"Messageless" Spam.

[PVR]

Like most people I receive much spam to which I never respond. Much of this
stuff contains no obvious message or attachments. Instead the "message" is
merely a collection of words apparently randomly selected from a dictionary.

WHAT'S THE POINT? I assume one point would be to identify the existence of
potential recipients but I "bounce" all this spam back to sender where
possible.

Peter.

 

[Carolyn]

Like most people I receive much spam to which I never respond. Much of this
stuff contains no obvious message or attachments. Instead the "message" is
merely a collection of words apparently randomly selected from a dictionary.

WHAT'S THE POINT? I assume one point would be to identify the existence of
potential recipients but I "bounce" all this spam back to sender where
possible.

I have also wondered what is going on with the spam that contains a series
of seemingly random words and phrases. I never open these emails, just view
them through the properties.
Can someone here explain what is going on with these things?
There is another group of emails that comes through with no subject and no
wording in the body at all. What is the purpose of these emails?
Thanks in advance,
Carolyn

 

[steve]

Like most people I receive much spam to which I never respond. Much of this
stuff contains no obvious message or attachments. Instead the "message" is
merely a collection of words apparently randomly selected from a dictionary.

WHAT'S THE POINT? I assume one point would be to identify the existence of
potential recipients but I "bounce" all this spam back to sender where
possible.

It is to fool Bayesian filters and it works to some extent. This type
of spam always contains a URL pointing to whatever the spam is really
about.

A kill filter on header "Content-Type: multipart/alternative" will
stop such spam be watch out for false positives if you are into html.

Bouncing is a waste of time. The sender will almost always be a fake.

Another generation of spam has recently started that is plain text
with the url nested within it and instructions about how to paste it
into the browser. They are really idiot level messages.


Steve

 

[kurt wismer]

It is to fool Bayesian filters and it works to some extent.

i think this is a misconception... randomized text has appeared in spam
for quite some time now, long before bayesian filters started to become
mainstream... it is to fool the simpler content examining pattern
matching filters - it's there for precisely the same reason spam often
has gibberish or odd characters or numbers somewhere in the subject line...

This type
of spam always contains a URL pointing to whatever the spam is really
about.

i suspect an email that contains nothing except said URL would have a
better chance of getting past a bayesian filter than one with a
mountain of random words...

 

[GSV Three Minds in a Can]

It is to fool Bayesian filters and it works to some extent. This type
of spam always contains a URL pointing to whatever the spam is really
about.

Perhaps the legislators in the UK/USA could consider an anti-spam law
which said any attempt to obfuscate the subject (eg vi@gra), the
content, or the 'from' address, is A Priori evidence of spamming intent
and the perpetrators should be identified and hung by the neck until
dead?

That would get around all the 'opt-in/opt-out', 'previous business
relationship', and suchlike cr&p .. and the remaining spam would be easy
to filter.

 

[Heather]

Perhaps the legislators in the UK/USA could consider an anti-spam law

which said any attempt to obfuscate the subject (eg vi@gra), the

content, or the 'from' address, is A Priori evidence of spamming

intent > and the perpetrators should be identified and hung by the neck
until

dead?

Couldn't agree more......except being hung by the 'neck' wasn't exactly
the body part I would use......LOL!!

Heather

 

[Gabriele Neukam]

On that special day, Heather, ([email protected]) said...

which said any attempt to obfuscate the subject (eg vi@gra), the
intent > and the perpetrators should be identified and hung by the neck
until
Couldn't agree more......except being hung by the 'neck' wasn't exactly
the body part I would use......LOL!!

Do you mean, the entire personage of the spammer "community" is of male
gender? I think the majority is, but who knows if there isn't a girl
that had been acting before the vidcam (you know how) and found it is
more satisfying to do the job "behind the camera" and direct the
spammers' activities...


Gabriele Neukam

(e-mail address removed)

 

[me]

On that special day, Heather, ([email protected]) said...


Do you mean, the entire personage of the spammer "community" is of male
gender? I think the majority is, but who knows if there isn't a girl
that had been acting before the vidcam (you know how) and found it is
more satisfying to do the job "behind the camera" and direct the
spammers' activities...

Gabriele Neukam

(e-mail address removed)

Perhaps Heather could suggest something for this "queen"?
(wraps)
http://www.techtv.com/screensavers/showtell/story/0,24330,3407919,00.html

J

 

[Ian.H]

Perhaps the legislators in the UK/USA could consider an anti-spam law
which said any attempt to obfuscate the subject (eg vi@gra)

All _legitimate_ marketing mail[1] should be marked as such, with the
likes of prepending the subject with '[ADV]' or similar. "Obfuscating"
such headers I believe is "against the rules" (I don't mention law here as
I can't remember the exact details off the top of my head.. but it may
well come under that too.. I don't know).



Regards,

Ian


[1] Apparently there is some... I don't appear to see much.. but there we
go =)

 

[Heather]

On that special day, Heather, ([email protected]) said...

exactly the body part I would use......LOL!!

Do you mean, the entire personage of the spammer "community" is of male
gender? I think the majority is, but who knows if there isn't a girl
that had been acting before the vidcam (you know how) and found it is
more satisfying to do the job "behind the camera" and direct the
spammers' activities...

Hmmm, you do have a good point. But then you and I know that women are
much better at 'production and direction'......(VBG)

Heather

 

[Heather]

Perhaps Heather could suggest something for this "queen"?
(wraps)
http://www.techtv.com/screensavers/showtell/story/0,24330,3407919,00.html

Grin.....guess we will have to go back to the 'neck'.

Wow.....she makes $200M a year? Hmmm.

 

[Tim R.]

Wow.....she makes $200M a year? Hmmm.

Yikes, you added an extra zero in there. It's 200 k.
But then the first rule of spammers is "Spammers always lie"


tim