![Spam Spam](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/spam_64.png)
![Security Security](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/security_64.png)
![Your Rights Online Your Rights Online](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/yro_64.png)
Spammers Exploiting Hotmail Vulnerability 310
chip rosenthal writes "Notice more Hotmail spam in your inbox recently? There is a good reason for that. In March, spammers discovered a new vulnerability in the Hotmail service that allows them to script their spam sending. So far I've seen a 2200% increase in Hotmail spam as a result. We're now at three months and counting, and the problem only seems to be getting worse."
can this be? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:can this be? (Score:5, Funny)
"Your Rights Online: Hotmail Being Exploited by Spammers"
I suppose MS must be employing their new ActiveSpamXP.NET technology. Built on the proven reliability of ActiveSpam 6.0, it will make our spam receiving experience faster and more reliable.
Re:can this be? (Score:5, Informative)
Received: from 64.84.xxx.xxx by bay3-dav112.bay3.hotmail.com with DAV;
After investigation it didnt seem like the spam had come from there, there was no evidence of a break in or that anyone had used it to send spam. While we were investigating we changed it's IP adress and never bothered to change it back, but we've still been given 3 more copies of current spam showing this IP address thats not even in use anymore.
By the way, I thought the article was pretty retarded standing on it's soap box about horrible microsoft security blah blah blah. The entire industry has problems with security, singling one company out is just petty. I've certainly had a lot of linux security updates I've needed to install over the past year, its nothing exclusive to one camp.
Also i think he was exagerating the effect of this bug.
I checked my spam that i've gotten since 5/1/03:
3467 pieces of spam
5 pieces of DAV spam
hardly a substantial amount.
Re:can this be? (Score:2, Insightful)
Also, Hotmail is solely administered by Microsoft.
So yes, blame for this particular snafu is all Microsoft's. Their long responsetime to fixing it is just damning themselves even further.
Re:can this be? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:can this be? (Score:4, Interesting)
While you cannot block Hotmail's corporate addresses from spamming you with their really really handy newsletters about using their paid service to, erh, fight spam... you can set a custom filter to block any mail where the from name contains Hotmail.
I'm not sure, but I think that would block spam posing as Hotmail newsletters. It certainly keeps my newest Hotmail account clean.
I would do the same with my old (Pre-microsoft era, old enough to be comprised of my first name initial and full last name -- try that one today!), but I am using more custom filters than you can technically have for the free service since the introduction of the paid service. If I tried to change one of the filters to the aforementioned, half of my other custom filters would go out the window, but as long as I don't touch anything, it seems I can keep my filters... for now. I miss the pre-MSN days.
Oh I get it. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Oh I get it. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Oh I get it. (Score:3, Funny)
You'd expect Microsoft to be giving head to the spammers.
Re:Oh I get it. (Score:3, Funny)
I only use hotmail for online ordering (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I only use hotmail for online ordering (Score:4, Informative)
Re:I only use hotmail for online ordering (Score:3, Informative)
My girlfriend's hotmail account on the other hand receives a similar amount of spam, and the spam filter only grabs 10% of it... and that has included a number of valid e-mails (bulk mails from a doctor's surgery, so we can sortof let it off on that one, they probably do show all the signs of being spam).
Re:Blame the original Hotmail owners. (Score:2, Interesting)
GET / HTTP/1.0
HTTP/1.1 302 Redirected
Server: Microsoft-IIS/5.0
Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2003 08:45:20 GMT
Location: http://lc2.law5.hotmail.passport.com/cgi-bin/logi
Re:Blame the original Hotmail owners. (Score:5, Informative)
FWIW, Hotmail ran on BSD for a number of years, before Microsoft bought it out. They then sent a huge crack team of MCSEs (if such a thing exists :-) in to switch everything over to Windows, and they did everything apart from the advertising servers. It was run like this for a couple of years, then some Linux fanboi said "look! Microsoft use Unix!" and they changed the ad servers too. I've had my Hotmail account for around six years, and have been receiving stupid volumes of spam for about three years. Even when Microsoft took over, it was a useful service for a few years.
Of course, we all know Microsoft [microsoft.com] don't use UNIX [microsoft.com] at all, do they? In fact, they never [google.com] did [google.com].
Re:Blame the original Hotmail owners. (Score:5, Funny)
Of course they exist!
MCSEs only use the finest crack.
Hotmail useless (Score:4, Funny)
If you're using the free yahoo mail service, then (Score:4, Interesting)
Also, I've noticed that some persistent spammers just get through, period, even with blocking [with no apprent change in the headers, at least none that are obvious].
Re:Hotmail useless (Score:5, Informative)
basicly, before you spammers had to go through the slow web interface to send spam, now they can automate the process
Re:Hotmail useless (Score:2)
another vulnerability (Score:4, Informative)
InfoSpace was such a partner (maybe still is, but I don't work there anymore). Every so often Hotmail sends these partners a huge set of files. Basically, it's all the diffs, new users, etc.
All it takes is a few employees at a few such partners to copy the data and do whatever they want with it.
Of course, this is a very old problem...nothing unique to Hotmail...
No Biggie (Score:2, Insightful)
I quickly learned that the Hotmail account was only good for submitting in those situations that would probably generate spam, and it sounds like with this DAV exploit that it'll continue to catch spam. Anyone who uses Hotmail for anything other than spam catching is masochistic.
Re:No Biggie (Score:5, Interesting)
I always wondered how people get so many mail via hotmail while I do not
The only thing which I took care of, was to not click on "yes, send me spam from all advertisers", but that was a no-brainer. If you apply for spam, you will of course get it.
So far, I have my account for more than a year. I regularily send a mail once in 2 weeks to another account, with reply to keep it from expiring, but beside this I don't use nor advertise it at all. No spam. Zero. Nada.
It might be because I am non-american (so I am not a good target for american-only advertising).
Am I the only one with this "problem"?
Re:No Biggie (Score:4, Funny)
I did once set up an account at sendmesomejunk@hotmail.com, and the box was filled in less than a week, mostly with stuff addressed to a single person, so I think it's possible that many people get spam because they picked an address that was already in use in the past, but abandoned.
On a mostly unrelated note, I once had an address that was me@myisp.net, and got tons of mail from people at my ISP that were trying to send stuff to themselves.
Re:No Biggie (Score:3, Funny)
=Smidge=
Re:No Biggie (Score:2, Insightful)
The sad thing is that when they introduced the "please spam me" feature, it was enabled by default and you had to log in in order to disable it. Which basically meant that for a while most snotmail accounts were publicly advertised.
Re:No Biggie (Score:5, Insightful)
On March 6 I created a Hotmail account with a choice of name designed to be "really obscure". I have not had one single piece of spam arrive in that account. In 3 months, no spam. I've only used this account to test whether spammers use email addresses harvested from 551 User not local; please try really-obscure@hotmail.com SMTP responses (conclusion - no they don't)
Having see dictionary attacks on my own domain (and seen the bounces from dictionary attacks when spammers fake my source email address), I can conclude that geeks choice of obscure doesn't range far off science fiction character names.
As for this Hotmail exploit, I had been wondering why these spams were getting through my DNSBL lists - about the only spam that was.
Time to add hotmail.com to the baclklist until Microsoft fix this.
Re:No Biggie (Score:2)
It takes me ~1 minute to look through it all
and discard spam, because spam is easy to tell
apart just from summary info, like from: and
subject: fields. So my point is, until I start
getting about two orders of magnitude more spam
per day it will not be a problem because it will
still be easily sortable by hand in less than
10 minutes per day.
Re:No Biggie (Score:2)
My hotmail account does not get spammed. (Score:2)
I take my name and tack on an approximation of a transcendental number and no spam (and no dictionary attacks).
Now, no farkettes [fark.com] have written me either, but that's a different problem.
DAV as an integration method for outlook? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:DAV as an integration method for outlook? (Score:5, Insightful)
So, Outlook is this huge pipe for virii, worms and spam leading me to wonder.....why is anyone still using Outlook?
I am not trolling here, this is a serious question based on example after example of companies that want to standardize on Outlook. For instance, my wife's company (a large multi-national conglomerate which will go un-named) decided last year that they wanted to standardize on Outlook. Their support costs have supposedly skyrocketed and yet there is no discussion of using something else. What is happening here?
Re:DAV as an integration method for outlook? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:DAV as an integration method for outlook? (Score:5, Interesting)
* btw - if there is a port and I am just not aware of it, someone please let me know.
Re:DAV as an integration method for outlook? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:DAV as an integration method for outlook? (Score:3, Insightful)
Install Outlook with the rest of office, and take a look at all the spiffy things that can get done--E-mail mail merge (useful for things other than SPAM, y'know), calendar tracking & sharing, keeping track of what files you opened when...
The question isn't "why are people still using Outlook", but rather "why isn't th
Re:DAV as an integration method for outlook? (Score:2)
Good point, the killer app portion of Outlook at my company is the calendar. The rest of the features go mostly unused and the power-users would figure out how to accomplish the same things on any other system we went with, so why isn't there anything to buy?
I like Outlook at least as well as any other Windows mail client, so I'm not really upset by this, just kind of surprised.
Re:DAV as an integration method for outlook? (Score:2)
2) Must have all the features, none of the bugs
3) Must remain un-bought-out by MS, or sued for patent infringement
4) Get VC to raise money while they show it's working and sell it
points 1 and 2 are the killers. OE keeps changing, and part of the reason for the bugs is that the features encourage their use.
I can accept point 1, there must be a compatible migration path. Point 2 was sort of the point of my previous post, how many of the features of Outlook g
Re:DAV as an integration method for outlook? (Score:3, Interesting)
I suspect there isn't an Outlook killer for Windows because a lot of companies have just given up trying to compete with Microsoft. How can you win against a company that thumbs its nose daily at national governments? That has the installed user base that any company in any industry would kill for?
I work for a small consulting company and I regularly push free software. I push killer
Re:DAV as an integration method for outlook? (Score:3, Informative)
Why would it run on Windows? The convincing outlook replacement is Evolution, and it runs on the Ximian desktop.
"calendar, collaboration or integration that Outlook has."
The Kolab sever does this much better than the Exchange server, and not only supports Outlook, but Kmail and KCalendar as well. Not the calendaring / task-sharing etc. wouldn't be better done by an intranet webserve
Re:DAV as an integration method for outlook? (Score:5, Informative)
1.) They don't necessarily need to use Outlook to be exploited. If a file has the extesion
2.) People can be using any email app and still get tricked into opening a trojan. Since Outlook Express is on everybody's Windows machines, then it can still be used as a conduit to send stuff back out. Most of the attempts I've seen involved opening stuff that has nothing to do with what e-mail app you're running. Remember "pretty park.exe"?
I'm not defending MS here, Outlook Express has created a nasty situation for Windows users. You don't even have to use OE to have it bite you in the ass. Uninstalling it's not painless either. I tried to do that once, and it killed Outlook 2k by wiping out a common DLL that they use. Doh. (Note: I haven't tried uninstalling OE and installing O2k.)
Here are a few things you can do to solidify yourself:
- Remap the
- If you're using Outlook 2000, set its 'attachment security' to high. While you're at it, go through it's zone security and turn off everything. You don't need 'ActiveX Controls marked as Safe' to be enabled, for example.
I acted as my company's sysadmin for a couple of years. Back then, we were all running Windows 2000 and Outlook 2000. As mentioned before, I never had to deal with the cleanup of a virus. All I really had to do was go through that little checklist. If I hadn't done that.. well who knows? I probably wouldn't have so many posts on Slashdot. I'd be busy working or something. Heh.
Re:DAV as an integration method for outlook? (Score:2)
1. Don't open obvious attachments (EXE, VBS, whatever).
2. Run a GOOD, UPDATED antivirus. Norton seems to have caught all viruses I've encountered (at least the one's I've noticed, although I haven't been made aware of my computer ever sending out worm e-mails and the like). Norton has even caught JavaScript exploits in web pages as I try to view them!
Why is anyone still using Outlook? (Score:2)
There are much better pure email clients out there, but honestly, I don't think many people would prefer Notes or Groupwise for calendaring/scheduling.
Also, some corporates at least are perfectly capable of locking down Outlook in a standardised desktop build. It's your home user with broadband who's the real da
Re:DAV as an integration method for outlook? (Score:2)
Also, Outlook is a different beast from Outlook Express. Yes, the latter is full of holes, has an anoying interface and can be a gateway for virii, but
Re:DAV as an integration method for outlook? (Score:3, Informative)
"But Outlook is a security nightmare!", we Linux & Mac nerds whine. Maybe so. But for all Outlooks many, many flaws, it definitely serves it's PIM role well for the people that spend all day in it. (And as an aside, the Exchange trick that allows remote users to get their Outlook desktops in an SSL pr
Re:DAV as an integration method for outlook? (Score:3, Informative)
The spammers can now use that interface with hotmail to script the sending of spam.
The use of outlook is not the issue here, the implementation of DAV with Hotmail is. If no one used outlook, this problem would still exist.
Re:DAV as an integration method for outlook? (Score:2, Insightful)
No, they wouldn't, for the simple reason that these clients don't execute attachments or scripts automatically.
Of course, this doesn't prevent people from manually executing attachments even when they get warnings about doing so, but then, that's a problem that doesn't really have anything to do with which mail client people are using.
Re:DAV as an integration method for outlook? (Score:2, Funny)
FROM HER LATEST EMAIL TO ME:
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
Fri, 6 Jun 2003 16:51:54 -0700
Received: from 62.241.8.122 by bay1-dav113.bay2.hotmail.com with DAV;
Fri, 06 Jun 2003 23:51:54 +0000
even though it didn't mention my penis size, I'm sure she's a spammer!!!!
OK, back to reality. It looks like this DAV thing isn't just spammers. UNLESS MY MOM IS A SPAMMER!! OMG!! :)
I'm glad I checked a few sources before putting
Re:DAV as an integration method for outlook? (Score:2)
So it sounds like anyone using Outlook with Hotmail will use DAV, thus no easy kill recipe unless you are ready to go to the extreme of treating all Hotmail addresses as spam. I have a few friends using it, maybe I'll just put their names in a whitelist and drop everything else from Hotmail.
Re:DAV as an integration method for outlook? (Score:2)
Re:DAV as an integration method for outlook? (Score:3, Insightful)
Was that intentional? That's the funniest typo I've see all day!
Spammers cutting and pasting??? (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't buy it. An hour with a Perl for dummies book and the LWP doc's and any spammer can automate thier submissions.
Does the author really believe that these spammers are copy and pasting thier spams? I sure as heck don't.
Re:Spammers cutting and pasting??? (Score:2)
You don't believe in scripting stuff??
Re:Spammers cutting and pasting??? (Score:2)
Re:Spammers cutting and pasting??? (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't know why DAV is scriptable but HTTP isn't. Yet, the fact that there is a 2200% difference between the two indicates that's the case.
Yes, I do believe the HTTP spam I see from Hotmail is manual. The bulk of it is 419 spam, which is reported to be largely done by hand by itinerant Nigerians. The rest appears to be from mom-n-pop or work-at-home cluebies.
Re: Spammers cutting and pasting??? (Score:5, Funny)
> The bulk of it is 419 spam, which is reported to be largely done by hand by itinerant Nigerians.
Itinerants? I only get it from ambasadors, generals, and other important public officials.
Spam control in Hotmail? Bought a bridge lately? (Score:5, Interesting)
And hey, it's owned by Microsoft! Grab your pitchforks!
Re:Spam control in Hotmail? Bought a bridge lately (Score:2, Informative)
Hotmail use (Score:5, Insightful)
A better solution (Score:2)
There. Now you don't need Hotmail at all. Yay!
What kind of crack is that guy smoking? (Score:5, Insightful)
How is this any different than signing up for a standard throw away ISP account with imap or pop/smtp servers and using a bulk mailer in conjunction with it?
Wow.. (Score:5, Funny)
I get the distinct feeling that if Microsoft organised a piss up in a brewery there would be sausages, crisps, plenty of seating, a cool entertainment system, probably even a stripper...
Visual Studio Arch Edition (Score:2, Interesting)
I thought this was news for nerds? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I thought this was news for nerds? (Score:3, Insightful)
Geez, I am really starting to be fed up with this. Mod me down all you want, but the average
I reported this problem to them some time ago... (Score:5, Informative)
Here's an example of the kind of brush-off I got when reporting this to Hotmail. Note that I've reported the issue several times, tried to have it escalated as I suspected it was a hole in their DAV implementation. Here's what I would get back from them:
Hello warthog,
Thank you for writing to MSN Hotmail.
This is Alvin and I'm writing in response to your complaint.
I have checked the mail including the headers and it appears that the
mail passed through a Hotmail server. However, kindly note that this
does not mean such e-mail originated from our domain.
Sometimes, e-mail delivery between different domains are relayed
through other servers. This is the reason why a Hotmail server appears
in the mail header. It is possible that your ISP or e-mail provider
employs such method.
I understand how it feels when an illegal activity has not been given
proper attention. However, we're only allowed to investigate Hotmail
members. In this case, I strongly suggest that you contact the Help
program or the Abuse section of the domain from which the unwanted
e-mail originated
Sincerely,
Alvin F.
MSN Hotmail Customer Support
Re:I reported this problem to them some time ago.. (Score:2)
I've never heard of an ISP relaying mail through someone else's mail server.. Doesn't that defeat the purpose of BEING an ISP? Or are their IPs so blacklisted that they have to relay the mail? Either way, it doesn't make any sense to me..
Re:I reported this problem to them some time ago.. (Score:2)
Re:I reported this problem to them some time ago.. (Score:2)
hotmail spam (Score:5, Interesting)
Yahoo generates the same reply regardless of whether the recipient exists or not. Thus, to guess user names, spammers would have to brute-force every mailing, as opposed to just the initial one like in the hotmail case.
Why hotmail would do something like this is completely beyond me.
Seems like a good time.. (Score:5, Informative)
Couple of nits are it is slow as hell to log into (they are in Australia and supposedly upgrading their system to fix this) and it uses Horde [horde.org] as the actual email interface (I'm a much bigger fan of SquirrelMail [squirrelmail.org] and always thought Horde needed a serious facelift).
Of course the upside is I haven't had a single piece of spam and I really like logging in and knowing that if I have new mail its from people I want to hear from.
Here's their marketing spiel:
Bluebottle stops spam.
Bluebottle's open-source technology is 100% effective in blocking unwanted email. It is the only system that can effectively protect a user from spam while ensuring all legitimate email is received.
Bluebottle is easy to use. When Bluebottle receives an email from an address or domain not on your âAllowed' list, a verification request is sent asking the sender to verify themselves in one of two ways. The required response to these verification requests automatically places the sender's address on your âAllowed' list, and the email is delivered to you without delay.
Once the sender's address is on this list, they can email you as they would normally. The advantage is that you ONLY receive email from allowed senders.
Effective.
To avoid identification, spammers commonly use forged or fake addresses. Consequently, the verification request is never seen or responded to, so spammers can't infiltrate your allowed list. That means you'll no longer receive annoying, unwanted email.
Manageable.
Bluebottle is easy to manage. Simply add your known contacts to your âAllowed' list so they can avoid verifying themselves. And even if legitimate senders do need to verify themselves, it's quick and easy to do so.
If you're sending an email, Bluebottle automatically adds the recipient's address to your allowed list to avoid a request being sent when they reply.
Protective.
Bluebottle applies the verification process to your existing email, including Hotmail, by checking your accounts through its servers. Email from known senders is delivered to your account without delay. Unknown email is placed in the pending queue to await verification. You can access your spam-free email through Bluebottle's webmail interface or via pop using any email client.
hotmail... more porn for free (Score:5, Funny)
Hotmail supplies me with the following things:
Slashdot Updates
Porn
Oh yeah, and I occasionally get asked if my privates are O.K.
Check.
------
The movie of the summer [tripod.com]
Casaredmond (Score:3, Funny)
Allchin: "The latest donation from the spammers, sir."
Ballmer: (sotto voce) "Oh, thank you very much." (to customers) "Get out! Everyone out at once!"
Good free web-based e-mail? (Score:2, Interesting)
I often face a situation where I'm helping someone to open up an email account (working at a library) and usually end up going to Yahoo, but that one has been getting worse. The spam filtering is good, but all the banner-ad spam isn't and the user interface leaves a lot to be desired (why did they have to change it so that it takes you to my yahoo on login is beyound me)
The
Re:Good free web-based e-mail? (Score:3, Informative)
And more fun from M$ eh?? (Score:2)
What would the world do without M$????
This _is not_ a vulnerabilty (Score:2, Insightful)
HotMail allows you to programatically send email via your accout. Holy Shit! My god, if someone had only though of this sooner! Oh wait - its called SMTP
Yes, this means that spammers can create free accounts, instead of having to bay to create one that supports SMTP, but the difference is trivial.
Especially since spammers already known how to script web submissions via HotMail.
This article is flamebait-ish (Score:5, Informative)
So please, I know slashdot will take any opportunity it can get to Microsoft-bash but in this case the blogger is pronouncing the sky to have fallen when it has not. The fact is that this service IS traceable and IS throttled, two aspects which make it relevent only to the newbie spammer that doesn't know what he's doing.
Imperial units? (Score:5, Funny)
Since US butts are, on the whole, larger than in the rest of the world, I can guess that a metric buttload is larger than a US buttload.
This doesn't match my experience (Score:5, Informative)
0165 Jun xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
1602 May xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
0734 Apr xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
0439 Mar xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
0289 Feb xxxxxxxxxxx
0236 Jan xxxxxxxxx
0283 Dec xxxxxxxxxxx
0189 Nov xxxxxxx
0417 Oct xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
0349 Sep xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Clearly, I for one have been getting a surge in spam lately, which might possibly be sloping back down after last month's spike, but it's too early to tell yet.
In spite of that, of the nearly 3000 spams I have received since march, only seven match the pattern with DAV in the message headers. That bears repeating: I have received only seven instances of this exploit, vs. 2940 overall spams since March. Further, I only see 72 messages that have a hotmail.com server on their received headers at all -- most of the time I get "from Hotmail users" it's almost always forged.
Anyway, the first message to mention "with DAV" was sent March 25th, which fits the timeline this guy describes. On the other hand, the rest of my data massively disagrees with the 2200% spike that is suggested in the linked blog -- it seems to me that 0.238% of the spam I'm getting is due to this mis-feature, not 2200%.
Now granted, the two of us are the only two data points that I know of so far, but the results that we're seeing are so wildly out of step that I wouldn't think people should draw conclusions from this. Two completely conflicting measurements can't show us any kind of pattern.
The spam sky may be falling, but this isn't one of the falling pieces you need to keep an eye out for as near as I can tell.
In other news (Score:2)
The Hotmail "White List" (Score:2, Insightful)
IN SOVIET RUSSIA (Score:2, Funny)
br>br>br>br>br>
Hotmail users vs. the spammers... (Score:4, Insightful)
Honestly, though, blaming Hotmail for this is pretty counterproductive. 99% of the time, parsing the header and tracing the return path reveals that the the displayed information was munged and spoofed beyond any resemblence to reality. I have yet to have a spam bearing a Hotmail "from" address actually be sent from a Hotmail account.
Yes, Microsoft is (probably) guilty of a multitude of evils. This, however, doesn't seem to be one of them. Hotmail spam is increasing, just as is all other spam, because there are enough idiots out there who actually will click on links in unsolicited e-mail to make it profitable for the [expletive deleted] who send the shite out in the first place.
hotmail (Score:3, Interesting)
Hotmail sources (Score:2)
Security problem? (Score:4, Insightful)
mr butterfly (Score:2)
but seriously, isnt passport at fault here? i thought when services bought the passport signing service (like ebay) they bought some sort of snazzy security thing that people were up in arms about rights / privacy wise a while back.
My university blacklisted them (Score:2, Interesting)
Why Do You Get Spam? (Score:2, Interesting)
I want an answer to a simple question regarding the subject (not a snobish question at all): Why Do You Get Spam?
I had a period in my life where I recieved A LOT of *#$in' spam. It sucked big time. It happened about 4 years ago. I figured out then, that the problem came about from joining a chat session for around 20 minutes of my life. I deleted that e-mail account. Since then, I have had less than ~.5% spam in my 3 e-mail accounts since -- not much o
The spam problem is an illusion! (Score:2, Insightful)
You could blame the software industri for not making these tool avaible. But to blame spammers is _very_ far fetched.
It would be like blaming crackers for security holes in software.
Please read the ASRG's strategi for effectively remove spam, and get a little more informed.
hotmail leaks on purpose? (Score:5, Interesting)
How could that be without Hotmail leaking names?
The 65.54.*.* range (Score:5, Interesting)
A week ago I removed the block to check if things had changed. To my suprise, no connection since. Apparantly MS has solved this problem finally (that is: installed the WebDAV patch that is what, 2 months old?).
Re:Three month old news (Score:5, Funny)
Re:ouch (Score:5, Informative)
Re:ouch (Score:2)
The address I use on my domain gets about 30 per day that SpamAssassin picks up, 5 or 6 that get by it.
Re:FreeBSD (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:FreeBSD (Score:2, Informative)
Re:FreeBSD (Score:2, Funny)
That is so utterly ridiculous. Everyone knows blind people should drive Geo Metros. That way even when they do hit a pedestrian it won't do anything but cause the car to implode.
Re:Combatting spam (Score:2, Insightful)