Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

Exposing Spammers For All They're Worth

Posted by timothy on Mon Nov 19, 2001 01:51 AM
from the next-time-up-the-rates dept.
llywrch points out this interesting story at Art & Farces in which a "guy fights spammers by occasionally sending an email telling the spammer to leave him alone or he'll bill for time & services. Some take him off their mailing list, some pay the bill, but most don't respond . . . except one guy who was so incensed at receiving this invoice he had his lawyers send a threatening note. Makes it easier for Fraase to collect on his invoice."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1) | 2
  • by evilviper (135110) on Monday November 19 2001, @01:55AM (#2583472) Journal
    Empty threats are nice... but until large numbers of people go to court to fight against spammers, well, you lie in the bed you've made (or have done nothing to stop).
  • Your account is seriously past due... by rela (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @01:56AM
  • Spammers by WickedClean (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @01:56AM
    • Re:Spammers by OmegaDan (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @02:21AM
    • Re:Spammers by psychalgia (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @02:45AM
      • Re:Spammers by psychalgia (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @04:21PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Spammers by debolaz (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @03:15AM
    • Re:Spammers by Monoman (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @08:36AM
    • Re:Spammers by linuxelf (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @10:20AM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Spammers by blang (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @12:09PM
    • Re:Spammers by WillSeattle (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @04:39PM
    • 4 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • KABLOOEY! Slashdotted. by Sarcasmooo! (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @02:03AM
  • "So you want to sue a spammer" (Score:5, Informative)

    by IvyMike (178408) on Monday November 19 2001, @02:04AM (#2583504)

    There's an outfit called "Private Citizen [privatecitizen.com] that helps you receive less (snail) junk mail and fewer telemarketing calls. The sell a book called So You Want To Sue A Telemarketer [privatecitizen.com]. I sure hope that they come out with the "Sue A Spammer" edition of this book soon. Even though I think too many people are quick to sue in this country, I can't think of anybody who deserves a lawsuit more than the spreaders of spam.

    People too cheap (ok, "frugal") to spend money at Private Citizen can try following the advice at Junkbusters [junkbusters.com], and they even have a page concerning spam [junkbusters.com].

  • Google cache by Milinar (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @02:11AM
  • Mirrors? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Wayne247 (183933) <slashdot@laurent.ca> on Monday November 19 2001, @02:12AM (#2583518) Homepage
    Well i found this article dated September 2nd which appears to be the one being submitted today. So happy caching [google.com]
  • anti-slash?? by JDizzy (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @02:14AM
  • Spammer's Real Address by istartedi (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @02:14AM
  • What about using copyright law? by www.sorehands.com (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @02:14AM
  • lets do worse (Score:5, Funny)

    by JohnG (93975) on Monday November 19 2001, @02:15AM (#2583523)
    If they are spamming an ad for a website, you can look at their registars whois database and find the owners mailing address.
    I say we all send a pizza to his house. After a few million pizza delivery guys after every spam sending attempt he'll give up.
    Not to mention the double effect that you can invest in Pizza Hut and watch the stock go WAY up!
    Disclaimer: The post was intended for entertainment. I will not be held accountable for any spammers who die from pepperoni overdose!

    • Re:lets do worse by doorbot.com (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @02:18AM
    • Re:lets do worse by FyreFiend (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @02:25AM
    • Spam the Pizza Companies! (Score:5, Funny)

      by VValdo (10446) on Monday November 19 2001, @04:51AM (#2583818)
      I know this plan is a joke, but maybe there's a way to do it without causing damage to the pizza companies but rather to the spammers themselves.

      Maybe the key is to start ordering shitty products from one spam company and sending to another's whois mailing address. We can call this program like "Spam-Swap(TM)" and even make them opt-out of it.

      "Sorry if you've received this other spammer's product in error. Reply to be removed from our Spam-Swap(TM) List."

      W

      (ps. this is a joke too...)
      [ Parent ]
    • Sorry, not funny. by jcr (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @05:45AM
    • Re:lets do worse by cobar (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @05:59AM
    • Re:lets do worse by autocracy (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @12:00PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • whore (Score:5, Informative)

    by seanadams.com (463190) on Monday November 19 2001, @02:18AM (#2583527) Homepage
    I didn't have a chance to get to the other link [farces.com] before farces.com went down, but here's the first page (edited to pass junk filter):

    A few months ago, I published an article outlining my opinion and experience with spammers in general and one in particular. That article, Fun with spammers, has drawn the attention of the subject spammer?s lawyer, and I am being threatened with legal action.

    I am publishing both the demand and my response without comment. Your comments are most welcome.

    Today I received the following letter on lawyer letterhead:

    Gary K. Kahn
    -address-
    November 12, 2001

    Michael Fraase
    -address-

    RE: Dispute Involving E-Core Technologies, Inc.

    Dear Mr. Fraase:

    This office represents Jim Hobuss of Portland, Oregon. Mr. Hobuss has called my attention to information you have placed on the internet regarding Mr. Hobuss. Specifically, you have defamed Mr. Hobuss in your posting and it is clear you are attempting to interfere with his business.

    On behalf of Mr. Hobuss, demand is hereby made upon you to remove any reference to Mr. Hobuss from your posting. If you fail to do so within ten (10) days, my client will consider all appropriate legal recourse against you.

    Sincerely, REEVES, KAHN & HENNESSY (signed)
    Gary K. Kahn

    To which I responded on my business letterhead:

    ARTS & FARCES LLC
    -address-
    16 November 2001

    Gary K. Kahn
    --address-

    Dear Mr. Kahn,
    I received your letter concerning Mr. Hobuss? claims of defamation in information posted on the ARTS & FARCES internet website. I believe the article in question can be found at:
    http://www.farces.com/farces/999462920/

    under the title ?Fun with spammers.?

    The piece accurately reflects my email experience with Mr. Hobuss and my opinion of that experience. I stand by the article and have no intention of removing it from publication. Nor do I intend to remove any reference to Mr. Hobuss in the piece.

    In fact, I expect to publish a follow-up piece including the text of your letter and this response.

    Your client?s account with this firm is now seriously past due, and I?d like to know what his intention is with regard to my unpaid invoice(s).

    Regards,

    (signed)

    Michael Fraase
  • by Yottabyte84 (217942) <yottabyte AT softhome DOT net> on Monday November 19 2001, @02:19AM (#2583531)
    A while ago I got an account at neopets.com (using a disposable email address [sneakemail.com]) making sure to select the "don't send me any email" box, and after I was disgusted at thier birbery for clicking ads forgot about it. Then they spamed me. I sent them an email telling them they'd be billed for any further spam. Here's what they sent me (personal details deleted):

    To Mr. [censored]:

    The Legal Department is in receipt of your message regarding an
    advertisement you allegedly received from NeoPets. We take all user
    concerns-especially those in connection with member privacy and safety-very
    seriously, and in this regard monitor the website around the clock for
    inappropriate content.

    To begin with, NeoPets unequivocally rejects your "purported" contract and
    refuses to enter into any agreement with you. Your demands are neither
    reasonable nor are they acceptable under any circumstance. As such, this
    message should not be construed as an admission of liability or acquiescence
    to your demands, but asv a complete rejection of your offer. Likewise, any
    transmission you may receive from NeoPets is not an acceptance of your
    agreement and may not be construed as an acceptance under any condition.

    Moreover, by registering on the NeoPets.com website, you expressly agreed to
    NeoPets' Terms and Conditions, which states that NeoPets may send
    notifications and announcements to its users' e-mail addresses. Neither
    NeoPets nor its sponsors send unsolicited e-mails and will only send e-mails
    to users who have expressly requested, or consented to receive, such
    correspondence and have provided an e-mail address destination. As such,
    immediately upon the Legal Department's receipt of your message, we had
    0rnrsegu001@sneakemail.com blocked from our system to ensure that you do not
    receive any more unwanted e-mails. Additionally, we researched your e-mail
    address in the NeoPets database and located the account "yottabyte," which
    we immediately froze to prevent you from receiving any further unwanted
    e-mail communications.

    Unfortunately, we have no control over the sponsors our users register with,
    and this is a matter that must be taken up with each sponsor that sends you
    e-mails. As a practical matter, our sponsors are very responsive to
    "unsubscribing" users who wish to be removed from e-mail databases. As a
    courtesy, we will try to help remove your e-mail address from our sponsors'
    systems, although we can make no guarantees as to the effectiveness of
    preventing future unwanted e-mails. To do this, however, I will need you to
    send a list of the sponsors from whom you are receiving unwanted e-mails.
    Because NeoPets.com does not pass along user information to anyone, we do
    not know where your e-mail address was registered and thus have no way to
    automatically unsubscribe it.

    Please contact us directly at legalDepartment@NeoPets.com if you have any
    further questions or if this problem persists. We hope the foregoing has
    addressed your concerns.

    Sincerely,

    The NeoPets Legal Team

    Now for some commentary.

    Moreover, by registering on the NeoPets.com website, you expressly agreed to
    NeoPets' Terms and Conditions, which states that NeoPets may send
    notifications and announcements to its users' e-mail addresses. Neither
    NeoPets nor its sponsors send unsolicited e-mails and will only send e-mails
    to users who have expressly requested, or consented to receive, such
    correspondence and have provided an e-mail address destination.


    And yet they tried to get me to buy tickets to some event (I seem to recall it being some radio station held event of some sort)

    Unfortunately, we have no control over the sponsors our users register with,
    and this is a matter that must be taken up with each sponsor that sends you
    e-mails.


    I definatly did not register for any annoying ads.

    I responded to this by telling them "whatever.... all further email to this address will bounce" then going to sneakemail.com and deactivating the address.

    I'm sort of amused by this, I bet it cost them at least $100 to have thier lawyers tell me off.
  • About spammers and telemarketers by dvNull (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @02:23AM
  • google cache by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @02:24AM
  • My dad has done the same thing a couple times by KnightElite (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @02:26AM
  • Spam and Hotmail by mgv (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @02:33AM
  • by RageMachine (533546) on Monday November 19 2001, @02:34AM (#2583563) Homepage
    I would have to say the best thing to do is to use spamcop for the 1st or 2nd time, and then after that if the ISP still does nothing about the spammer, then find every address listed on the site, and forward the spam to it. That will make the admins listen.

    I repeatedly recieved spam from a site called popsite.net, run by megapop.net, and repeadidly asked them to stop sending spam, or to stop providing free dialups to spammers, and they still din't listen. I got tired of it and called them. They still did nothing. I recieved another one, and decided to just annoy the hell out of them untill they did somthing about it. I forwarded the spam to EVERY email address listed on megapop.net: abuse@ support@ noc@ billing@ etc... every one. Then I forwared the auto-replys back to them. And finally a REAL person emailed me and said they had found the spammer, and mentioned that several people were pressing charges against him, and asked If I wanted to, and gave me his email address, AND his home phone number.

    Now every now and then when im near a phone and bored, ill call the spammer and hangup, or play a recording of a Telemarketer; somthing along the lines of "Congratulations! You've qualified for the platinum card!". Every site that asks for an email address to download somthing, I just put his email address in it.

    I have over 1,200 lines in access file for sendmail, and STILL I get spam from overseas servers. Mostly I will just block all of .co.uk, or .com.pt, or somthing to that nature, to prevent 9/10ths of the spam that comes in.

    The best way to fight spammers/advertisers/telemarketers is to fight fire with fire.
  • Getting back (Score:5, Interesting)

    by wormyguy1 (266395) <hal@halberg m a n .com> on Monday November 19 2001, @02:36AM (#2583568) Homepage
    Spammers really go to all ends to get you to open their email. I got an email the other day that said, in all caps, "BIN LADEN HAS BEEN CAPTURED", and it came from a coherent-looking MSN email address. Realizing that I didn't know anybody lame enough to send me anything in all caps, I opened it anyway. Well, to no surprise, it was porn, in HTML format, with some 300k of blinky, flashy, seizure-inducing images.

    If it's one thing I don't understand about spam (and this coming from the fact that my mother is in the advertising/graphic design business and I help them with tech support issues, I know how the corporate marketing machines work) is that you want to target a key demographic who is going to be interested in your product (in this case porn), you want to send it to the people who will be most likely to give you their money. Marketers spend millions of dollars on demographic databases to make sure that they aren't wasting money marketing to people who aren't interested. Now imagine how much it costs them to send 300k of images to the email boxes of, I'll be conservative here, a million email addresses. Imagine how much it costs when said email bounces. Witnessing the slashdot effect (especially right now, I haven't even been able to resolve the domain of the site linked above), I can't even imagine what must be going through spammers minds when they send an email with "BIN LADEN CAPTURED!" as the subject. After reading that subject, I imagine that most people would open the email, download all that porn, cost the spammers money, and then not even be interested as they weren't looking for porn to begin with. Same thing with them registering domain names... if you are looking for information on the White House (IE: whitehouse.com) and you come across porn, how interested are you going to be?

    The other thing that surprises me: if it wasn't successful, they wouldn't bother.
  • It begins by s0crates (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @02:37AM
    • An anecdote by Jaycatt (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @12:12PM
  • Stupid Spam Terrorists by orgnine (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @02:37AM
  • cached copy and weird coincidence by 2id (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @02:38AM
  • Going after TrafficMagnet (Score:5, Interesting)

    by greysoul (62792) on Monday November 19 2001, @02:54AM (#2583619) Homepage
    Recently I got Spam from a company called Traffic Magnet, they provided me with a screensho of my webpage, and I sent them the following, feel free to copy, or comment on the points of my letter. thanks

    Christine,

    One thing I notice is that you are using my copyright images to sell a product and/or service.

    Please email the physical address of your legal department, or the location to which I should have an attorney contact you about this issue.

    If you prefer to contact me via mail please use my business address:

    --Address--

    As an artist I take my copyright, and privacy very seriously. While no laws yet exist in New Mexico regarding Unsolicited Commercial Email (SPAM) There are laws that protect Copyright holders. As a copyright holder it is my responsibility to protect my property. I do hope that you take this matter seriously and we can resolve this quickly. The normal process is I would have my attorney send a cease and desist letter, to which you would have a lawyer reply that the actions demanded (by me or my agent) have been followed out in accordance with applicable laws.

    Thank you for your time

    Signed.
  • "Asshole fee" (Score:5, Funny)

    by innocent_white_lamb (151825) on Monday November 19 2001, @02:55AM (#2583622) Homepage
    Two years ago, I walked out the door of my business one day at noon and discovered that a roofing contractor had strung a cord across the vacant lot beside my building and had plugged into an outside electrical outlet on the rear of my building. He was using my power to run his roof-tar machine.

    I immediately turned around and went back inside and turned off the circuit breaker for that outlet. After a while, though, I thought, "Hey, where does he get off plugging in without permission!" As the fax number for his company was printed on the door of his truck, I wrote up an invoice for one "asshole fee" at $50 plus $3.50 sales tax, and faxed it to his company.

    To my surprise, the following week I had a cheque in the mail from them, for $53.50. The payment stub that came with it said, payment enclosed for asshole fee, $50 plus sales tax.

    I was amazed. On the other hand, I hotfooted it right to the bank and deposited the cheque, too!
  • Art & Farces' didn't do anything ... by Rosco P. Coltrane (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @02:56AM
  • Google cache comes through again (Score:5, Informative)

    by steveha (103154) on Monday November 19 2001, @02:57AM (#2583627) Homepage
    Go to www.google.com, and type in the keywords "farces fun with spam". The top hit is the page with the details about this. Click on "cached" to see what google.com has in the cache, and you can read the whole thing.

    But I pasted a copy of the text in here. Well, most of it; the slashdot lameness filter won't let me paste in the whole thing.

    Warning: the spammer likes to use bad words.

    BEGIN QUOTED TEXT

    Every day I get roughly as much spam, which I define as any unsolicited bulk email, as legitimate email. It's a problem that doesn't have an easy solution. The proposed legislation generally misses the mark of eliminating either the unsolicited bit or the bulk bit. While the first amendment protects your speech, it doesn't include a requirement that I subsidize it--financially or with my attention.

    With that in mind, I think I may have hit on a formula that probably won't eliminate spam, but it sure makes the parasites think twice about doing it again. And it always seems to push the indignant outrage button that all of these vermin seem to have in common. So far, the formula has worked like a choreographed dance in each instance. Here's how it goes (please play along at home):

    Each day I select 2 or 3 of the more outrageous spam messages that serve no useful purpose whatever. They're almost always some sort of commercial scam. I do a traceroute and a whois with NeoTracePro (it's got neat maps) to determine who they really are, where the message really originated, and who their local and upstream bandwidth providers are. Then I send the following reply to the original message--complete will all header information from the original spam--with copies to the abuse, postmaster, and hostmaster addresses at the bottom-feeder's local and upstream provider:

    Remove this and all addresses within the farces.com domain from your distribution lists immediately. We have no existing business relationship, nor do I wish to establish one. I don't do business with spammers. Not now. Not ever. You are using my resources for your gain without my permission or compensation. Any further contact from your domain to any address within this domain will indicate tacit agreement to your use of our resources at our published billing rate of US$125 per hour with a 10 hour minimum.

    Clear enough?

    Invariably I get a quick response, singularly uninspired in its lack of originality:


    From: Jim Hobuss
    Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001
    To: mfraase@farces.com
    Subject: RE: Save Money On Your Home Loan Today!

    Not really.

    Could you explain it again?

    Yeah, right!


    Except this idiot, dumber than most, actually sent a second retort, this time issuing a challenge:


    From: Jim Hobuss
    Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 7:43 PM
    To: mfraase@farces.com
    Subject: RE: Save Money On Your Home Loan Today!

    Oh yeah, I forgot to tell you. That email you
    received was an opt-out email ... Certainly legal.
    If you want to be removed from our mailing list,
    I suggest you follow the instructions on the email.

    Go ahead and send me a bill... And try to collect.

    Clear enough?


    Astute readers will recognize that I never claimed what scum like Hobuss was doing was illegal, only that I rejected his offer and counter-proposed one of my own. Of course, by responding, he's now agreed to my terms and is billed accordingly (with copies again going to his local and upstream providers):

    You received the following message on 1 Sep 2001 in reply to your spam and yet you continue to spam this domain. Accordingly you have accepted our terms of contract and are being invoiced under Minnesota state statutes and the Universal Commercial Code. Payment in full is due immediately. If you fail to pay in full immediately the invoice will be rendered for collection, appropriate credit reports will be prepared, and we will vigorously pursue judgment in the appropriate venue(s).

    For the record, our original offer is included below.

    Remove this and all addresses within the farces.com domain from your distribution lists immediately. We have no existing business relationship, nor do I wish to establish one. I don't do business with spammers. Not now. Not ever. You are using my resources for your gain without my permission or compensation. Any further contact from your domain to any address within this domain will indicate tacit agreement to your use of our resources at our published billing rate of US$125 per hour with a 10 hour minimum.

    Clear enough?

    Invoice

    [Professional-looking invoice for US$1250 removed thanks to slashdot's lameness filter. I particularly enjoyed the part on the invoice where it says "Thank you for your business."]

    In this case, Hobuss actually got two of these, differing only in invoice number. As you can imagine, this game of Invoice Ping Pong can go on for days, but it rarely does. It almost always immediately devolves into barely intelligible abuse:


    From: Jim Hobuss
    Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 8:18 PM
    To: mfraase@farces.com
    Subject: RE: Save Money On Your Home Loan Today!

    Go ahead and try collect asshole.

    And if you even try to file one Judgement against me, I'll
    sue you and your LLC. There is no fucking tacit agreement
    here. Kiss my ass and fuck off. I've taken your name off our list.

    Clear enough?


    Oooh, I imagine the spittle at the corners of his mouth are not very attractive. But he's made the mistake of crossing over into clear abuse and maybe even threats, a second and more serious violation of his provider's Acceptable Use Policy. At this point, all I have to do is reply to the message (again with copies to his--they've always been male so far--local and upstream providers) with yet another invoice and the following tasty bit addressed specifically to his providers:

    NOTICE TO ISP AND UPSTREAM PROVIDER(S): As you can see this has escalated to abuse on the part of your client. Kindly take whatever action you find necessary with regard to your AUP and notify me directly of anything necessary on my part to expedite the process. Suffice it to say that I expect immediate action with regard to this matter.

    Most importantly, he's removed me from his spam list. And I'll bet good money he's at least thinking about the next spam missive he sends. From his next provider, of course.

    Now, I probably can't collect on all 3 invoices, but I can certainly make the parasite's life miserable with just one. A quick trip to the county courthouse (until they get their system web-enabled) generates a court date that subsequently renders a judgment that I can easily file with the appropriate agencies. Like fish in a barrel. I've never done it because I haven't had to; my intent is to stop the spamming of my domain, and it's working. A few of these bottom-feeders have, however, paid the invoices. I deposit the checks with a grin.

    END QUOTED TEXT

    Notes on my editing: To avoid the slashdot lameness filter, I used HTML "blockquote" for the quoted email messages; the original text used '>' characters. Also, some of the punctuation came through as question marks; I tried to replace it with correct ASCII punctuation. (The punctuation was apostrophes and long hyphens.) I did my best not to introduce any errors, but no promises!

    steveha
  • Google Cached here .... by MartinD (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @03:02AM
  • I had a similar experience... by Tribbles (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @03:10AM
  • have more fun with direct marketers by derF024 (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @03:21AM
  • The safest thing to do by cra (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @03:29AM
  • Private Citizens by neksys (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @03:35AM
  • Hmm, terror (Score:4, Funny)

    by forgoil (104808) on Monday November 19 2001, @03:36AM (#2583715) Homepage
    If you could fool the goverment into thinking that spam is terrorism, I bet they would definitly do something about it;)

    [Disclaimer, don't even try to take that seriously]
  • Entertainment Value of Spam (Score:5, Funny)

    by liquidweb (154468) on Monday November 19 2001, @03:37AM (#2583717) Homepage
    I have simply initiated a policy of placing falicious phone calls to spamming organizations.

    The last one I made was to another web hosting corporation, I used a deep south accent and kept asking about how many pullups a 'gigerbyte' was.

    Ocassionally he's use a three syllable word, and I'd freak out saying, "Ya'll from the future?". It ended when I started calling him boy, and talking about how "I don't done know them fancy reading boy words" while fake yelling at various red neck named children and referencing the fact that I was "Sick a dem computer boys lording their electronic pants over me".

    I did this from the office with mixed reactions from employees.

    The only event beating this one was when I actually talked a lady into a telemarketing office into checking three cubes down for me. I had her convinced that I was from the same agency and the autodialer had errored out. My next goal is to start a dispute between employees at a given location. It's hard work even to break them out of the script, let alone get them this far.

    • Request by Asic Eng (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @06:16AM
      • Re:Request by liquidweb (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @07:03PM
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • What about non-English spammers? by Skevin (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @03:39AM
  • I've tried billing them... (Score:5, Informative)

    by vandan (151516) on Monday November 19 2001, @03:42AM (#2583732) Homepage
    Doesn't seem to work for me.
    However http://spamcop.net does wonders. A couple of weeks ago I contacted dodgy list-seller, http://www.incnet.com.au and complained about them continuing to sell my details to others when I had emailed AND phoned (it's a local call - I'm in Sydney) and asked to be removed. I talked to a guy who said "Oh YOU'RE the bastard that reported us to Spamcop. We had a LOT of trouble because of that". He then bullshitted on about how he was going to sue me for causing him financial loss. So I called the Australian Direct Marketing Association and put in a formal complaint and haven't heard from either since. I assume he was talking shit at the time and got into trouble over it since.
    Anyway, the moral is that Spamcop does seem to do something, and it's a lot easier than personally emailing all involved with each piece of spam you recieve.
  • by Gery (13478) <wolfgang_bauer@i ... .at minus author> on Monday November 19 2001, @03:43AM (#2583733)
    Hi,

    i just wanted to mention that in Austria you have to give your admission to receive email. Only then, a company may send you an email.

    So even "first contact" may only be made if a prior acceptance is available (ex. with a tip-on-card where the user gave his email-adress or whatever...).

    Afaik, this is the strongest law in the EC (and of course by far stronger than US-laws).

    Gery

  • 1885 Reasons why Spam should be illegal by sh0rtie (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @03:46AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Deth 2 Spammers (Score:4, Insightful)

    by BillTheKatt (537517) on Monday November 19 2001, @04:04AM (#2583758)
    I'm on a personal anti-SPAMMER crusade. I'm just ticked that hackers waste their time launching DDOS attacking on corporate websites and writing virii. Maybe they should use their skills for a noble purpose, like pounding SPAMMERS. Just create a throw-away email account, post a few messages to USENET, and plenty of targets for DDOS or hacking. Redirect the SPAMMER's webpage to point to SPAMCop or suespammers.org. I posted a single message to USENET with my real email address 5 years ago, and I still get 5-10 SPAMs per day. Hackers and crackers, do the world a favor, go after SPAMMERs. Find their real names and expose them for the world to see.
  • Spam from an admins view (Score:5, Interesting)

    by buss_error (142273) <buss_error&yahoo,com> on Monday November 19 2001, @04:05AM (#2583759) Homepage Journal
    Out of 13K mail boxes, I get 10K-15K e-mails per day not including those that don't pass our Internet MX (In otherwords, internal e-mail). About 3 in 20 are spam of one sort or another. So that makes about 2250 spams per day.
    Lets say it takes about 2 seconds per-person per e-mail to decide it's spam and hit delete.
    OK, that's 4,500 seconds, or about 1.25 hours. Lets say the average pay per person with an e-mail box is $221.00 per day.
    So, total, it costs my employer 276.25 per day just to delete spam.
    Now, let's say that 1 in 100 of those e-mails deleted really wasn't spam, but real e-mail. If the user notices they deleted a legit e-mail, and goes to get it out of the trash, lets say that it takes them about 30 seconds to retreive it. That makes 22 per day, at 30 seconds each, at 221 per day, that is another 41.50 per day.
    Grand total now is 317.25 per day completely pissed away because someone wants to sell some lady a penis enlarger, or some gay guy hot teen bitches.

    OK, now about content filtering. I've looked at quite a few, and all choke on the amount of e-mail we have. Others, running on unstable OS'es, are a complete joke. The only thing that does seem to work for a week at a time is to block based on IP. If I could find an IP distribution map by country, I'd be a happy camper. Sure, I could zot 202/8, 203/8, 210/8, 211/8, 64/8 and a few others, but more and more these netblocks are getting re-assigned to US companies that I don't want to block.

    One thing that's helped quite a bit is blocking all of DialSprit's assignments, and a few others. The RBL helps, but it's too easy to get off and too hard to get on.

  • For all you Missourians (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Mustang Matt (133426) on Monday November 19 2001, @04:10AM (#2583768)
    I'm working with State Rep. Carl Bearden to get our spam laws up to par. We're currently adopting a several sections of the Washington laws, and hopefully coming up with some of our own in the near future.

    I've submitted the details of my success twice to slashdot but my stories are always rejected.

    I strongly encourage people in other states to contact their state reps and ask for better laws! It really IS that simple!

    I was amazed at how willing my State Rep. was to learn about the problems and what possible solutions can be put in place.

    For all you people complaining about Spam, if you haven't done your part and tried to make a difference, quit all the fuss.
  • An easy way to avoid new spam. (Score:3, Informative)

    by xenoweeno (246136) on Monday November 19 2001, @04:13AM (#2583773)
    I've used this method for a couple of years with great success. What is this magic? Setting the href in your "email me" links to:

    javascript:window.location='mailto:tda'+'vis@tda '+ 'vis.org'

    ...doing appropriate substitution for your own email address, of course. It would probably also be useful to include an explanation [tdavis.org] in case someone doesn't have JavaScript enabled.

    The only problem I have now are legitimate mailing lists, like the PHP lists, which archive stuff to the web without obscuring addresses similarly. sigh.

  • How about some new spam....Lawsuit Spamming by udelslayer (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @04:27AM
  • ... with their provider's contact persons.
    Usage in procmail:

    :0
    * From .*\.spammer\.com
    * Received: .*\.carelessisp\.net
    | spam-forward -s 'Oops, they did it again' \
    postmaster@carelessisp.net

    Here's the script itself:

    #!/bin/bash
    #
    # Procmail helper to redirect spam messages.
    #

    [ "$SENDMAIL" = "" ] && SENDMAIL=/usr/sbin/sendmail
    [ "$SENDMAILFLAGS" = "" ] && SENDMAILFLAGS=-oi

    subject='[SPAM ALERT]'
    while getopts s: opt; do
    subject="$OPTARG"
    done

    shift $(( $OPTIND - 1 ))

    dest="$*"
    if [ -z "$dest" ]; then
    echo "Usage: $0 [-s subject] recipient ... <message" >&2
    exit 1
    fi

    to_line="${*/%/,}"
    to_line="${to_line%,}"

    ( cat <<EOF
    From: $LOGNAME
    To: $to_line
    Subject: $subject
    X-BeenThere: $LOGNAME@$HOST
    Precedence: bulk
    MIME-Version: 1.0
    Content-Type: text/plain
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

    Hello,

    This is an automatically generated spam alert.
    Feel free to contact me if you have any issues related to this.
    The (partial) listing of the message that triggered it
    is included below.

    EOF
    head -n 100
    ) | $SENDMAIL $SENDMAILFLAGS $dest
  • A page full of fake email addresses by Malcs (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @04:39AM
  • I once had a call at work... by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @05:06AM
  • Do these people really make money? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by FunkyRat (36011) <funkyrat@NoSPAm.gmail.com> on Monday November 19 2001, @05:14AM (#2583871) Journal

    The general concensus seems to be that spammers do their thing because there is at least a small percentage of recipients who actually send these people money.

    Can this really be true that there are enough people out there who are so gullible as to make this profitable...!? or is it that the ones who are really making money in this game are those selling lists of e-mail addresses to spammers? I know that in the online porn industry, the real money to be made is not in the porn sites themselves, but in selling services to the people setting up porn sites. I would expect something similar is going on here, especially since I've gotten a great deal of spam lately telling me how lucrative a business 'mass e-mail marketing' is, and how I should act now to 'get in on the ground floor' by buying their CD-ROM's full of e-mail addresses 'for the low, reduced rate of $99.95.' It looks to me like spam mailing is just another get rich quick scheme.

    I'm asking this as a legitimate question. Do people really make money by spamming or are the only ones making money those who are supporting this "industry?" I mean, if .025% of the population is stupid enough to send you money for something like fake Viagara work-alike pills at $25 a pop and you send e-mail to 1,000,000 addresses, that's $6,250 -- well, with those kinds of numbers I'm tempted to start spamming too. After all, if the idiots are willing to pay...


    Disclaimer: Before you flame me for admitting to the same thing you've likely thought of yourself, rest assured. I am not about to start spamming anytime soon. However, I think the question is relevant. Is there anybody actually making money at this game?

  • send your spam to the FTC by vscjoe (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @06:17AM
  • Spam does work by Ashcrow (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @07:09AM
  • Some nice spamcop reporting scripts (Score:3, Informative)

    by Erik Hensema (12898) on Monday November 19 2001, @07:30AM (#2584065) Homepage
    When you're running a system with procmail (don't we all?) and better yet: use a mailer which supports piping messages to stdout, you can use these [xs4all.nl] scripts to report spam to spamcop semi-automatically.
  • I don't get these people (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Yuioup (452151) on Monday November 19 2001, @07:36AM (#2584077)
    What I don't understand about spammers is that they expect you to buy their products after you've been annoyed by them. I never buy any products from advertisers who:

    1) spam my mailbox
    2) use popups
    3) annoy me with flash animations that take up 80% of the webpage I'm trying to read
    4) have floating flash animations which seek out your mouse pointer
    5) etc..

    Yuioup
  • Procmail is your friend by The Mutant (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @07:38AM
  • by camusflage (65105) on Monday November 19 2001, @07:44AM (#2584097) Homepage
    Declan McCullagh's Politech has a post with a reply from the spammer [politechbot.com]. In it, he says "Therefore,
    consequential and more severe actions will now be initiated and followed through to conclusion. An acceptable conclusion is no longer a removal of the Web page."

    Want some cheese with that whine?
  • terms of service and email harvesting (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Multics (45254) on Monday November 19 2001, @07:44AM (#2584098) Journal
    I have on my website two mailto: addresses that are in html comments. Sitting next to both are comments that these shall not be used for SPAM. They are do_not_spam1@ and do_not_spam2@. According to my terms of use, anyone who uses them is up for (us)$10,000 per use + cost of collection.

    An email address harvester apparently from:
    bidmain.com
    came through took them then used them.

    I sent them a bill with a 30-day deadline to pay. Bidmain's information, BTW is:
    iBIZCAST (BIDMAIN-DOM)
    302, 1008-2, Daechi-dong,
    Kangnam-gu, Seoul 135-280
    KR

    But more interestingly, their phone numbers are:
    822-564-3404 fax: 822-539-0925

    So far, for my complaint, my spam per day has trippled. They don't use the above addresses, but they sure do use the address I used to send them the bill. The 30 days is up in about a week.

    My take on all of this is SPAMMERs are criminals. They are taking huge amounts of money from us (us == owners of systems).

    If anyone wants to join in class action against the criminal above, I'd like to hear from you. Reply below.

    Thanks!

    -- Multics

  • Spammers lie to net retailers (Score:5, Informative)

    by Snowfox (34467) <snowfox@snowfox. n e t> on Monday November 19 2001, @08:17AM (#2584182) Homepage
    I buy a few things online each week, and I create a different mail alias at my domain for each online retailer, and tack a random 'apartment' on as well, for example, if Slashdot had a store, I'd be "slash@mydomain", and I'd add "Apartment sdt" to my mailing address.

    I always make it abundantly clear that I don't want my contact information shared. If there isn't policy on the site explicitly promising not to share my information if that's what I choose, I don't buy there.

    More than a dozen times, I've gotten mail advertising the original store, followed by a flood of random spam to the same address. When I contact the store owner, they insist that they had an agreement with the 3rd party that they wouldn't use the list of addresses for anything else. "Then why am I getting mail to UglyShoes@mydomain when you're the only one who ever got that address?" They lose a customer, and I cancel a mail alias.

    Then again, not all retailers are honest either.... God forbid you share your name with Radio Shack.

    Three years ago I bought a soldering iron at Radio Shack, the address including an "Apartment RSHK", again requesting no mailings or address sharing. Now, if I had a dollar for every shit mailing and magazine I'd been automatically subscribed to at "Apartment RSHK", I'd be a rich man by now.

    Again, it doesn't seem to stop with Radio Shack sharing. I think many of the companies Radio Shack shared with turned around and sold my address as well, because it went from Radio Shack mailings to Columbia House to Playboy to Victoria's Secret to Lillian Vernon to Fingerhut to god knows what. Half my specifically targeted junk mail comes to "Apartment RSHK", and about half comes to "Apartment SN", from my long-ago subscription to Science News.

    • by camusflage (65105) on Monday November 19 2001, @11:31AM (#2585108) Homepage
      God forbid you share your name with Radio Shack.

      At least Rat Shack will let you not give your info, when you say you'd rather not. When pressed, I usually start "1600 Pennsylvania Avenue". Most of the time, they take a clue and stop asking. One guy at an appliance store once, however, just didn't get it. "Washington DC, huh? You just visiting here?" It somewhat pained me when I told him that he had the choice of bothering the president, not bothering me, or not making a comission. Needless to say, he took option B.

      A more reasoned response would be to do the homework ahead of time. Find out what their corporate headquarters address is, and what the CEO's name is, and use that.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Spammers lie to net retailers by Dimensio (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @12:19PM
    • Re:Spammers lie to net retailers by Weaselmancer (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @03:06PM
  • Billing for time and services by CaseStudy (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @08:19AM
  • Slashdot effect. by the_real_bayliss (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @08:44AM
  • What we're up against... by jpellino (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @09:27AM
  • strange by archen (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @09:28AM
    • Re:strange by j-beda (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @12:24PM
  • by div_2n (525075) on Monday November 19 2001, @09:30AM (#2584403)
    When they start into their script, yell STOP until they stop. Then say something like this, "This call my be recorded for contractual purposes. I must politely inform you that I perform most of my work on the phone and I charge an hourly rate of US$100 per hour with a 3 hour minimum for any and all non-personal calls. All calls past 6PM (insert your timezone) are considered overtime and will be charged an additional US$50 per hour. To agree to these terms, please do so by saying yes now . . ."

    Take that and run with it. Buy a cheap recorder and actually record it. If they have someone stupid enough to say yes, then you just scored 300 maybe 450 dollars!
  • Would this be acceptable? by algorithm_x (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @09:32AM
  • /.ed by TMacPhail (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @09:51AM
  • Anti-Spam Idea by Xesdeeni (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @09:53AM
  • Nietzche? by shpoffo (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @10:29AM
  • Pretending to be serious by digitalsushi (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @10:47AM
  • Most sinister method EVER by digitalsushi (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @10:52AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • root@localhost anti-spam measure by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @10:59AM
  • Earthlink and SPAM by maX_ (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @11:33AM
  • Another anti-spam tactic by Eusebo (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @12:29PM
  • Minors by fishebulb (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @02:05PM
  • How not to get spam by soft_guy (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @02:17PM
  • Are spammers getting smarter? by coljac (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @03:18PM
  • Expose them... literally! by tresstatus (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @03:32PM
  • spam on AOL by ccf (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @04:43PM
  • i have been doing this for a while now... by Prion86 (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @06:08PM
  • Oh crap! by mmmmbeer (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @11:02PM
  • Kill 'em All!!! by letchhausen (Score:1) Tuesday November 20 2001, @12:40AM
  • Site is still slashdotted by Pathetic Coward (Score:1) Tuesday November 20 2001, @07:44AM
  • Re:Spammers by WickedClean (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @02:01AM
    • Re:Spammers (Score:4, Funny)

      by spectral (158121) on Monday November 19 2001, @02:25AM (#2583546)
      I dunno, I got one telemarketer to go through all his stuff, then he wanted to send me something, and asked for my address.. so I told him to send it to his own, he wasn't sure how that'd help me.. I told him that I wasn't interested in the literature, I thought he might since he spoke so highly of it. I then paused a second, and asked to be removed from their list. He started swearing at me and telling me he was going to come and kill me and my family and all this other stuff and hung up on me :)
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Spammers by Pathwalker (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @02:49AM
      • Re:Spammers by Tony Hoyle (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @07:26AM
        • Re:Spammers by Tony Hoyle (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @07:29AM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Spammers by danb35 (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @03:45PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Re:How slloooowwww does this guy read? by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @03:52AM
  • Re:How slloooowwww does this guy read? by clheiny (Score:2) Monday November 19 2001, @03:57AM
  • by Keith_Beef (166050) on Monday November 19 2001, @06:50AM (#2584011)

    You're missing the point, Mr anonymous coward.

    I'm on a dial-up account. That means that every minute I spend connected is costing me money. Now, if I have to spend time connected to download a long HTML message with images in it, that is costing me money, albeit a small amount for a single message. Let's say it cost me 0.03 Thalers. If I now get 100 of these in a month, it's just cost me 3 Thalers.

    You suggest filtering... but that happens after I've downloaded the messages, so doesn't lower the cost. It's not a realistic option.

    And this is before I start factoring in costs for

    • wear and tear: keyboard (extra typing to delete message)
    • wear and tear: mouse (extra pointing and clicking to delete message)
    • wear and tear: hard disc (extra read/write operations)
    • depreciation: hardware loses its value fast, so every second occupied has a high cost during the first year of use
    • my time: 0.9 Thalers per minute


    Hmm... that makes for a low cost per spam mail received. But, like most companies, I'm going to set a "minimum invoice charge" to cover fixed costs associated with drawing up each invoice and chasing up payment. Lets say 30 Thalers. And now, we factor in a percentage for "bad payers". Let's double it.

    All in all, I feel quite justified in billing for 60 Thalers per spam received.

    [ Parent ]
  • Re:How slloooowwww does this guy read? by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @09:35AM
  • Re:Stephen King, author, dead at 55 by j-beda (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @12:11PM
  • Re:Some Medival Torture for Spammers by Tremo (Score:1) Monday November 19 2001, @02:55PM
  • 53 replies beneath your current threshold.
(1) | 2