffer]Numeric spam John Carter
- Re: [sniffer]Numeric spam John T (Lists)
- Re: [sniffer]Numeric spam Colbeck, Andrew
- Re: [sniffer]Numeric spam Computer House Support
- Re: [sniffer]Numeric spam Darin Cox
- Re: [sniffer]Numeric spam Computer House Support
- Re: [sniffer]Numeric spam Darin Cox
