Ethical Hacking Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package. | Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. |

| Subject: | Re: [Full-Disclosure] Spam sent via spambots? |
|---|---|
| Date: | Sun, 31 Oct 2004 20:12:55 -0500 |
I believe the reason Nick created another thread was because he's starting a new subject. The old thread had moved more into ways to fight spam. Nick's thoughts seem to be focused on if anyone or group has even done a legitimate study on the amount being passed through bots on exploited systems. If so, what kind of numbers were actually found. (Please correct me if I'm wrong.) To respond to the question...
So, has any really good, large-scale sampling of these issues been done, perhaps by the large Email/anti-spam managed services folks??
Not that I can think of off hand. Like you, I've seen estimates here and there, though without any facts to really back them up. It may be a difficult thing to actually get accurate numbers on unless you base it solely on IP space. At that point, some of it could be "legit spam", meaning the IP# responsible for sending it is aware it's being sent. If you're just after how much spam is coming from the Cable/DSL IP space, I'd be happy to donate two of my majorly spammed accounts to the study. =) It will give a cross section of roughly 5,000 spam per day. Unfortunately I don't have the time to accurately disect the headers of each and trace the findings to verify where it originated. Someone else is welcome to it - I can simply have email forwarded for awhile along with the full headers. -- Peace. ~G On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 23:25:33 +0000, n3td3v <xploitable@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 11:57:13 +1300, Nick FitzGerald <nick@virus-l.demon.co.uk> wrote:In another thread Hugo van der Kooij wrote:Well why didn't you reply to the comment on the thread topic it was post on, instead of splitting it into two, to further clog up the list with a similar thread. Thanks, n3td3v _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
| Previous by Date: | Re: [Full-Disclosure] Spam sent via spambots?, Nick FitzGerald |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [Full-Disclosure] Spam sent via spambots?, GuidoZ |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [Full-Disclosure] Spam sent via spambots?, Nick FitzGerald |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [Full-Disclosure] Spam sent via spambots?, J.A. Terranson |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |