If you have an Internet mail account, you've almost certainly received spam, the slang term for unsolicited commercial e-mail, at some point. Small amounts of it may be easy to ignore or filter, but experts say the problem is going to get a lot worse before it gets any better.
Jupiter Research, an commercial research firm that has studied spam trends, says that the average American will receive more than 2,200 spam e-mails this year and as many as 3,600 by 2007. While the average does constitute less than 10 spam e-mails per day, spam distribution is not average. People with posted e-mail accounts or those who frequent chat groups and news forums invariably receive more than the average amount, whereas people who only use their e-mail for personal communication and never give their address away get less spam. Data from mail-filtering company Brightmail indicates that spam has gone from about 8% of all e-mail to as much as 40% currently.
Spam has become a big business, with some spammers making millions of dollar per year by sending billions of e-mails all over the globe. It's also very easy to get started as a spammer. CD-ROM's holding hundreds of millions of e-mail addresses are available for US$100, and finding a list of an open mail relay server overseas is trivial. Anyone can send a few hundred million e-mails with less than an hour's work, and the average payoff for that hour could be $10,000.
Fighting this vast industry is a growing array of e-mail filtering packages. Using a variety of keyword filtering mechanisms, filtering software attempts to identify spam by words contained within. Spammers, however, are a crafty lot and have used misspelled words, punctuation, or even graphical bitmaps with spam embedded in it, to confuse or bypass these filters. The cat and mouse game continues with other packages attempting to ban spam at the source by identifying and blacklisting e-mail servers that act as open mail relays.
Yahoo has more news on this.
The persistence of these spam vendors never ceases to amaze me. People install filters, create rules, and even implement mail relay blocking lists to stop spam from getting in, yet how do the spammers respond? By trying desperately to confuse, mislead, and bypass these very measures. You'd think they'd get the hint, that if people are going through so much trouble block spam that they don't want anything that the spammers are offering, yet they persist. It's frustrating, as our corporate mail server continues to get spam every now and then, even though we've got filtering software and use an ORDB list.
The answer to why the spammers persist is obvious, though — it's because spam works. Send out a few billion e-mails and even if only one hundredth of one percent respond, you'll make money, and lots of it. As long as there are people who actually read and respond to spam, spam will continue to prosper.
Here's an interesting thought: if spammers are purposefully trying to circumvent a controlled access device, in this case a filtered e-mail server, doesn't that violate the DMCA? Wouldn't it be neat to see spammers cut down by a law that, so far, has done little to protect consumers?
USER COMMENTS 57 comment(s)
|its about time (12:57pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
to impose that fictitious e-mail tax. I would gladly pay 5¢ per e-mail if I knew I were no longer going to receive junk e-mail. One hour per week at $42 per hour / 5¢ = 210 e-mails per week, I think the 5¢ would be cheaper. - by zaph1
|correction (12:58pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
$42 per hour / 5¢ = 8,100 e-mails per week. - by zaph1
|again (12:58pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
840 e-mails, still cheap at twice the price. - by zaph1
|mailwasher (1:08pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
I got one of those filter programs that sends back an unknown user message for mail you mark as spam. It took a few weeks to start working, but now virtually all the mail I get is real.
We'd need international laws in order to take much of a bite out of spamming. I'm surprised that most of the spam gets ANY response. Email programs need to come with better filters… oh, but then MS would be illegally bundling and squashing competition, and playing monopoly or something. - by Robguy
|re: mailwasher (1:14pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
been using it for a while.
Great little app.
- by please donate
|Don't know about spam… (1:24pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
…but soon I'll have 20% of USD $31,500,000 (thirty-one million, five-hundred thousand U.S. dollars) from a trusted source in Africa (as we all know, the most honorable continent on the planet).
All I had to do was give them all my banking info, name, numbers, etc!
Just my $0.02 worth,
|Spammers (1:25pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
Fax spammers were dealt with a long while ago, email will come soon. With a fax if you recieve an unsolicitated fax transmission that you asked not to recieve you can sue for like 1500 bucks per instance. - by Doc_Stihl
|Just curious….. (1:26pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
….How are these open e-mail relays getting their bite out of it? Seems to me it'd be a little generous on their part to keep these servers running just so people can blam their spam.
As for the spammer crowd, I think it's just a matter of time before it gets back to them, and I don't mean e-mail. There was a news article a few months ago about one of them who was already a convicted felon for stealing computer equipment, and he owned several houses by questionable means in addition to signing up e-mail accounts with legitimate ISP's under false names.
Seems to me if the Feds really wanted something do that people would appreciate they'd start getting the info and busting these guys. At the very least it'd cut down on the amount of traffic Carnivore has to gnash through. - by Ziwiwiwiwiwiwiwiwiwi
|Media attention to filtering… (1:30pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
is the answer. The more users that learn about filtering & use it correctly will put spammers out of business. - by tech
|Consider the source… (1:38pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
“Spam” (what a cutsie term) is a small price to pay for a free and
People that are
It's a very good thing that there is
|Mailwasher (1:46pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
As several others have commented, mailwasher is great. Download it at: I have been using it for about a month, and while the volume of spam hasn't decreased, I no longer need to sort threw things nearly as much as I used to. - by Salaryman
|Canned meat… (1:54pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
Use your filters better…
Stop with blocking what you do not want but filter what you do want to have and let all others sink, put the person you gave your address into your endorse filter…
and not as in many cases:
|Bassie (2:06pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
I sent you an email to put me into your endorse filter… didn't you get it? - by Bounce
|How does spam work? (2:09pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
How can people using spam make all this money? What moron is actually responding to spam messages and buying product or services from them?
Part of the problem is in the haphazard granting of Email addresses, such that spammers create thousands of free, unique address names, so they can send their crap out without getting easily filtered. This site is part of the problem because of the carefree granting of geek.com addresses. Services like AOL, HOTMAIL, etc are even more irresponsible when it comes to registering email addresses.
In all honesty, if you want to stop spam, then start charging money for email addresses and for each email message sent. Something like one cent per message is easily affordable by legitimate email messengers, but a spammer sending 100,000+ emails a week will get quite a hefty charge on their account.
Also, ISP's need to really start monitoring how people use their email accounts. I don't mean reading their outgoing mail, but again, legitiamate emailers do not send 1000+ email messages a day. Any account sending 1000+ email messages at a time should be immediately suspended and investigated. - by Topher
|Topher (2:36pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
Most SPAM comes from email addresses that don't exist, and have never exist. If someone has an open relay, then anyone can send email from any address, real or fake. Charging for email accounts wouldn't make a big difference. Most ISP's and free mail providers are already quite vigilant about removing spammers accounts. - by Etcetera
|smtp abuse (2:45pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
Most SPAM is sent directly via SMTP with bogus email addresses. ISP's would have to start monitoring the SMTP port and tie that to a user account.
But I agree, they should do this and anyone that uses it excessively should get looked into. Of course those that insist on sending 3+ Meg files via e-mail will get noticed to. - by Dust
|Open relays DON'T get anything for this (2:50pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
To answer an above question, the open relay servers, most of them in Asia, don't get any recompense for someone using their servers and their bandwidth. They are unwitting accomplices in this whole affair because they're running shoddily maintained mail servers. Anyone with a little time and some freely-available open relay scanning software can identify thousands of open mail relays, all of which can be used to send incredible amounts of spam. Under most circumstances, the people with the open relays rarely even know they're being used in this fashion. Usually their first inkling is when they get blacklisted by one of the ORDB's.
Now there is a growing business movement whereby the big spammers are setting up shops overseas and using their relays there so they can avoid lawsuits and other legal entanglements in from the States, but this is the minority since it costs money. It's far easier to just steal someone else's computer time and bandwidth, both on the server side and on the recipient side, to make your money. - by J. Eric Smith
|GUNNYGEEK. (3:00pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
Just stuff it up your ass.
You are trying to compare freedom to UNSOLICIATED, UNWANTED, AND SOMETIMES GRAPHIC advertising being sent to ourselves, my home, and my family. I'm not saying that companies shouldn't have the right to send advertising, which spam mail is at it's core, but their should be common rules so that I can tell when I open a piece of mail if my grandmother sent it to me or if it's a naked pic of someone's sister trying to sell me lube.
In fact I don't believe there is a way to make laws to govern it, I just wish the SCUMBAG BOTTOMFEEDING LOWLIFE'S that sent it would have the common courtesy to not hide there agenda. - by Doc_Stihl
|Two words (3:03pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
U N I V E R S I T Y D I P L O M A S - by Slaymaan
|Experts say……. (3:24pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
…It's gonna snow this winter…..
…It PROBABLY WON'T snow this summer….
…If you are out in the rain, you'll get wet.
…If you eat too much, you MIGHT get fat.
…If you touch a hot stove, you MIGHT get burned.
NOW……your telling us that the amount of spam we receive will increase? Prove it, I want to see some numbers. Any numbers. 5's, 8's, maybe a few 2's, just show me some more damn numbers!! And I'd like for you to tell me how this is going to help me get higher NUMBERS on my framerate in Quake III. Show me NUMBERS!!!! - by BeanCounter
|Spam is great (4:04pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
I just got my diploma to sell viagra to a Nigerian citizen who had lots of pictures of his young wife sleeping with another man. - by Hormel
|I hate spam (4:12pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
I hate the Mail and the Meat too.
- by Rax
|Speaking of low lifes… (4:16pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
There you go Stihl, now
don't you feel all good
and superior. And in such
a disgusting, vile manner.
I rest my case. - by GunnyGeek
|SPAM THE JUNKET MAN (4:41pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
SPAM CAN KISS MY FURRY WHITE ASS
“HASTA LA VISTA…BABY”
SEE IT.LIVE IT.
OH MAN, DID I FUCKEN MENTION KRISTENNA LOKEN??? - by madpiggy_dj
|Spam Arrest (5:38pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
check out Spam Arrest ( - by iGetNoSpam
|Friend lists – Mailwasher (5:48pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
Some of us can't block all emails and use a “friends” list to accept good ones, because we never know where the legitimate messages might come from. Anyone who uses their email address for business, runs a website, etc can get a legitimate email from any random person's email address, so strict friends-based filtering is completely impossible.
I want to give a big thank you to the few of you that recommended mailwasher. I'm already finding it very useful to identify emails that are spam. Whether the bouncing feature ends up having a long-term effect or not, I will be wasting less time looking at emails that look like they might be legitimate based on subject/address but actually came from open relays.
One of the main reasons I come here is the useful info I gather from comments on articles like this. - by Belandrew
|Wait a minute, I love Spam (5:56pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
I just love spam, don't you? - by ThePostman
|Stop spam at the source (6:13pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
Advocates, lawmakers, etc need to quit attempting to use the law to determine if spam is wanted or unwanted and, instead attack the METHODs of sending spam.
Make fake e-mail accounts, invalid return addresses, using an SMTP relay without owners consent illegal and prosecute people who violate those rules. Its illegal to fraudulently use the phone or postal mail…why not apply the same framework to e-mail.
If lawmakers were to attack the methods, then the spam business would quickly sort itself out. “Legitimate” spammers would exist, but they would exist within the framework of the law. - by wkene
|how do spammers make money? (6:28pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
Beats me!There are many things about spam that I don't understand and one of these is how a spammer makes his money by sending unsolicited mail.What if somebody answers the mail?How is it going to benefit the spammer?Care to throw some light- anyone? - by greenhorn
|I found some % s… (6:34pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
flamers can play with: 71% of corps say they will underspend their budgets in the 4th quarter. 39% will spend some on linux projects. - by tech
|This is exactly (6:45pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
why Linux RULEZ abd MicroSoft SUX!!
Rax told me himself, YOU CAN'T GET SPAM WHEN YOU USE LINUX. Linux RULEZ and Patti Perry had on black panties today. - by Rax's Brother
|Negativepulse.com (7:21pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
Free online web proxy and anonymous mail… Negativepulse.com - by Nerp
|re: GunnyGeek (7:24pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
???? I think there's a pretty wide gulf between being on a mailing list and getting spam all over the place. On the mailing list I usually know I signed to be on it, and the e-mail I get is something I have half an interest in. And yes, those sort of e-mails are part of a free market.
But getting an endless stream of e-mail about university diplomas, stop smoking, enlarge your schlong, get out of debt, look here, etc. from one forged e-mail after another isn't some glorious rapture of capitalism but the snake oil salesmen gone electronic and there to make a quick buck. And you assumin' anyone objectin' to spam is all just downloadin' bootleg apps and p0rn—well, who's “feeling superior?” - by Ziwiwiwiwiwiwiwiwiwi
|Re:brother (8:40pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
Who the heck is Patti Perry?
Thanks for the support Bro.
- by Rax
|There is always Palladium (8:43pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
Won't be able to fake who the email is from, you can opt to only accept email from verified sources. Damn that evil empire. - by Robguy
|It IS getting worse (9:42pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
We used to get 9,000 valid emails a day and blocked about 1,000. 10% was acceptable even if annoying. Today, we still receive about 9,000 valid emails a day but the known spam has risen to a staggering 20,000.
I've had to resort to totally blocking several Class A addresses, 61, 200, 202, 203, 210, 211, 218, 219, 220. That pretty much takes 15,000 a day off the table. That is Asia, Latin America and if I had my way, I'd lop all of PacBell, Verio and UUNet off the face of the internet.
I block a Class C at the drop of a hat because they appear to be registering domains, get a block of addresses setup and spam away from a couple of dozen odd addresses.
I've almost resorted to a white list, opposite of a black list. But again, we are a business and I can't get away with that. - by Spam Vigilante
|bluebottle.com (10:13pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
I have finally found a solution to my spam problem…
- by allsmiles
|Spam is real spiced ham (11:55pm EST Tue Dec 03 2002)
I love my SPAM…it tastes good.
My dick is bigger - by TooL
|mail-snail-bail (6:48am EST Wed Dec 04 2002)
I can imagine we see DDOS attacks pending on spamming initiator networks if nobody does a thing…
Another nice one is letting your mailfilter forward spam towards the abuse@ the network housing the spammer, when a network owner gets that many forwarded mails that original cam from their networks they prob take measures… - by Bassie.
|help, help, don't put me into that vacuum cleaner again! (9:11am EST Wed Dec 04 2002)
IT HURTS! - by Rax's penis
|Spam (9:44am EST Wed Dec 04 2002)
I'm using which has cut my daily spam from up to 50 per day down to zero with no significant problems. I'd be happier if new internet users could be educated to ignore spam and/or the Korean and US legislators took some serious action to stop spamming at its source, but of course this won't happen until spam has made e-mail almost unusable, if ever. - by Bob
|Down on The Farm (12:19pm EST Wed Dec 04 2002)
All the animals are equal, but you Pigs is MORE equal…
The 1st amendment is a good deal utill it brings you a tiny bit of grief, then you're above it.
“…they come puking and mewling…”
>You are, Ziwi - by GunnyGeek
|Analogy (12:38pm EST Wed Dec 04 2002)
This reminds me of my battle with squirrels and trying to out-wit them at the bird feeder. The birds are the e-mails you want to get and the squirrels are the marketing people.
Just a reminder to those choosing a college major – Worthless majors: Marketing, Business Admin, Management, and the like. Take something with balls!
Don't be a squirrel. - by hang up
|Konrad Lorenz (12:53pm EST Wed Dec 04 2002)
The right major for you, “hang up” is obviously Biology! Ethology to be exact! - by GunnyGeek
|re: GunnyGeek (1:19pm EST Wed Dec 04 2002)
Hey, care to put up your e-mail address? I have about ten thousand items I want to sell you and I just can't resist exercising my first amendment rights and spamming you into oblivion. Come on, put your money where your mouth is, let us spam you! - by Ziwiwiwiwiwiwiwiwiwi
|So young, so angry… (1:38pm EST Wed Dec 04 2002)
I use this service BECAUSE they have a halfway decent filter system. - by GunnyGeek
|re: GunnyGeek (3:27pm EST Wed Dec 04 2002)
Drop the “so young” condescension, eh? I'm probably older than you and smell a flame baiter when I see one.
As for Hotmail, uh-uh, no cheating! If you think that spam is part of the free market then whatcha doing filtering it? Nope, you can't say one thing then do another. Sorry, silly, I think you're the pot calling the kettle……
- by Ziwiwiwiwiwiwiwiwiwi
|Z-wee, wee (3:55pm EST Wed Dec 04 2002)
I doubt it.
And the only flame I smell here is you.
In free enterprise they're free to speak and market as they will, and I'm free to associate with, and accept missives from who I choose, when I choose. Nobody gouges them, nobody gouges me. The only one trying to force a position on anybody is YOU. YOU want to DICTATE what they can send, and YOU want to DICTATE what I can accept!
|re: GunnyGeek (4:56pm EST Wed Dec 04 2002)
*snicker* Oh c'mon, first you say that anyone not wanting spam is too busy downloading pirated warez and porn, now you're hiding behind flame baiter excuse #32, “anyone disagreeing with thy epithets is crazy.”
Wake up and smell the oil slick bud, your ship is done sunk. By filtering the spam you're not participating in the same “free market” you're espousing, and flat out admitting a lot of it is junk you don't want. So if you consider me whacked out because I don't want unsolicited spam, then gander all you want.
Accepting “missives,” Sui Juris, what a buffoon, a loon with a tune……. - by Ziwiwiwiwiwiwiwiwiwi
|what a news flash (6:09pm EST Wed Dec 04 2002)
no shit, sherlock - by qwerty
|What kind of an idiot are you? (11:02pm EST Wed Dec 04 2002)
By definition a filter separates out what I want from what I don't want.
The filter does not DICTATE anything to the sender. It “filters” out what I want to receive from what I don't want to receive. Neither I nor the “filter” impede or control the liberty of the market place in anyway. I take the responsibility to accept or reject what I want. YOU are FREE and have the RIGHT to send me 10,000 “spams” (that I'm still waiting for) and I have the RIGHT to accept what I will WITHOUT hindering your RIGHTS in ANY way.
And… missive simple means a “letter”. (sorry didn't mean to scare you with that word.) And apart from YOUR disparaging chide regarding the word “missive”, there are no epithets here. Just a RIGHT to take a position, and the exposition of simple facts.
And yes, DICTATORS are ALWAYS disturbed individuals. - by GunnyGeek
|The other side of spam-filters (10:01am EST Thu Dec 05 2002)
As a newsletter publisher I'm also concerned with the other side of aspam-filters – the false positives, that prevent my legitimate and double opt-in newsletter subscribers from getting what they signed up for.
The following is a pre-screening spam-filter that use the SpamAssassin filter.
Put the word TEST at the beginning of your Subject field, and send your newsletter to affiliateprogram-spamcheck@sitesell
A few minutes later you get back a report that tell you your SpamAssassin score. Now you can fix the trouble-spots before sending the newsletter to your entire subscriber-base. - by Henrik Flensborg
|gunny? (10:34am EST Thu Dec 05 2002)
what is a gunny? Is it another term for an annoying tick? - by slartibartfast
|I think (10:41am EST Thu Dec 05 2002)
isn't that s0me sor+ of military thing or rank or something, dude?
I doubt it. On the other hand you have different fingers.
I out-rank you because I haven't bathed in 4 days. - by l00 å
|Instead of a Blacklist Filter (12:37pm EST Wed Dec 11 2002)
Why not instigate a Whitelist on servers that allow only proper email to be sent to users.
Instead of trying to block Spam, you only allow companies, groups etc that have paid to be allowed to solicit or send emails.(would be kicked off if abused system with no refund of money down)
If ISP's started this type of program instead of Blacklists, which don't work, then we effectively get rid of unwanted Spam for good.
Just a thought. Other people have mentioned this before, this is not a new idea, so what's the holdup? - by Bruce
|Spam Bully (3:26pm EST Tue Jan 27 2004)
Spam Bully introduce Bayesian filter for Outlook Expres… you can manage as simple OE rule.
there some demos on the website - by Veronica
|2 years later (4:59am EST Tue Aug 31 2004)
Ooooooo. No! 50%??? That turned out to be a very modest estimate. Flash forward to August 31, 2004 and I see 83% spam/viruses on my mail server every day, up from 70% in May. Simple extrapolation of available data shows 90% before 2005. Antispam software is no longer a luxury, it's a necessity. - by Spam Block Head