in sov r bot test you

The spamtrap addresses affected were originally 'scraped' by spiders running on servers rented from Everyone's Internet/EV1Servers, and gather the usual mess of penis enlargement, pills and fake watch spam.

Using a distinctive test message rather than simply sending out another batch of pill spams would make sense if spammers were collecting bounces in order to eliminate undeliverables from their spam lists. This doesn't seem to be the case, however: the 'From' addresses on the messages use randomly-generated addresses at other people's domains, so there's no way for the spammer to collect the bounces. They could monitor the actual SMTP transaction — but then there's no advantage to using a distinct test message. It's therefore likely that the messages are no more than they appear to be: simply test data used for checking a botnet or trying out a new email module.

The book isn't primarily about spam, but any discussion of the future of the Internet — which Zittrain sees as potentially bleak, by the way — must necessarily cover the topic. Zittrain outlines the problem and then talks about responses to the problem in the form of open collaborative grassroots projects. I haven't had time to do more than skim it, but it looks like it might be worth a read, if only as a possible source of new ideas and a way to look at spam as an instance of the larger problems facing the Internet.

Hello! News agency Reuters informs about not to working capacity of a site amazon.com in current of two weeks since June, 9th and corresponding it to falling of share price. Be close at work with them.

The message contains no URLs, no malware payload, nothing except the text above. It's difficult to tell what the purpose is - a botnet capacity test, a short-and-distort attempt on AMZN, a test to identify active addresses — or just another spammer misconfiguration?

It's true that Amazon recently had system problems that took it offline for a couple of hours. What's not clear is why spammers want us to know that.

Important Message: Our message is not spam, here's why: email is a form of correspondence equal to a telephone connection or a letter. In Brazil and in the rest of the world, in the same way that no authorization is necessary to send letters or to telephone somebody, it is likewise unnecessary [to have] prior authorization to send emails in whatever form, there is nothing in Brazilian legislation that refers to the practice of spam, ...

At this point the Portuguese becomes quite opaque (so much so that I wonder if it's not their grammar rather than my very limited grasp of Portuguese that's at fault) but they appear to be arguing that in any case, should such a regulation exist, it will be restricted to requiring that the sender provide an opt-out mechanism.

I'm sure you'll all agree that this is a fascinating argument. I look forward with great eagerness to hearing their justification of why they should be allowed to forge my email address in the 'From:' line of the spams that they send out.

It's not clear how effective the naming-and-shaming policy operated by both Spamnation and Peru sin Spam actually is. Some of the companies involved — particularly the ones offering 'management seminars', who are the worst offenders in terms of spam generated — seem fairly sleazy. Still, it's nice to see someone making the effort and their site is a useful resource.

So far, so plausible ... but Mary Ann claims to have discovered our email “through an email surfing Affiliated with the US chamber of Commerce”, whatever that means, and her familiarity with the English language is patchy at best. I suspect that if you agree to take this bundle of joy off her hands, there'll be a customs fee to pay, and then another unexpected charge, and then another and ...

Still, going after soft-hearted dog lovers is a master stroke. Well done, "Mary Ann", you obviously have a brilliant career ahead of you.