AnonDuffer
@kaballero.com | reply to GOLFnSUN
Re: Scientists should be prosecuted for 350 million spam msgs
Ain't the power of censorship a heady brew? Karl?
They sent the spam.
They sold the product.
They profited.
They admit it.
I think prosecution is appropriate, or am I not even allowed to have an opinion? |
|
birdfeedr
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-11
Warwick, RI
 ·Verizon FIOS
| reply to AnonDuffer
Re: Scientists should be prosecuted for 350 million spam msgs
said by AnonDuffer :
or am I not even allowed to have an opinion?
You have it, and you told us twice! Impatient much?
Actually, I've gotten stuck in the technology loop too. Called in to a local talk radio show, and it sounded like I was cut off, so I called back, and sounded like I was cut off again. So with the phone still connected I launched into a long, creative string of expletives that would make a sailor blush, then hung up.
Turned on the radio to hear the tail end of the host chastising me for my response. "Tell us what you really think." |
|
Sock Puppet
Premium
join:2000-10-09
Parker, CO
| reply to AnonDuffer
They never actually sold anything, they stopped short of doing so as the article conviently left that out:
This article has more detail:
»voices.washingtonpost.com/securi···_at.html
To this point no one has been successful in stopping spam. It seems like the next logical step is getting in the spamers minds and determining their distribution avenues and success rates. If ultimately their research can be used to help stop spam, I personally do not care that I got one extra spam, with a link that I would have never clicked anyway, going to a site where you actually could not purchase anything. |
|
birdfeedr
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-11
Warwick, RI
·Verizon FIOS
| Thanks for the link. Reading it, it appears that the researchers did not use the botnet to send spams. Instead they hijacked a small enough number of nodes to change the spams that were already going out (under someone else's direction, so charge them with malfeasance, if you can find them). Instead they were re-directed to the researcher's fake pharmaceutical website. The fake pharmaceutical website worked up to the point of checking out, so there were no personal or financial details invloved.
The spams which, when clicked, would have infected the users with malware, redirected the click-ers to a website that merely counted hits.
None of the above by the researchers is actionable. And trying to get a handle on the spam scourge by understanding some of the dynamics is within the realm of ethical. |
|
meh37
@verizon.net | What if the 28 hits were just other researchers researching spammer websites? |
|
