malware and spam and spam networks
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/235527/s...-per-year.html
Printable View
malware and spam and spam networks
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/235527/s...-per-year.html
It's things like that article that make you wonder if perhaps we're all in the wrong line of work. I suppose it makes sense in a messed up sort of way.
High Risk, High Reward (for example running a botnet)
Low Risk, Low Reward (for example, security researcher).
I wonder how much risk they're really at. How many of 'em are actually busted, percentage wise? The people I REALLY want to get my hands are would be that small % of imbeciles that actually clicks links in spam emails and makes the crap profitable at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPnyc
That's a good question. Hackers can virtually eliminate personal risk, but that's by using stealthy :karate: ESSID scanners instead of packet storming every network you walk past :globwhore and using various other bits of common sense. Spammers, on the other hand, are sending out several million emails at a time. Somebody's gonna notice one day and be like "wtf...my interwebz is really slow today". :what: Even if you hack a different network every single time, and use a different spoofed MAC address every time, you still leave a trail. ::1pacman
Please forgive the abuse of emotes. In a kinda funky mood.
You already know the answer to that. Throw out a low estimation then take absurd steps backward from that.Quote:
I wonder how much risk they're really at. How many of 'em are actually busted, percentage wise?
Keezel i salute you on your cunning use of smilies. :)
they are far too often taken for granted! *laughs*
on a serious note: i think spammers put more effort into new spamming techniques and technology than anyone can keep up with. i think they pretty much have the "risk factor" under control and i believe that only the dumbest of their flock get picked off by any kind of authority. there doesn't seem to ever be any serious decrease in the amount of spam floating around.
you have to admit there are an awful lot of sheep out there who get spam emails and say to themselves "hey i wonder what this is all about" and thus patronize the spammers business.
the other thing however is who is going after the people who PAY the spammers to spam in the first place? do they even do that? maybe my logic is a little twisted but here goes my train of thought. your not gonna send a million spam emails out for something your not going to get paid for. its like a crime boss sending an underling to do a "job". the underling might get busted and if so the boss will just replace him with another. right?
so who's going after the bosses?
...and this is why I still have hope. Just a little, mind you, but it's there.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/11...o_goes_silent/
"Upstream service to US-based McColo Corporation was terminated sometime Tuesday, according to researchers from Arbor Networks, which monitors internet traffic, and other firms. Hurricane Electric, one of McColo's upstream providers, told Brian Krebs's Security Fix blog it cut off service after it was presented with evidence demonstrating the magnitude of nuisance its customer represented."
blah blah blather blah blah
"Statistics from SpamCop showed a drop in the amount of spam being blasted out to the world. Starting Tuesday afternoon, spam volumes dropped from about 30 junk messages being sent every second to less than 15 at time of writing."
This has already been posted, but still nice to see some form of justice done.
that is kinda funny. i noticed a drop in spam in my inbox recently. i used to get a ton of spam. now i'm barely getting any at all.
Yeah, maybe a slight decline. To be honest, I hardly notice it anymore. It's all filtered so effectively by kaspersky's plugin for "The Bat!" email that now it's just another number in my folders list. But now that you mention it that number does seem to be quite a bit lower lately.
This article http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7725492.stm may explain that.Quote:
Originally Posted by chaosclown
O
EDIT: Whoops...beaten to the punch, but still...that news sets a great precedent.