Spam hits 36 percent of e-mail traffic

ZDNet News ^ | 8/29/02 | Robert Lemos

[Valpal1]

>>>"They are getting really bad returns, so they have to spam millions more," Linford said. "It's happening because it is nearly free
to send e-mail to a million people. It would have happened regardless of the economy."
<<<

I'm sure Congress would love to fix this problem with a .01 tax on every message sent.

[luckystarmom]

I get so much spam now. My pacbell account is the worst. My yahoo account is much better.

I can't stand spam!!!!!

[lelio]

A recent paper on the subject that a Bayesian filter might be the best way to block spam by just looking for keywords.

[kellynla]

www.mailwasher.net Check it out and it's freeeeeeeeee

[GovernmentShrinker]

Try RCN if it's available in your area. Weeks go by without my receiving a single unsolicited e-mail. On the rare occasions that I receive one, I immediately forward it to RCN's spam police, who seem to be a pretty efficient bunch.

[LenS]

Strange. I never get spam. And I get my hook-up through one of the Baby Bells.

[FreeTheHostages]

Good post. Interesting. Here's my take:

There's going to be spam until people STOP BEING STUPID AND RESPONDING TO IT!! Spam exists because spam works. It's like the con artist in my neighborhood that pretend to be homeless and get large $ donations despite their spiffy shoes: they're not going away until the idiots that give them cash figure it out.

[Cable225]

Somehow I feel left out. I read stories about people whose inboxes are full of this stuff. I never get any.

Of course, I don't give my email address to anybody that doesn't need it, so that probably has something to do with it.

[LTCJ]

May I humbly suggest the death penalty?

[PJ-Comix]

In July, according to Brightmail's latest interception figures, unsolicited bulk e-mail made up a whopping 36 percent of all e-mail traveling over the Internet, up from 8 percent about a year ago.

That's actually an UNDERESTIMATE. I get about 150 e-mails per day of which at least 140 are worthless spam. BTW, one way I deal with it is by checking my mail via www.mail2web.com and then deleting from THERE all the spam. Then I open my Outlook Express to allow only personal e-mail to go in. Good way to eliminate viruses too!

[FreeTheHostages]

y'all are posting to GeneD, but here's the damndest thing: do a search on his name. he doesn't discuss. he doesn't respond. he just posts. weirdness.

[Always Right]

Not exactly true. The 50 posts I saw there were 10 that were actually comments.

[Michael Barnes]

Spam exists because spam works

Wrong. Spam exists because it's easy and cheap to do. Seedy companies sign onto spamming millions. It's very, very easy for me to grab domain names off the net. From there, I use a similiar approach to "dictionary attakcs" on passwords. I have a rather lengthy (and I do mean lengthy) list of "username"@x.com, or .net. or .org. or the country codes. I screw with my headers of the e-mail, and fire off 15 million e-mails across a weekend. Now a days, this is an archaic method. These guys "offshore" their servers, move IP's (networks), hit unwary junior admins and exploit old sendmail and misconfigured mail servers, not to even mention trick local ISP mail servers into cranking out 100's of 1000's of forwarding e-mails.

Try this sometime, make up an obscure e-mail addr at any of the major free webmail services. YOU WILL GET SPAMMED within 48 hours, even if you don't use the account at all. I hate spam for one reason only. It uses resources that it does not technically own...Think about this. You'd be pissed if 100's of vacuum cleaner salesmen were driving up and down your driveway wouldn't you? Well, you should, you are paying for that driveway. It's not theirs.

[Hildy]

My last job entailed doing research on the internet about 65% of the time. As you all know, if you type in the wrong URL, sometimes you get a porn site. It's happened to me many times. They catch your address and you get email. It happens to everyone who is on the internet long enough, I'm sure you know. I just found out today that my old boss is telling everyone that I vistited porn sites when I worked there. I guess he saw stuff come in my inbox after I left. This guy knows this happens. We've talked about it. He's saying it because he's mad I left the company. One of the reasons I left is because he's such a jerk. I wish there were something I could do to get back at him.

[Henk]

I hate spam also, but it's the price we have to pay for a free internet.

The alternative is a gubment solution which will involve a tax of some sort and loss of freedom.

[Dog Gone]

Of course, I don't give my email address to anybody that doesn't need it, so that probably has something to do with it.

That has everything to do with it. I have two mailbox accounts that come directly to my computer. One is the old one from my former internet provider that was acquired by a new outfit. It's chock full of spam. Eight of eight messages tonight were spam. My new one, which I've had for about six months, has one new mail in it. It's legit.

I learned my lesson. I never put my new email address into any website asking for my email address. I save it for family, friends, and private individuals with a need to know. I have never ONCE had a piece of spam in it.

[FreeTheHostages]

Yeah, but the comments weren't political. I dunno. I guess he's not a disruptor: those guys run around saying leftist stuff.

[FreeTheHostages]

yes, of course, all correct: but cheap as it is, who would bother unless they expected to profit? I mean, at least most of the time, isn't the motive for spam $?

As in, I kinda fairly assume that the reason why we have so many homeless people begging in my very nice neighborhood in this city, despite a very good homeless shelter 3 blocks away that could meet their needs, is because some of my neighbors are dumb enough to subsidize the solicitors' drug habits.

[jennyp]

I'm sure Congress would love to fix this problem with a .01 tax on every message sent.

Seriously, the problem comes from the essentially zero incremental cost of each email. That's why people aren't nearly as offended by physical junk mail as we are by SPAM email. I think the best solution is systemic: Change the mail protocol so that each pop3 mailbox can charge a fee for incoming messages.

I'm not sure how mail works exactly, but I think when you send an email message, your ISP's smtp server, which is usually running Sendmail, logs on to the pop3 server program that's running on the recipient's box. Let's say the recipient's ISP has set a $0.01 charge for each incoming email. The sending mail server could decide whether or not to send the mail to the recipient at that price. If they accept, then the sending ISP gets charged for the email, and presumably they'd pass on the cost to the spammer. If the sending ISP doesn't pay up, then their IP addresses go on a blacklist just like SPAM-friendly ISPs go on blacklists today.

The incoming charge could be set by the ISP, in which case it's part of their competitive appeal: "We charge less for incoming mail than anyone else - you'll get all your mail!" vs. "We charge more for incoming mail - you'll get less SPAM!" Or maybe the individual user could set their own price. I could set mine at 0.5 cents per message, or maybe I'd go for a full 5 cents per if I'm particularly proud of my address. Or my ISP could let me charge different prices for different senders - free for mail coming from Mom or from my subscribed mail lists, but a penny each otherwise.

Doing something like this would stop the SPAM problem very quickly. What little unsolicited email that remained would be a lot higher quality, since they'd have to go back to targeting their email lists to only the people who are most likely to appreciate the offer. Just like physical junk mailers have to do today.