Spammers on the Run

ericald writes "An interesting update from Blue Security, the group that introduces the Blue Frog initiative to fight spam, claims that during the past few days at least one spammer had frequently deleted domains he owned as a result of their system. In another update in their blog they report they have already recruited over 21,000 users. It's about time spammers start feeling the heat! I'm just surprised they show results so soon."

Spammers fate

Spammers must realize by now they run an awful risk by having their true identities tracked down and then posted for punishment. It won't be long until search engines (Google, Yahoo, etc.) start compiling results for them such as, "Mr/ Mrs X Illegally spammed millions of people." Employers certainly will rethink hiring someone with such tainted credentials. It just isn't worth it nowadays to harass people with unwanted/ unwarranted emails. This is a resounding wake-up call for these cretins to rethink their ill-fated profession.

Re:Spammers fate

When the spammers can afford to pay $7m to Microsoft, I don't think they need to worry about being hired by anyone.

Re:Spammers fate

Not really. The notoriety will give them some fame, and tell potential advertisers that those spammers know how to send spam in really large amounts.

Re:Realistic View?

I think by and large most corporations are taking this tack in dealing with spam sent to their MTAs. If you do not do business with that country, ban their IP block. This is an inexpensive 100% solution to spam from overseas.

Public ISPs, universities and government centers do not (and can not) take this route. So these orgs must take another path towards dealing with international spam.

Filtering works. Greylisting works. These technologies help a great deal against the zombie armies everyone said would be unstoppable spam sources.

I am glad you have a solution which works for you (and to some extent, I agree with your soultion), but I would hate for the balkanization of the Internet to come about due to the misbehavior of a few rotten apples. I think there must be a better way.

Cheers,
-- RLJ

Re:Spammers fate

The "better" spam filters described by Graham are already getting pretty common in decent mail user agents. And yes, bayesian filtering works well.

However, it will not make spam unprofitable. To make it unprofitable, the costs of sending spam must be higher than the money you get from it. So in some way, we need to increase the costs of sending spam, or reduce profits.

The cost of sending spam is essentially zero. Sure, you may have to switch ISP once in a while, register some new domains, invest in some CDs with email-addresses, buy some software or consultants to infect machines, etc... But it really doesn't matter. Even with todays hostility towards spammers, the cost is still essentially zero.

The profits of spam is:

• price_of_whatever_you_sell * number_of_email_addresses * some_really_low_fraction

where really_low_fraction is the number of idiots who fall for your scam.

Bayesian filtering doesn't address either costs or profits. It does not make sending spam more expensive, and it does not change the some_really_low_fraction, because the idiots who respond to spam wouldn't be using bayesian filtering anyway.

So Bayesian filtering is nice for the end-users who just want to get through their mail, but it doesn't really help solve the problem of making spam unprofitable.

Re:Spammers fate

In other words: the Microsoft approach is the best one. Go after the barstewards and make them pay.

Part of the problem is the legal framework, unsolicited mass mailing needs to become 'more illegal'. Paying someone else to spam needs to be targeted, if a company in the US pays someone in Uzbekistan to send spam, that company in the US has to suffer. Follow the money.

Blacklisting entire countries is a different approach, once strong anti-spam laws are in place in some of the main jurisdictions, recalcitrant areas can be *persuaded* to adopt/enforce similar measures by blacklisting. That blacklisting has to be done at the ISP level though, not by law.

Re:Spammers fate

Employers certainly will rethink hiring someone with such tainted credentials.

      I know we're living in the era where corporations and employers believe they have the right to do anything they want. But while refusing to employ someone on hearsay is within an employer's rights, there's a chance of shooting yourself in the foot and actually hiring the guy who was smart enough to cover his tracks, rather than the silly, average person whose box was "owned" and spammed without thier knowledge.

      Oh but we all know that search engines are infalliable and are the best way to screen a potential employee, right? Come on. If I can steal your identity and borrow money in your name, how hard can it be to spam in your name? Frankly this would not be an employer worth working for.

Re:Spammers fate

I dunno.. If I was a greazy marketing type I would love to find someone who was a greasy as myself and this kind of Google information would be perfect. And you have a hard time using the word illegally on any of this since you would have to have proof. How many spammers have been convicted?

Re:Spammers fate

that it must actually be somewhat successful,

      Of course it's successful. Any biological system obeys a gaussian or normal distribution. This includes patterns of behaviour in a population. There is always a bunch of people on the edge of this curve who will buy anything. The gullible, the impulsive, the mentally handicapped, the bipolars in their manic phase. If you spam enough people, you will hit enough of this extreme population to make a "business" out of it. What sucks is that the entire rest of the population who are not at all interested in the "product" will also have been spammed at this point.

      But the spammers don't care, all they want is cash. I wouldn't be able to live with myself knowing I did this for a living, but the spammers obviously have no problem with it.

      If the spammers were smart they would have a list of gullible people by now and target their population more intensly, to save on effort. You might as well bleed em dry, right?

Excuse me...

Is it just me, or does anybody else think that these attempts might show some promise, but in the long end probably won't work. Basically this is the spamming world versus an organization which, in reality, uses spam right back to get the results they wish. Yes yes, I know you will all say they are using spam in the 'name of good' and all that, however, an organization without political ties will not be able to battle all those companies responsible for the spam in the first place. Until we see more government movement against spammers, I don't see much of a dent on the spam I am getting in my Inbox...

...Unless of course Blue Security would like a list of the spammers who are filling my email, then perhaps I will change my opinion ;)

what do they do?

I'm confused. What does this blue frog inituative do thats so magical to get rid of spammers. "Look we're getting rid of spammers"... Well HOW?

Its great and all yes? But what are they doing?

Re:what do they do?

Almost. The process works as such:

For each e-mail address you regiester with Blue Frog, they create a honey pot account and seed the internet with it.

Each spam that honey pot gets is entered into a database, based on links contained, ip address sourced from, etc.

Humans look over the databased data, using it to find out who the source of common spams are (not the spammer, but the company who hired them).

Then, for each spam from that company found in a honey pot, a complaint is programmatically sent from the BlueFrog software that sits on the honey pot owner's client computer.

Essentially, it's a set of software that allows you to complain about spam in an organized way without actually having to do the investigation, etc yourself. Further, since it keeps all information to just the honey pots' data, if the spamming company decided that your complaint is evidence that you want more spam, they get complained against further. The more users that are members of the Blue Community, the more damaging this is to the offending company.

Spamming is cheap, and virtually without risk. Essentially, this is a legal way to shift reality so that it's more risky to pay a spammer for your advertising.

Yes it's legal. No, it's not spamming the spammers. They only get one complaint per spam recieved. You'd do it yourself, given the time to do so. Meanwhile, you've explicitly installed a piece of software to do it for you. If that breaks their server, well they probably shouldn't be sending so much goddamn spam.

Re:what do they do?

Blue Frog essentially responds to spam with complaints. So spammer X sends fifty thousand spam mail messages to Blue Frog users, and he gets fifty thousand complaints back. It's an eye-for-an-eye technique done properly: one spam, one complaint.

I see this as having two major effects. First, it keeps the spam away from you. Second, it informs the spammer that nobody read his spam. Spammers *depend* on human beings reading their spam. As long as nobody reads it, nobody buys.

Re:what do they do?

What does this blue frog inituative do thats so magical to get rid of spammers.

You really don't know? Geneticists have engineered a breed of frogs that subsist entirely on Spam. An interesting side effect is their attractive blue coloration.

That's funny. I'm still getting spam.

I'm amazed at Blue Security's success. They've gotten a few spammers to shut down a few domains.

The odd thing is, I'm still receiving as much spam as I've always received. No matter how many tens of thousands of users they sign up for this process, I fear this is going to be a very small drop in a very large bucket.

Re:That's funny. I'm still getting spam.

Of course I'm sure you don't find it at all ironic that you include spam in your very own signatture line, do you?

feh.

Blue Security

For those that don't know what Blue Security does, see this thread [slashdot.org].

Basically, they DDOS spammers websites in hopes that they will shut them down.

Re:Blue Security

How is Option #2 any different than the sit-ins done during the 1960's civil rights movement to businesses in Alabama?

Those are lauded in all of the history books as an application of peaceful economic pressure.

Peaceful, yes; lawful, no.

Good old detective work for a chance?

If I understand this correctly these guys are exposing the identities of spammers including how many people they exposed to their unwanted messages? That's an interesting approach, but might get thrown down in U.S. courts due to privacy regulations. Hey, don't kill the messenger ;-) I just know how the legal system works over here and I'm sure these guys will not roll over and head for the hills. My bet is that they'll pay some high class lawyers to keep their identity from being released. HOWEVER, with that said - IF the identities would be posted icognito, then there's nobody to sue, right? ;-) Sorry if I'm offroading here - maybe I misunderstood the post (it's leaving out a bit of detail, you know...)

Running out of hiding places

I liked the mention of the domain registrar taking up a zero-tolerance policy after the spammer shut down their domain. I'm starting to think that with more people around the world getting online, more people around the world are getting sick of spam. This could help us eliminate some of those off-shore servers that spammers love to hide behind.

Give everyone in the world email for a week and then see all the government action we desperately crave ;)

Sounds like bullshit

Description of Blue Frog Initiative [technewsworld.com]

But I guess it may work in some cases. I bet these guys making headlines for getting retaliated against sometime soon.

Anti-Blue Frog

An interesting article over at TechNewsWorld [technewsworld.com] about how Blue Frog is not what we need in the battle against spam. "It's the worst kind of vigilante approach," said John Levine, a board member with the Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail. "Deliberate attacks against people's Web sites are illegal."

Re:Anti-Blue Frog

Personally I think the "worst kind" of vigilante approach would be getting the spammers home addresses and savagely beating them... or killing them. I dont think DDOSing some spammer pricks domain is that bad if you compare what could happen to these people.

Re:Anti-Blue Frog

Personally I think the "WORST kind" of vigilante approach would be getting the spammers home addresses and savagely beating them... or killing them.

You misspelled "best".

Re:Anti-Blue Frog

Personally I think the "worst kind" of vigilante approach would be getting the spammers home addresses and savagely beating them... or killing them.

Isn't that spelled ``best''?

Seriously, the grandparent post refered to this as a DDOS. If the spammer sends me an email, he's certainly got no right to complain if he gets one back. If he gets enough back to shut down his website, well, he shouldn't have sent so much spam, should he? My understanding is that Blue Frog tries to send an unsubscribe message for every spammed address (their website is slashdotted)? If so, the spammers have already announced their willingness to get that message, and it is obviously legal.

Re:Anti-Blue Frog

TechNewsWorld? Ah, one of those ECT publications. They have such esteemed writers as Maureen O'Gara on their payroll. Their publications are barely news and frequently contain some form of troll or flamebait to get them posted on Slashdot.

If you thought ZDnet was crap, ECT makes them smell like roses.

The missing link

Blue Security [bluesecurity.com]

domain names

look at the domain names, makes a good read..

asdlkjfea.com, alsfajega.com, aksdfaewl.com, hkassautdn.com, egmymaridjk.com, lhperdixnd.com, clthriftbf.com, bibiae.com, romisingfeasibility.com, betheuplift.com, fundamentalstojoy.com, dealandvaluematch.com, valueandassets.com, oursuperbiz.com, and best of them: truthfoundhere.com

maybe spamfoundhere.com?

Nibbling

This is nibbling around the edges, but nothing else is possible, so we should keep doing it.

Sue/fine/arrest/jail spammers? They'll move abroad where we can't find them.

Get a legal framework that will be enforced in all the countries connected to the Internet? Good fscking luck.

System Requirements?

I just hit the "join beta" link and didn't fill out the form, on the page you signup I see:

System Requirement

Windows 2000/2003/XP

Ok so I'm out, last windows I read email on was Win95 or maybe Win98, some bullshit virus or another screwed me over, I ain't "done email" on Windows of any type since. Oddly enough, I haven't had any viruses, spyware, adware, or malware since then either.

So while I applaud efforts to reduce spam, efforts that requre Windows seems silly at best and are efforts I can't join in on. Even my wife no longer reads email on Windows, the last time her Windows PC slowed to a crawl due to spyware instead of spending 3 or 4 hours googling for the latest cleaners and finding out what new and not at all entertaining spyware she had, I said "fuck this' gave her my new and as yet unpacked Mac Mini and she hasn't had any spyware problems since. Ripped her PC apart and installed Linux on it to replace my laptop as my main "work" pc.

Russian spammers fate

Whot about the bloke in Russia who got 'blown away' with a gun for excess spamming?

Foot, meet bullet

> An interesting update from Blue Security, the group that introduces the Blue Frog initiative to fight spam, claims that during the past few days at least one spammer had frequently deleted domains he owned as a result of their system. In another update in their blog they report they have already recruited over 21,000 users. It's about time spammers start feeling the heat! I'm just surprised they show results so soon."

An interesting update from Spammers-R-Us, Inc [...] In another update in their blog, they report they have already gotten over 21,000 Slashdotters to hit the Blue Frog site. It's about time spamfighters started feeling the heat! I'm just surprised they show the results within 20 posts on the thread!

- with apologies to the original article poster :)

Let's not forget...

<sarcasm> Let's be sure to give proper credit to Congress and their ultra-effective CANSPAM act. </sarcasm>

A better idea

I propose the Blue Steel program where spammers are hunted down like animals. Sponsored by Colt. Successful hunters will be allowed to mount the heads on their walls.

Litigate against all the spammers.

Microsoft received $7M from Richter, but what about all the other spam victims of Richter. There still is over $45M in proofs of claims against Snotty.

If even .1% of spam spam victims sued Snotty for the spam that he sent, he would be out of money.

One large spam suit usually does not take out a spammer, but 1000 or 10,000 smaller suits will.

On the use of this to decrease your competition

If I was the King
of Spam, I would send email
for competitors.

More people will hire
me - my competition is
DOSed to death!

Poor solution

This solution to spam is one that could at best reach an equilibrium with less spam but still plenty around. If people have to DDOS the spammers to make the problem go away, then it will never go away. If it did, people would stop being prepared to DDOS them and the problem will come back. This is not likely to be cyclical, but rather reach an equilibrium. It also doesn't account for zombies sending spam - unless you DDOS the sites that are advertised, and that's got another whole set of legal issues.

IMHO, sender pays (ala hash-cash or something like it) is the only way to make a meaningful dent in the spam problem. I know this fails one or two of the "reasons" on that list as to why it won't work, but doing nothing also doesn't work. Why don't Free programs implement this so people at least have the option of using it? I'd actually prefer a problem that can scale much larger - like taking a minute or even an hour on todays computers - so it will still be viable in the future. Yes, there are issues (like mailing lists) with this approach, but there are ways around those too. People have to be willing to do SOMETHING. If someone doesn't do something, someone else (think MS) will. Then we'll have a proprietary "standard" for dealing with it. You folks maintaining the software just have to get some nads and take a little initiative on this. If you wait for some company to devise a solution, they aren't going to just give it to you.

Summertime and the spamming is easy

We have a blog post to PR a "spam-catcher" - how is this different from spam, which is an unpaid commercial advertisement?

I'm just saying it's not news per se, nor is it really tech per se.

sigh.

Make them run using Postfix?

smtpd_sender_restrictions = reject_unknown_address
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
permit_sasl_authenticated,
reject_non_fqdn_sender,
reject_non_fqdn_recipient,
reject_unknown_sender_domain,
reject_unknown_recipient_domain,
reject_unauth_pipelining,
permit_mynetworks,
reject_unauth_destination,
reject_rbl_client ombie.dnsbl.sorbs.net,
reject_rbl_client relays.ordb.org,
reject_rbl_client opm.blitzed.org,
reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org,
reject_rbl_client sbl.spamhaus.org,
permit

We are also using SpamAssassinn / razor / clamav using amavisd-new. The main mail account used for everything from clients webmaster@ mail to contact@ are getting numerous spam daily, yet only three or perhaps four a month get delivered... and those are added to our body_checks.txt which is publicly available for download [linuxreviews.org] by anyone, including spammers who I have a feeling makes spammers think twice and clean us off their list when they find themselves listed there using search engines etc.

This gives me an idea...

Just as a proof of concept, would somebody please start sending out millions of "fake" spam messages, all with links to every one of SCO's web pages? Thanks!

Simple solution....

Remove their domains. If a domain receives x complaints in y days have their domain suspended. I mean this from a domain angle rather than a hosting/ISP angel: have the domain registers/DNS's drop them.

Kill profits by consuming resources

Blue Frog is effective because it consumes spammer's resources -- it raises the costs of being a spammer. Spam filtering does not reduce spammer's profits in that the same people that filter spam were never likely to visit the spam site and purchase. Filtering doesn't change spammer's revenues or costs.

In contrast, a bot that visits a spammer's site consumes the spammer's valuable resources in far greater amounts that is consumed by the original spam e-mail (spam emails often being under 10kB and sent via low-cost zombies vs. 50kB or 100kB for most web pages begin hosted on the spammer's e-commerce site).

Run.

Run, Forrest, Run!!

Junk faxers, too!

See my sig!

Actually, since I started using my sig, I've called these particular junk faxers back to see if they're feeling the heat, and one exasperated woman told me that they were! Keep up the good work Slashdotters! If we do the same thing to spammers (using something like SpamVampire), we will eventually have the same effect of hitting them where it hurts: their wallets.

Just don't hang honest people with Identity theft!

It can also be used against people whose identity may be used to spam out. The one's who have the capacity for mischief are also capable of making things worse for unsuspecting dudes. So go whack a spammer but make sure that he/she really did it!

Here's my idea

Have a program recreate an image using hotlinked images downloaded from spammer sites, reduced to 1x1 images.

Sure, it will take 20 miuntes for an image to show, but think of the fun! Mosaic time!

Wait, was that already done?

Slashdot needs new editors

No offence, but to whoever posted this article, you should really work on your grammar, or take a minute to re-read what you wrote. I've read it 3 times already and still can't understand what you're saying... Other friends also agree.

Elimination of voice..

I am quite pleased to hear there is a bit of 'street justice' being dealt upon spammers. The great news is my family who runs on AOL actually receives very little spam. Sure I get two or three emails in my 'spam' folder, but truthfully I get close to zero spam over all. AOL can really toot their own horn for how effective they have been. Compared to a few years back when I had to check my box three or four times a day, and spend five minutes deleting crap, I am elated. I think the tides are turning folks.

Side question, how does Blue Frog respond to spoofed return addresses? Do they try to ascertain the correct 'sent' address instead of the 'reply' address? Has anyone complained of being flooded with replies from Blue Frog when it really was not their fault?

Don't give it out...

I kneow SPAM is a huge problem world wide. However i dont get why people dont learn from thier mistakes. In the late 90's I used to have tons of SPAM arriving in my inbox. Since then i now keep three email addresses; one for personal contact, one for doing online transactions and one for filling out online forms (like contests & website registration). Since then i have had no SPAM in my 2 main accounts and very little (cause im very picky about the places i register) in the account i do give out the address to. Im glad that there are businesses and government efforts to combat SPAM but some of the responsibilty can still be layed on the shoulders of the fools who continue to give out their address to every ipod give-a-way website they see. Come on people, wise up. Help these do-gooders help you!

New Idea

What we should do here at Slashdot is have a section where new and old spammers domain's are listed daily so the entire Slashdot community can send an email to their domain with a large attachment and kill their bandwidth. I'm sure the spammers ISP/Hosting company would love that.

False "Results"

Spammers change domains the way normal people change underware. The fact that within a few days of Blue Security sending their malcious complaints to a spammer's website (which is set up on a throw-away account at a Chinese ISP, registered through a reseller for one of the minor registrars, who will, in three days, cancel the domain registration ANYWAY), is not evidence of ANYTHING.

Correlation is not causation!

Spammers have been rotating through domain names for years now. You can watch it on a week-by-week basis, as a whole series of domains with the same nameservers takes responses for the same spam months on end. Even when the spammers change nameservice, they tend to do it in predictable ways.

In one week's time Blue Security has manages to slightly ruffle the feathers of a total of THREE distinct spam operations. Big whoop.

from "Solution Overview" on their page:

http://www.bluesecurity.com/solutions/overview.asp >

" Spammers are required to download Blue Security's Registry Compliance Tools to clean their mailing lists from e-mail addresses appearing in the Registry."

" The Registry is enforced by the Blue Community and uses Blue Security's Active Deterrence, a patent- pending technology that disrupts the business of merchants, advertisers and spammers who choose to ignore the Do Not Intrude Registry."

Well, PATENTED idea? - no, thank you then. I thought it was a community effort, based on free ideas and standards. Isn't it like paying for "protection" to your neighbouhood bully after all?

Thank god for Crazy Frog

I'm glad that Crazy Frog Initiative was good for more than just a ringtone. Goodbye spammers! I hear the Crunchy Frog Initiative will be even more ambitious.

Oh wait...

Why did the registrar change their policies?

On this [bluesecurity.com] web page, which was the first one cited in the original story, they say that the spammer's registrar changed its policies at the time Blue Security did their organized complaining. This surely was not a complaint, but I don't see anything in Blue Security's actions that would give the registrar an incentive to change behavior. Does anyone know why the registrar changed their policy?

Spammers Fate?

If Blue Frog only runs on a Windoze platform, how do we know it isn't just some clever spyware app that clever spammers put out to lull us all into complacency?

Cheers!

Profits From Nothing?

It's odd to read posts on here about people making profits from spam. I was always under the impression the emails aren't selling anything. They sound improbably enough. I thought it was all down to people inventing crap to send badly-worded useless emails to annoy everyone.

Terms of Service

Has anyone actually READ their terms of service?

You agree to comply with all treaties, laws, rules and regulations applicable to your use of the Site. You agree that while using the Site You will not:

...
*harm minors in any way;

...
*"stalk" or otherwise harass another person;
*restrict or inhibit any other User from using and enjoying the Site ...

Indemnity.

You agree to defend, indemnify and hold Blue Security, its directors, officers, employees, agents and affiliates harmless from any and all claims, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, in any way arising from or related to your use of the Site, your violation of the Terms..."
(emphasis mine)

In other words, I'm not only not allowed to smack minors, have sex with minors, or in any other way harm them while simultaneously using the site. We're not allowed to "stalk" spammers. Oh, and we're not allowed to DDoS it by posting a link to it on slashdot, since that will restrict others' capabilities to access the site.

To top it all off, I agree to defend them should my use of the site result in any sort of legal actions? Am I reading this wrong? By signing up am I actually agreeing to DEFEND them, in court, or just agreeing to PAY for their defense? Or maybe testify on their behalf? I'm no lawyer, but these contracts scare the crap out of me.

The Ethics of Self Defense

I get a kick out of hearing people squawk about the "ethics" of this kind of response. Certainly the practice of delivering a powerful DDOS attack on a Website and thus bringing it to its knees must be carefully scrutinized, but then so must delivering a powerful groin kick to a would-be mugger and thus bringing HIM to HIS knees. We are under attack from spammers, and must use a measured and appropriate response. If someone tried to take your purse, wouldn't you have the right to defend yourself? Back in my Tae Kwon Do days, we were taught to abstain from violence unless it was first visited on us, and then to respond only to a level sufficient to put a stop to the nonsense. This is Blue Security's position. In my opinion, the spammers have initiated the aggression and are reaping a just response. Vigilantes go out and look for trouble. Self-defenders wait 'til it comes nosing around and then give it a black eye. Or in this case, a blue frog.

Re:So what is spam?

It's lubricated!

Re:You Only Think You're Winning

If the truth be told, there are far more people who are responsive to spam than there are people who dislike it.

      Say what? Which planet is this information from?

The sales figures for the businesses we serve prove this.

      How do you get this information, exactly? By comparing the number of sales to the number of times people click on the useless, "sign me up for more spam" unsubscribe link?

important commerce

      Yes I understand that "h3R|34L v1aGr4", having my penis enlarged, and a fake degree are important commerce. Yup. Real important. So important that I delete it on sight. Along with 99.9999% of other users. You guys make a living on the 0.0001% of people who do not act rationally, but to do so, you bother everyone else.

      Nice troll, AC. You've been fed. Now die. The sun's coming up.

Re:First Prime Factorization Post

Obligatory CUBE [cubethemovie.com] Reference: "Ass-tro-nomical" ;P

Re:You Only Think You're Winning

From: Pamela Manning [[e-mail]]
Sent: Tue 2/8/2005 3:49 PM
To: T4$
Cc:
Subject: Does your son suffer from your chronic Impotence
Attachments:

Your heartbeat are like mine

V.I'o'X.X 25 m,g 3o PILlS 72.50

V.1,A.G.R'A 1oo m'g 32 PiL|S 149.o0

C.1.A'L*1.S 2O m*g 10 P1lLS 79.00

0.r.d.e.r quickly :
http://pont.newyorkmedz.com/?wid=209015 [newyorkmedz.com] ! Same Day Sh1pp1ng !

We Also have in St0ck:

X*A'N.A,X 1 m*g 3O P!|LS 79.Oo

P.R*0.Z.A.C 2O m,g 3O PiL|S 11o.0O

P,A.X*1,L 2o m,g 2O P!llS 155.0O

M,E*R,I'D*I.A 10 m.g 3O PiL|S 147.OO

,p> see you soon

Jasper Trujillo
President
CarboMer, Inc., San Diego, United States of America
Phone: [phone]
Mobile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

This is a confirmation message

This package is a 3[2

You will go to jail and ..

You will eventually go to jail. Then we will send your cellmate, Bubba, penis enlargment pills, cialis softabs, penis enlargment patches, and SPUR-M, just for his enjoyment.

Re:WTF?

http://www.bluesecurity.com/ [bluesecurity.com]

Personally, I am all for it.

Re:An Error in this program would be a shame...

I do not see a problem in the program but more in the implimentation of both sides. While this is a DDOS attack against spammer's websites, more often these days, they are hijacked websites that have ads or phishing scams to them.

So what happens when Mr. Innocent, unpatched server, gets a bill for $10K in a month for bandwidth fees?

Re:You Only Think You're Winning

Keep telling yourself that, when you're doing time.

-jcr