DOS Attack Via US Postal Service 332
Phronesis writes "Bruce Schneier reports in Crypto-Gram about the slashdot-inspired Post-office DOS attack on SPAM-king Alan Ralsky. More interesting, Schneier writes, is a recent paper on Defending against an internet-based attack on the physical world, which generalizes this attack and discusses how it could be automated and how one might defend against it (you can't stop it, but you could make it harder to effect). From the abstract of the article: 'The attack is, to some degree,
a consequence of the availability of private information on the Web, and the increase in the amount of personal information that users must reveal to obtain Web services.'"
Politics that hard way (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Politics that hard way (Score:4, Insightful)
Meanwhile in the back rooms buying and selling of politicians goes on the old-fashioned way -- face to face.
Re:Politics that hard way (Score:2, Informative)
Hardly DOS is it (Score:4, Insightful)
Also this seems a little extreme 'The attack is, to some degree, a consequence of the availability of private information on the Web, and the increase in the amount of personal information that users must reveal to obtain Web services.'
Considering the webservices the article is talking about is requesting a catalog
Re:Hardly DOS is it (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hardly DOS is it (Score:5, Insightful)
DOS we're familiar with = so many requests for connection that real (legitimate) requests are very slow to get through, if at all.
mailDOS = so many catalogs that finding your real mail (if there is any) is an incredible waste of time, and some pieces (packets?) may be lost (dropped) in the confusion.
If this isn't the best translation of electronic DOS to physical DOS I don't know what is.
DoS!=DOS (Score:5, Funny)
"Disk Operating System", is an OS like Windows that bases its structure upon drives rather than directories like UNIX/Linux or Mac OS do. Windows NT is still a DOS even if it (supposedly) doesn't contain MS-DOS derived code.
On a side note, DOSes seem to contribute more to server malfunctions than DoSes.
Re:DoS!=DOS (Score:2)
If someone can provide info to the different I would be grateful...
Re:DoS!=DOS (Score:2, Offtopic)
I don't know if this was possible in NT, but here [itworld.com] is an article on how it's done in 2000 or XP.
Re:Hardly DOS is it (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Hardly DOS is it (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Hardly DOS is it (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Hardly DOS is it (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Hardly DOS is it (Score:5, Interesting)
I recently was out of town for a few days. The tiny little mailbox that my apartment complex provides probably filled up on the second day, so the postal carrier took all of it back to the post office, and left me a lovely note that if I didn't pick it up in a few days, they'd send it all back. Luckily I got back in time to pick up my mail, but it was definitely an inconvenience tracking down which post office outlet had my mail and then taking the time to go get it.
So for a few days my postbox was shut down (mini DOS), because the postal carrier wouldn't leave me any new mail until I found the time to pick up what had already been taken away.
Re:Hardly DOS is it (Score:2)
Re:Hardly DOS is it (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Hardly DOS is it (Score:2)
How the hell was the parent modded insightful anyway?
anthrax (Score:5, Funny)
Ping of death? (Score:5, Funny)
would that be the physical incarnation of the "ping of death" attack?
Re:Ping of death? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Ping of death? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:anthrax (Score:2)
More info at newscientist (Score:5, Informative)
Lack of authentication (Score:5, Insightful)
There is absolutely no way for a person to prevent against this right now.
The analog solution from the electronic world would be for the publishers send them an confirmation letter or something asking whether they really subscribed.
Re:Lack of authentication (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Lack of authentication (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Lack of authentication (Score:2, Funny)
What's next? A careful examination of how to defend against someone ringing your doorbell and running away?
Give me a freakin' break.
Re:Lack of authentication (Score:2)
Re:Lack of authentication (Score:2, Troll)
The only ones that caught on were the Columbia House music CD things and places that would deliver books. And we'd get 20 or 30 cds/books out of them before we'd get the "we need more info" letter. Fraud for underaged kids to get stuff to resell to buy cheap beer with fake IDs. I think if you b
Re:Lack of authentication (Score:5, Insightful)
However, the recipient doesn't have to pay for any of it. It's a nuisance, but nothing like paying for bandwidth consumed by a DoS.
"The analog solution from the electronic world would be for the publishers send them an confirmation letter or something asking whether they really subscribed."
It's cheaper for them to just send out the magazine in that month's shipment. Sending out "Are you really sure?" postcards would require a different class of mail ("standard" as opposed to "periodicals") sent in a separate mailing (two smaller pre-sort batches instead of one big one). And that doesn't include the cost of a Business Reply Mail account.
Re:Lack of authentication (Score:4, Funny)
Y'know, maybe I'm the only one, but I got some amusement from `George Walker Bush' posting under the subject `Lack of authentication'...
I said that to Dr. Fatburn. (Score:2)
What's wrong, he could he not do the physical world equivelent of clicking the unsubscribe link?
NYTimes article on the paper (Score:4, Informative)
death and taxes (Score:5, Funny)
Re:death and taxes (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:death and taxes (Score:2)
you talking tax returns or hate letters?
Re:death and taxes (Score:5, Insightful)
Rule #2: Never forget rule number 1.
Remember that the IRS is in the same department as ATF and the Secret Service.
this works for normal spam as well... (Score:5, Insightful)
yesterday as i went through *35* pieces of junk mail from 3 days i was wondering if the USPS had an opt out from certain mailers form? i doubt it because spam is how they make most of their money.
any input here?
Re:this works for normal spam as well... (Score:2)
Only a dozen a day? You are so lucky. I'm up to about 100 per day on my main inbox.
Re:this works for normal spam as well... (Score:2)
Re:this works for normal spam as well... (Score:2)
so i'm getting more snail mail spam than email spam!
Re:this works for normal spam as well... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:this works for normal spam as well... (Score:2, Informative)
yesterday as i went through *35* pieces of junk mail from 3 days i was wondering if the USPS had an opt out from certain mailers form? i doubt it because spam is how they make most of their money.
Two points:
the new email on the block! (Score:2, Informative)
oh well
So mail spamming is bad now? (Score:5, Insightful)
Huh? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Huh? (Score:2)
Out of curiosity, exactly what criminal law does this violate?
Re:Huh? (Score:4, Funny)
impersonation of an anal orifice.
Spammers have feelings! (Score:5, Insightful)
Ralsky got what he deserved, and hopefully moving 'on the quiet', if he did move, cost him alot of money. I read this article earlier today (didnt think of submitting it myself) and it made alot of sense. It IS all too easy to get yourself on these lists and your life is made difficult getting off them (digging about for phone numbers listed in a 500 page catalogue's small print...) - if you were subscribed to even 100 of these you would have a mammoth task to get rid of them all.
Re:Spammers have feelings! (Score:2)
Change of address (Score:2)
Automated Spam attacks... (Score:5, Interesting)
If you type the following search string into Google -- "request catalog name address city state zip" -- you'll get links to over 250,000 (the exact number varies) Web forms where you can type in your information and receive a catalog in the mail. Or, if you follow where this is going, you can type in the information of anyone you want. If you're a little bit clever with Perl (or any other scripting language), you can write a script that will automatically harvest the pages and fill in someone's information on all 250,000 forms.
What's the chance of setting up a perl script to automatically find Junk Mail Kings and sign them up for the service? I'm sure many of these 250,000 would be junk mail kings. Just set them on each other!
Though environmentally bad in the short term, if it shuts them down in the long term, it would save a heck of a lot of trees!
Please don't do that... (Score:5, Insightful)
Despite the spammers, there are a lot of legitimate businesses and non-profit organisations out there that are trying to get people to sign up so they don't waste their time and money mailing people who have no interest in what they have to send.
Just because a business or organisation asks people for contact details to send mailouts doesn't mean that they're doing it maliciously. What you'll accomplish by scripting this is to give headaches to the people doing it correctly by polluting their mailing lists with people who don't want their mail. If anything, it'll have a negative effect on their customers or members who actually want to hear from them in the process, and it'll waste the resources of an organisation that often won't have a lot to waste.
Hey michael (Score:2, Funny)
This style of DoS harms more than the target (Score:5, Insightful)
In the case of signing up a spammer or other unscrupulous individiual to catalogs and other physical mail, the companies that are sending these items are directly bearing the cost of your DoS. Sure, Sears can probably afford to send out one more letter, but catalogs are more expensive to print and mail. All these companies are getting screwed out of real money, not some potentially (and oft inflated) accounting of how much time/cost an ISP has for DoS countermeasures.
Sure, I think it's great to spam the spammers, but in doing so you harm legitimate companies more than in the Internet world.
That's why I pay for my fun. (Score:2)
Re:This style of DoS harms more than the target (Score:4, Informative)
Costs passed on to the consumer.
"Sure, Sears can probably afford to send out one more letter, but catalogs are more expensive to print and mail."
No, they're cheaper. Instead of sending at Standard Mail [usps.gov] rates, they're either mailed at Periodicals [usps.gov] or Bound Printerd Matter [usps.gov]. And the printing is also cheaper because there's no envelope stuffing or card folding involved. And the lighter-stock paper is cheaper.
"All these companies are getting screwed out of real money"
Measured in cents or franctions of cents per recipient. And depending on how much they're shipping and where, it may actually be cheaper for them to add in a few extra addresses to bump the mailing into the next rate (we're not talking bandwidth here). The more mail they have going to a three, five or nine-digit ZIP code, the finer level of presortation they can do and the cheaper the postage for everything in that particular sack of mail.
And don't forget these mailers are interested in addresses whether you're really interested or not. If you're not giving them Ralsky's address, rest assured that they're probably interested in buying his address from his bank, credit card company, car dealer, etc. The whole philosophy of bulk mail is that you're sending this information to people who may not know they're interested in something the mailer is selling.
The worst money loss comes from paying $0.37 + fee for the Business Reply Mail card you send in. If you feel guilty, don't use the BRM card and pay for the postage yourself. (Just putting a stamp on a BRM card/envelope doesn't work unless you remember to cover/obscure the "Business Reply Mail" box above the address, the five vertical bars to the left of the "stamp" area, and all those horizontal bars along the right-hand side.)
Re:This style of DoS harms more than the target (Score:3, Informative)
But a "catalog-sized book" is not a catalog, it is a book. A catalog uses thinner, cheaper paper (note that a "catalog-sized book" doesn't have as many pages as a catalog), cheaper inks, and a cheaper binding method than even your average paperback. Everything is done on the cheap because they print so many of them and
Post office "DOS" Attack is gonna backfire (Score:5, Insightful)
Catalogs and Magazine subscriptions ship at cheaper rates. The rural carriers that deliver mail to people's homes aren't set up to carry mass amounts of this type of mail to people; economically, the post office is set up to run with a balance of junk and first class mail on any given route.
Overload this with a hugh amount of bulk-rate junk mail, and you're putting a burden on the capacity of the carrier routes, which in turn will force the Postal Service to modify fees and/or service.
I would be highly suprised if they pass this charge on to the business customers that generate the bulk mail; this would meet with too much resistance and put pressure on the business relationship. Instead, I wager we'll see the fees passed along to first class, consumer mail either through an increase in postage fees and/or fees for home delivery of mail.
In short - The Postal Service is not the Internet. It is one orginization that can and will respond to this type of abuse, and the end result will be less service / increased cost.
Re:Post office "DOS" Attack is gonna backfire (Score:5, Insightful)
J.
Re:Post office "DOS" Attack is gonna backfire (Score:2)
Re:Post office "DOS" Attack is gonna backfire (Score:3, Informative)
You have to be kidding. Most catalogs by request are sent FIRST CLASS because most companies don't send enough mail every day or week to get bulk. Yes, Sears does, but for every Sears that sends a catalog there are 50 "Bob's Hottubs" that have catalogs by request that do not send enough regularly enough to get a discount. If y
Re:Post office "DOS" Attack is gonna backfire (Score:3, Insightful)
At any rate, the cost of delivering the mail is paid for by the postage (imagine that!). Even if you pre-sort the mail as finely as you can (in the order the delivery person drives past the addresses, no less) and bring it to the destination post office yourself (or through a third party), you still have to pay postage for the simple act of delivering the
Postbox filters (Score:4, Funny)
Perhaps some sort of packet filter [protectiondogs.com] on the mailbox layer might be useful.
Lawsuit Result (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Lawsuit Result (Score:5, Interesting)
Anti-spam crusader wins court battle Last Updated Tue, 15 Apr 2003 15:31:49
ELLICOTT CITY, MARYLAND - A Maryland court has ruled in favour of an anti-spam activist who was sued by an Internet marketing executive for harassment. Spam is the common name given to junk e-mail.
Francis Uy posts the names and addresses of spammers. This enables network operators to block junk e-mail or sue them.
But George Allen Moore of Maryland Internet Marketing Inc. said Uy's site posting such information is harassment and wanted it pulled off the Web.
Judge Robert Wilcox says there's no evidence Uy had harassed Moore directly, as Moore had alleged.
Moore says he has received about 70 packages and 200 magazines at his house because of Uy's site. Moore also says he's received threatening phone calls, including one person who he says threatened to kill him.
Moore is the owner of Maryland Internet Marketing. He's also listed as a prolific spammer by Spamhaus.org, which maintains a world directory of bulk e-mailers.
His company hawks everything from software to diet drugs.
"Every time you try to mess with me, I will post it and more people will learn about you," Uy warned other spammers. "I don't need to encourage harassment against you, and I don't need to. Your best option is to crawl back under a rock."
Moore says he's considering further legal action.
Re:Lawsuit Result (Score:3, Funny)
This is a serious issue (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, the Ralsky attack is funny and ironic and all, but imagine if it happened to you. This wouldn't be a pizza delivery or Playgirl subscription every now and then, we're talking *pounds* of mail every day from many, many sources (God! your mailman would *hate* you). Easy to initiate, not easy to trace and really hard to stop.
Also, you can't write filters to automatically route or categorize snail mail. You have to go through it all to find the non-spam. If this kind of attack catches on, watch out.
I'm interested, is there anyone out there that works for the Postal Service? How can victims deal with this sort of thing?
Re:This is a serious issue (Score:3, Insightful)
I doubt I would incur the amount of motivated anger for a group of people to spend this much time doing it. I piss a lot of people off. I get people that sign me up for shit all
Re:This is a serious issue (Score:3, Interesting)
Maybe, but it wouldn't even take a group of people. All you'd need is one motivated person with a search engine and a Web manipulation module like Perl's LWP. You could easily write a script to flood a person with junk mail all by yourself. A little easier to trace maybe, but still damn hard to stop.
Re:This is a serious issue (Score:2)
True, I know the methods for tracking one down online and take steps to protecting my actual address. You can get many addresses on me, but I doubt any of them are actually correct. That's my little safeguar
Re:This is a serious issue (Score:2, Funny)
From your freak list...
APL bigot (606126)
aussersterne (212916)
chris_mahan (256577)
CowardNeal (627678)
cranos (592602)
DAldredge (2353)
Elbereth (58257)
Godeke (32895)
Gojira Shipi-Taro (465802)
Graspee_Leemoor (302316)
Grishnakh (216268)
Hott of the World (537284)
IceAgeComing (636874)
Inthewire (521207)
isoteareth (321937)
LucVdB (64664)
mansemat (65131)
MillionthMonkey (240664)
NineNine (235196)
No More Wankers (605612)
nordicfrost (118437)
not_anne (203907)
PinkStainlessTail (469560)
pr
no, it is not (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, if you piss off people, they may try to get back at you. The Ralsky attack is the result of Ralsky pissing off a lot of people an each person engaging in a small and individually harmless act. In comparison to the kind of disputes among neighbors and individuals that often occur in the real world, that seems both harmless and unprosecutable. Welcome to the real world.
If you piss off a lot of people for justifiable reasons (e.g., you are the author of Satanic Verses), then some concerned government may try to help you out. Otherwise, the solution is simple: don't piss off too many people.
Re:no, it is not (Score:3, Interesting)
I agree that you shouldn't piss off too many people. Believe me, I haven't shed any tears over Ralsky's fate. But the power of DOS attacks is that they can be initiated easily by motivated *individuals*. As I said on another post, it would be easy to automate what happened to Ralsky such that a single person could initiate a flood of junk mail to any specified postal address. Or maybe you could flood a town's post office with junk mail to create a diversion and then send a real nasty letter (e.g. Anthrax) t
Re:This is a serious issue (Score:3, Informative)
2 days after the transition, someone tried running 550k e-mails through his machine. His machine had a properly set up filter, and bounsed everything back, unfortunatly it knocked out his ISP who he was buying the business line out of. So now the site is down, and the is
Anonymous so no karma whoring (Score:2, Informative)
Automated Denial-of-Service Attack Using the U.S. Post Office
In December 2002, the notorious spam king Alan Ralsky gave an interview. Aside from his usual comments that antagonized spam-hating e-mail users, he mentioned his new home in West Bloomfield, Michigan. The interview was posted on Slashdot, and some enterprising reader found his address in some database. Egging each other on, the Slashdot readership subscribed him to thousands of catalogs, mailing lists, informa
Be Aware... (Score:5, Funny)
Sincerely,
Guy LeBarge
186 Rideau St.
Ottawa, ON
K1A 25U
Re:Be Aware... (Score:5, Funny)
The paper.. (Score:4, Funny)
It's Not Ironic... (Score:5, Insightful)
"...and the punishment of vice, often in an especially appropriate or ironic manner. "
So you see, this is poetic justice, not irony. That said, I'm not mad about this happening to him, is anyone else?
re: Google and DOS Attack Via US Postal Service (Score:4, Interesting)
Google now kicks back one hit - the article itself...
You really have to strip your search down before it starts returning anything.
Re: Google and DOS Attack Via US Postal Service (Score:2, Informative)
Re: Google and DOS Attack Via US Postal Service (Score:5, Funny)
Now type "somecommand" (without the quotes).
Now I know....
One variation on the same theme (Score:5, Funny)
That worked well because where we lived, enveloppes without a return address and without stamps were delivered allright, and had to be paid in full by the receiving party for the cost of shipping plus a penalty fee for not stamping the mail in the first place.
I doubt that he's ever made someone loose great amounts of money, but that must have annoyed the hell out of those people receiving junk and having to pay for it !
Maybe somebody would realize that it is serious... (Score:3, Insightful)
At least the catalogs he's getting have a real return address. I hate spam with fake sender, and I hope someone will soon enforce that domain.com must come from a domain.com mail server (or through one with authentication) and start the snowball running. If you can't send through the domain.com mail server, why should anyone believe you have the right to send mail for user@domain.com? The default "trust anyone" is one of the big signs e-mail was designed for "serious" use by "serious" people before the general public started using and abusing it.
Kjella
What about the USPS? (Score:2, Interesting)
I mean, logistically, how do they cope with it?
Re:What about the USPS? (Score:2)
rather than electronic attacks, (Score:2)
How about a digital pager DDOS attack? (Score:5, Informative)
Take:
Empirically, 1000 pagers (at 3-4 dial sequences per minute) equals about 4 days of constant calls to the vicitim's phone. How I know this is another discussion...
Of course, this was more effective when digital pagers were much, much more popular. Today, it probably wouldn't go over as well, but back in the late 80s and early 90s, it worked flawlessly. Essentially, it was distributed crank calling before the "DDOS" term was coined.
The most interesting part was that the pager companies explicitly refused to do anything about it. No tracing of calls, no attempts to halt sequential dialing, etc. Not their problem.
retaliatory postal spamming works (Score:5, Interesting)
From The Spamhaus Project (Score:5, Informative)
Seems like his "real" address is:
Alan Murray Ralsky
6747 Minnow Pond Dr,
West Bloomfield,
MI 48322
Telephone: 248-926-0688
Current email address: amr777@comcast.net
The positive side of REAL junk mail (Score:5, Funny)
Property value (Score:3, Interesting)
This calls for some testing... (Score:5, Funny)
Got Ralsky's Home Number? or Fax Number? (Score:4, Interesting)
First - get his fax number into some key marketing/questionaire databases and blamo! - Fax Spam Ahoy!
Second - Setup a couple of "Faxback" server attacks on those numbers. Faxback servers are fantastic because they're realllly dumb. Call them up on an toll-free number and order up a mess of documents to be faxed to wherever you want. The best part is that they're relentless - they will just keep on calling (up to 10 times) to try to make a connection
Its mega-annoying - especially if you get a couple of them going at once - and at 3AM
But heck
Wouldn't it be more effective... (Score:4, Interesting)
to determine the business addresses that those who actually respond to his spam would be sending their checks too and swamp those? Spammers depend on a very low operational cost model to make money. If they have to sort through 100s of items of mail for every one that has a check in it, you've just increased their cost of doing business.
If they're doing most of their business electronically, publishing a list of their SSL sites could be interesting. If we all ran something to walk the list once an hour and just make a connection to the SSL sites and leave it, they'd be effectively down. Negotiating the SSL connections has a high computing cost on their side.
If someone were to design a virus that does that and continuously checks into sites for new lists, I might actually try to get the virus.
In other words, if you want to have a real effect, go for cutting off the money.
The only one who hates us more than Ralsky (Score:3, Insightful)
Is his postman. Can you imagine all the huge stacks of spam he has to haul up to the mailbox? Geeze, I bet by now he almost has a seperate bag...
At least sign the guy up to Playboy so that the postman has something interesting to "obtain" from the sack 'o' mail he must have to deliver on a regular basis.
Some history,,,, (Score:3, Insightful)
And a previous story [slashdot.org] on slashdot.
Re:I say start a 2nd wave... (Score:2, Insightful)
Because fraud is fun? Or you just want to cause trouble for innocent business owners.
Re:Lex Talionis is a morally bankrupt code (Score:5, Interesting)
Wrong. Lex Talionis was the principle that you take NO MORE than an eye for an eye - promulgated as an "improvement" in an era where the response to losing an eye (or a purse) might be to do in the alleged perpetrator and confiscate all his worldly goods.
It's morally bankrupt, all right. But only to the extent that if the thief only loses what he stole, and has a nonzero chance of getting away with it, theft remains a profitmaking enterprise despite full enforcement of the law. So it becomes an endorsement of theft as a lifestyle. This is why there are "puntitive damages" - extra penalties to punish the perpetrator (thus making continued misbehavior a losing proposition even with imperfect law enforcement).
None of which applies here. Applying "Lex Talionis" to the spammer would mean spamming him, rather than seeking compensatory and puntitive damages.
===
Which is what they did, isn't it? B-)
===
Lex Talionis also recognizes a moral principal of equivalency, to wit: In an egalitarian society, regardless of what actions you think are fair, you have NO moral gripe if someone does to YOU what YOU did to them. If it was wrong for them to do in retaliation, it was AT LEAST as wrong for YOU to do without provocation.
===
I note, by the way, that your posting is IDENTICAL to one you made several [slashdot.org] times [slashdot.org] previously [slashdot.org] - including in the slashdot article credited with inspring the USPS DDoS attack in the first place. (And that last one I cited was under your own slashdot ID of Chuck Flynn [slashdot.org].) Given that, I felt free to repeat, almost verbatim, my response to your most recent previous missive.
The posts that recieve your canned response seem to be any suggestion about spamming the spammers. You wouldn't happen to be a spammer, would you?