This Week in Asia Pac
Allís fair in spam and war
by daneoz 09:02AM Friday Sep 12 2003
Spammers are showing they’re not without their own weapons when it comes to fighting the spam war
. DOS attacks through unwitting Australian broadband users have recently targeted the anti-spam lists themselves.
According to this report, the tactic is a new development in the increasingly dirty-handed struggle between the spam faithful and those that would see them burn in hell:AusCERT general manager Graham Ingram says the issue should be taken seriously by the government at high levels
"If indeed spammers are aggressively going after people developing anti-spam technologies then this is a pretty interesting development,"
And the tactic appears to be an effective one:This battle, which has been raging for nine weeks, has already claimed the scalp of blacklist Osirusoft, which shut down last month.
SORBS operator Matthew Sullivan told ZDNet Australia his service, like other blacklists, has been subjected to a bombardment of traffic that peaked at 3 billion bytes a second.
"They hit us again this morning locally...they used some Telstra [customer] machines," Sullivan said. "Its changed from day to day. The problem that we've had is that most of the time it's been a spoofed attack."
Despite blacklists, spam prevention services, email filters and increasing legislation, the spam faithful are refusing to go quietly.
Speaking of dirty tricks, more revelations from the struggles of consumers trying to actually be allowed to choose their broadband provider: Telstra, Australia’s main telco, has been forced to provide some quick excuses
for why some people have been told ADSL is not available in their area for rival services, only to be connected later to Telstra’s own service.
As the report says:Telstra has again admitted it was at fault in denying a customer access to iiNet ADSL whilst subsequently signing him up to BigPond Broadband ADSL.
The telco said the customer's two initial line qualifications were done by a staff member new to the role who misinterpreted the results and "erroneously rejected both these applications after interpreting the data as indicating the customer was on a pair gain."
The BigPond line qualification was then done by a different employee, who correctly approved the application.
Hmm, good excuse or what?