Slashdot Log In
Spammers Sue Anti-Spam Groups
Posted by
timothy
on Wed Apr 23, 2003 12:40 PM
from the slither-together-or-slither-separately dept.
from the slither-together-or-slither-separately dept.
SuperBanana writes "The Register reports in a story today that spammers have banded together under the name EmarketersAmerica.org to sue various anti-spam groups- days before a large conference on spam hosted by the FTC(which will be attended by many spammers). Anti-spam groups think the timing is not by coincidence, but believe the move may backfire because they will be able to countersue and get access to spammer's internal documents. By the way, if you're wondering who these guys are, check out Spamhaus's directory of top spammers."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Spammers Sue Anti-Spam Groups
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 581 comments
(Spill at 50!) | Index Only
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
|
2
This is what should happen to all spammers.... (Score:4, Interesting)
Elliott Harris, Chicago Sun-Times: "A fan in Massachusetts, upset at Fox's decision to replace auto racing with Red Sox baseball, faces the possibility of a year in jail for sending more than 530,000 e-mails that shut down Fox's Web site in 2001. Hey, who knew a NASCAR fan would know spam was anything other than something to eat?"
Re:This is what should happen to all spammers.... (Score:4, Funny)
(Last Journal: Thursday May 15 2003, @10:42AM)
Damn Yankees fans, I swear ...
Random nonsense (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.cyberista.com/)
We know which companies sell their email listings, right?
More than a few of us can write a script...
A clandestine server running in an undisclosed location--perhaps a public wireless hotspot--can go forever properly filling out the forms of these companies with complete and total gibberish.
It won't crash servers... nobody will even know until it's pretty much too late and the offended databases are loaded with utter garbage.
Recently, I wrote about passively doing this to spambots [cyberista.com]. I keep the page [cyberista.com] on the server for good measure.
My tech articles are geared to a nontech audience so don't give me crap if they sound lame. I don't preach to the choir except when hanging out at Slashdot.
That said, I don't see why this concept can't be expanded. They have no defense against form scripts.
Theyve banded together???? (Score:3, Insightful)
The irony is just sickening (Score:5, Funny)
(Last Journal: Tuesday March 14 2006, @12:31PM)
Dear Customer,
Please key in the password you see displayed to the right in order to obtain the information you requested from our WHOIS database.
In order to protect the privacy of our customers, Go Daddy Software has implemented a process that prevents unscrupulous spammers from running scripts that acquire email addresses from our WHOIS service (which in accordance with ICANN policy must be made available to the public). The password you see is provided in graphic format and cannot be read by a script. Only humans can read it. By taking a moment to key in the password you are doing your part to eliminate SPAM.
mefels@aol.com (Score:4, Funny)
(http://www.etteroljen.no/ | Last Journal: Tuesday January 17 2006, @11:50AM)
mefels@aol.com [mailto]
Broken link (Score:4, Informative)
emarketersamerica.org [emarketersamerica.org]
Are they 'leveraging their synergy'? (Score:5, Funny)
A group of Florida-based porn peddlers, penis enlargement and Viagra spammers has united to file suit against anti-spam organisations.
Given their similar, uhhh, subject matter, I guess it makes sense they would eventually form a union of some kind.
(I meant union as in 'coalition' or similar, not any other kind. Probably best not to think too much about that one. D'oh.)
Re:Are they 'leveraging their synergy'? (Score:4, Funny)
(Last Journal: Thursday October 17 2002, @10:28AM)
>I guess it makes sense they would eventually form a union of some kind.
I'd much rather they formed an aggregate, were sealed in glass, then placed in a deep tunnel in a remote mountain.
Let future generations worry about the "ethics" of such a punishment.
Re:Spammers Sue Anti-Spam Groups (Score:5, Funny)
(http://prometheus.med.utah.edu/~bwjones/ | Last Journal: Sunday December 09, @09:11PM)
Re:Spammers Sue Anti-Spam Groups (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://prometheus.med.utah.edu/~bwjones/ | Last Journal: Sunday December 09, @09:11PM)
It just goes to show how a few incredibly selfish individuals can bring chaos and ruin to society. It obviously does not take many to bring huge costs to business and government, so why is it so hard to prosecute these few individuals for abuse of the internet and indirect theft from business and government (taxpayer) coffers, especially if they are known?
Jerks (Score:3, Funny)
eMarketersAmerica, more like eMarketersNigeria
Re:Jerks (Score:5, Funny)
Hey, look, there IS still one guy who thinks the US is held in any regard worldwide. Damn, now I owe my buddy a beer.
Contact? (Score:3, Funny)
What will be next? (Score:5, Funny)
Drug users suing dealers?
Smokers suing tobacco compani.... Oh.
Actual text of the filing in flordia (Score:5, Informative)
(Spread out which ones you use, these are alot of folks with home machines on DSL lines. Being
http://ares.penguinhosting.net/~leftreveggplant
http://chickenboner.com/felstei
http://cjllewellyn.homeip.net/slapp.p
http://home.earthlink.net/~bbay/slapp.pdf
htt
http://members.co
http://members.shaw.ca/wooly
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/egplant/
http://SteveSobol.com/slapp.pdf
http:/
http://www.b
http://www.conmicro.cx/slapp.pdf
http:/
http://www.ge
http://www.linxnet.com/misc/spam
http://www.north-lincolnshire.com/slap
http://www.pearlgates.net/nanae/slapp.pdf
http://www.t
http://www.tirani.net
There's also been some lively discussion on NANAE about this issue....
Anybody feel like... (Score:3, Insightful)
Assuming there are such, as it's currently being hit with a DoS. I think it's the first time a website has deserved a /.'ing.
Hah (Score:4, Funny)
(http://www.fontosaurus.com/ | Last Journal: Tuesday February 17 2004, @09:37AM)
Of course, for once, we'll see the Slashdot Effect put to good use.
Re:Hah (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe not now, but just wait until this story is posted three more times.
FYI- link to the PDF of the lawsuit (Score:5, Interesting)
I found out about this from a friend(Hi Scott!) after I submitted the article. He put it best:
"It is classic... misspellings, copy + paste problems...He named rediculous people as defendents, including the brother of one anti spammer, who apparently lives in Italy and doesn't care about spam at all."
http://chickenboner.com/felstein/slapp.pdf
hmm... (Score:4, Funny)
(http://aol.com/)
Can we bomb them, Oh please can we bomb them ?
Important Tip (Score:3, Funny)
(http://www.will-ludwigsen.com/)
Offshore? (Score:3, Funny)
(http://traal.livejournal.com/ | Last Journal: Thursday November 13 2003, @05:26PM)
google cahche of spamhaus' list (Score:4, Informative)
What if we just stopped using the email protocol? (Score:3, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Tuesday September 28 2004, @01:45PM)
Let's say we ditched the email concept, and messaging just involved people going to eachothers websites and dropping a note via webform. To reply, you simply click the link back to the senders message webform etc...
Then to ensure we don't have web crawling bots auto submitting spam through the forms, you add a dynamically created GIF/jpeg file with a 5 letter code embedded that the subitter needs to type for the form to submit.
Then, problem solved no? Christ the email protocol we've been using for the last 20years is ready for the shitter in my opinion.
--Zuchini
judicial spam (Score:3, Funny)
Keeping courts busy with unnecessary and pointless lawsuits, thus blocking "real" and important cases and wasting resources is its own form of spam: judicial spam!
Spamhaus slashdotted already (Score:5, Interesting)
What's really amazing isn't that spammers continue to spam but that they continue to find people who are willing to pay them to do so. Have you ever read what an email marketer considers fair results? 2% of the emails you buy will be viewed (viewed meaning that someone actually generated an http request based on the HTML inside). How do they guarantee this? If they fall short, they will
This is an amazing comment on the ineffectiveness of spam. More than 98% of all spam messages are deleted unseen (or bounced). Of the remaining 2%, some of those were only "viewed" in the sense that they had active focus when the receiver hit delete. Of those that generate actual click-through, how many generate sales?
How stupid does someone have to be to buy an "email marketing campaign?" One could get better results by sending your $1000 to a local charity and putting out a press release.
Spam --- built on ignorance and stupidity.
Re:Spamhaus slashdotted already (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Saturday February 08 2003, @06:44PM)
- This is an amazing comment on the ineffectiveness of spam.
Only if you don't complete the math. I haven't priced a spam-campaign, personally, but I have seen adverts for software you can "run from home" that retail for as little $75.So let's play a numbers game. Let's suppose I want to sell narfing-irons. I can manufacture them cheaply in India, so I have a good supply, and can make a 60% profit if I sell them for $35 a pair. I want to use a spam campaign, because I know how effective they are. I buy a service for $350, and they will send spam out to 4 million addresses. Just 2% will result in page views. That's 80,000 hits. Let's assume we get a sales rate of .5%. That's right, one-half of one percent. That's 400 sales. Or, total revenues of $14,000. Around $8000 of that is profit, from which my $350 spam-campaign is taken.
And that was only one run of spam. If I run, say, 10 or 12 campaigns from different services, with similar rates of return, my narfing-iron business will net me in the vicinity of $80K-$100K in profit from Internet-based sales alone. And I didn't lift a finger, other than to ship the product.
NOW do you see where they get people who will pay for this service?
paradoxical question (Score:4, Funny)
(http://knoppixquake.webhop.net/)
Re:paradoxical question (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah right (Score:3, Interesting)
Allright the blacklisting is allright because the user is requesting those sites to be blacklisted. Don't know about invasion of privacy (probably publishing the names and addresses), publication of false information (isn't that libel?). Finally "intentionally interference with a contract".(well at least it's spammer english:) there was never any contract in the first place and is just the user trying to avoid harassment. I'll be very surprised if this goes anywhere then again we may not have the whole story, remember the register isn't exactly an impartial newssource.
Recidivist Spammers (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.noirchickenstudios.com/)
So... who's got 1,800 feet of rope and an orchard to spare?
spammer conference? (Score:3, Funny)
(http://www.sagentusers.com/sagent/)
Now where's some of that Iraqi nerve agent when we need it?
Want someone to complain to? (Score:5, Informative)
FELSTEIN & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
Attorneys for EMarketersAmerica.org, Inc.
555 South Federal Highway, Suite 450
Boca Raton, Florida 33432
(561) 367-7990 Phone
(561) 367-7980 Facsimile
mark@EMarketersAmerica.org
Mark E. Felstein, Esq.
FBN: 192139
I think we have a new address for every free cd offer, junk ad, and telemarketer list in the world.
Spam Me Please!!! (Score:3, Funny)
(http://www.hooklinesinker.org/)
Address:
5016 Patrick Rd
West Bloomfield, MI 48322-1543
I REALLY NEED A PENIS ENLARGEMENT!!! PLEASE!!! I'll EVEN GIVE YOU MY CREDIT CARD NUMBER!!!!!
Maybe we could (Score:3, Funny)
(http://www.unixnetworking.net/ | Last Journal: Wednesday December 04 2002, @05:55PM)
Network Operators where are you? (Score:3)
(http://www.builditwiki.com/)
Eventually they will run out of aliases and addresses to use. But I suspect that the access providers make a lot of money from spam, probably providing a premium service to spammers much like the adult hosting business. Or maybe the access providers are just so big now that they just don't notice where the spam comes from? I doubt it though, if they were really losing money they would shut them down in a second.
Even if spam is not coming from your network, then networks could just not peer with networks that allow spammers to operate without discretion, ie those that send out unsolicited emails with false origination information or use brute force spamming techniques such as dictionary matching.
The worst spammers are akin to a DoS attack, which can be tracked down and stopped. This is basically the same thing. So why not just unplug the spammers one by one?
Or are they somehow smarter than us? Maybe these are genetically engineered super smart spammers that can anticipate our every move? No, its just the people that can deny them access aren't motivated enough.
In Soviet Russia... (Score:4, Funny)
Oh wait, that's the case here too... Nevermind.
Spam as business (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.ajs.com/~ajs/)
The residential users are annoying because there are so many of them, but if, 10 years from now, the only way you can send mail is to relay through a large ISP's mail servers... who do you think said ISP's best business partners will be?
For an answer to that question look to the US Postal Service's largest customers: The US Federal Government and bulk mailers.
THAT is exactly the business niche that spammers are evolving into. All they need is for users to have slightly less choice and ISPs to have slightly more power to tell their users how the Internet works rather than the other way around.
Push to keep the Internet a network of peers while establishing a system of identity, trust and responsibility (which should in turn also by non-centralized, but rooted on an arbitrary number of certificate authorities and trust databases), and you will do yourself and the rest of the world a large favor!