Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Spam

Spammer Ducks For Cover 363

Posted by michael from the everyone-loves-spam dept.
rabidgremlin writes "The New Zealand Herald has an article about a NZ based spammer who has shut up shop after being at the receiving end of an anti-spam campaign. Good riddance I say, but some of his comments ("never intended to break any regulations" and "I'll just stick to search engines and web sites - that's still plenty of fun and money.") had me wondering if he and other spammers are as really naive as the article makes out."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Spammer Ducks For Cover More

Spammer Ducks For Cover

Comments Filter:

  • Booo-hooo (Score:5, Interesting)

    by The Bungi ( 221687 ) <thebungi@gmail.com> on Monday August 18, 2003 @07:26PM (#6728234) Homepage
    He had received more than 20 phone calls, five of them obscene. [...] he had been subscribed to a gay-dating site and his email address had been added to "tons of email lists". [...] "I have already banned my 5-year-old from answering the phone," he said.

    Well, cry me a river. I'm sure that there are 5-year olds out there whose parents were a bit concerned about their kids receiving penis-enlargement emails and links to porn websites. Oh, and "tons of email lists"... I thought everything these fucks did was "opt-in"? Does he mean to insinuate that that's not the case? Bwahaha.

    Cry me a river indeed. Maybe this is a good way to kill them off.

    • Re:Booo-hooo (Score:5, Informative)

      by The Bungi ( 221687 ) <thebungi@gmail.com> on Monday August 18, 2003 @07:33PM (#6728290) Homepage
      Oh, and here's [google.com] one of the abuse-sightings posts that probably did him in (Google thread).
    • Yes, that was rich - "20 phone calls, five of them obscene." He sent 100 million (!) messages a day, ALL OF THEM OBSCENE.

      What really saddens me about this story, though, is finding out that someone like this has children.

      • Re:Booo-hooo (Score:3, Funny)

        by Quarters ( 18322 )
        What really saddens me about this story, though, is finding out that someone like this has children.

        Is that because he has the capability to raise more people with his ammoral views or is it because it proves that spammers get to have sex while UNIX using geeks don't?

  • Old sayings (Score:3, Insightful)

    by crmartin ( 98227 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @07:26PM (#6728238)
    1) Never underestimate the power of human stupidity.
    2) Never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by stupidity.

  • yeah... (Score:3, Funny)

    by edrugtrader ( 442064 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @07:27PM (#6728239) Homepage
    and how does this guy plan on marketing his new websites?

    "well, i figure i'll just use my vast email lists and invite everyone to check them out... that can't be illegal, can it?"

    • Re:yeah... (Score:4, Funny)

      by karnal ( 22275 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @07:42PM (#6728349)
      Quote:

      that can't be illegal, can it?"

      --
      WANT TO BUY ILLEGAL DRUGS ONLINE? - EDRUGTRADER.COM! [edrugtrader.com]

      Wow.

      **lameness filter bypass**

    • As seen on TV (Score:3, Informative)

      by Alien54 ( 180860 )
      and how does this guy plan on marketing his new websites?

      You obviously have not seen the late night informercials advertising how you can have your very own internet marketing business, where you can make money fast in only a few hours per day.

      Yes, you can be a spammer [tvadvertisingcompany.com] - if you sign up todayu [tvadv.com]!

      Scary, No?

    • Re:yeah... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by The Wicked Priest ( 632846 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @08:50PM (#6728806)
      He was talking about gaming the search engines -- you know, that silly shit where scores of irrelevant words that are likely to show up in someone's search are added to a page in an attempt to get it more views. This is what he aims to fall back on, since spam backfired on him. Honest work is right out.

  • 20 phone calls? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Champaign ( 307086 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @07:28PM (#6728253) Homepage Journal
    Wow, the guys sends millions of e-mail messages, then he closes up shop after getting 20 unsolicited phone calls.

    Guess that's what you call "can dish it out, can't take it"...
    • I want to sell his kids som penis enlargemtn pills.

      Spam, telemarketing, whats the difference? Why are you so offended? My 8 year old neice gets those e-mails.

      • Re:Whats his number? (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward
        I think it's:
        Atkinson Shane

        2 O'Neill Ave Harewood Belfast

        0-3-323 6484

        But don't call him up and try to annoy him... that would be unethical!

    • There was much more than that. I'd list it, but it's mentioned in the paragraphs following the part you chose to read.

    • Re:20 phone calls? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by GammaTau ( 636807 ) <jni@iki.fi> on Monday August 18, 2003 @07:56PM (#6728427) Homepage Journal

      Wow, the guys sends millions of e-mail messages, then he closes up shop after getting 20 unsolicited phone calls.

      Actually that sounds like a good strategy. If even a tiny group of all the people who receive spam would give feedback by making a phone call, I think it could make many spammers to reconsider their business. Assuming that you get the right person on the line, it will take them a few seconds or minutes per each caller (as opposed to a mail bounce or a mail reply that won't ever be read by a real person) plus they will get a fair share of verbal abuse they deserve.

      • Re:20 phone calls? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by kudos200 ( 698269 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @08:21PM (#6728590)
        what if, instead, everyone called collect? the phone would still ring and become an incredible annoyance, but at no cost to us, the poor, proletariat spammees.

        i know i don't feel like paying just to be an annoyance, but maybe i'd do it for free.

        seriously, there's got to be a way to make spam end. i sure hope so.

      • Re:20 phone calls? (Score:5, Funny)

        by imnoteddy ( 568836 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @08:56PM (#6728850)
        If even a tiny group of all the people who receive spam would give feedback by making a phone call, I think it could make many spammers to reconsider their business.

        I have an email filter rule that looks for toll-free numbers and puts them in a folder. Every morning I call the (usually 2 or 3) that have come in the last 24 hours and say politely, "I got your email about (whatever) and just wanted to let you know I'm not interested" and then hang up. No abuse, just waste their time and probably confuse them.

        • Re:20 phone calls? (Score:5, Informative)

          by GordoSlasher ( 243738 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @10:47PM (#6729648)
          When you call a toll-free number, the recipient gets your phone number even if you have caller ID blocking. This opens you up for receiving telemarketing calls. Even if you're on the Do Not Call list, the fact that you initiated a call to them might give them the right to call you under the guise of having a business relationship.

          The best thing to do with those toll-free numbers is to call them from a pay phone. The recipient pays an extra surcharge for calls from pay phones, and they can't track you.

      • Calling up spammers (Score:5, Funny)

        by billstewart ( 78916 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @09:58PM (#6729303) Journal
        If one person called up a spammer's toll-free number and sang them the Monty Python Spam Song or Weird Al Yankovic's Spam song, they might think it was a bit odd, but if a whole bunch of people started calling up, singing them a spam song, and hanging up, they might start to think it was a _movement_.

        And if one person called up their toll-free number and left them a phone number they didn't want to talk to, like their ISP's phone number, or Interpol's, or the FBI's anonymous tip line, or their local police office, or their country's government's people-selling-bad-medicine bureaucracy's complaint line, or other spammers' toll-free numbers, or other spammers' ISP contact numbers, they might also start to think they were getting slashdotted.

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @07:28PM (#6728257)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • hmm... we made the same joke at the same time... I think you're my comedy twin...
    • >> "he had received more than 20 phone calls,
      >> five of them obscene"

      According to our records Mr Atkinson had choosen to opt-in on recieving such telephone communications, if he wishes to be removed please have him send an e-mail to an address that doesn't exist at someone elses organization.

  • Text. (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Since the server was slow even when It first appeared.

    Spammer ducks for cover as details published on web

    2003-08-19 - By JUHA SAARINEN

    A New Zealander who sent billions of junk emails out every day has shut his business after his personal details were posted on the web.

    Shane Atkinson - whose business is known as spamming - said the barrage of abuse made him worry about the safety of his children.

    His identity as the man behind millions of spam messages promoting penis enlargement pills was revealed i

  • 20 phonecalls??? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Grimlock88 ( 687600 )
    this guy peed his pants becasuse he received 20 phone calls, 5 obscene. unless he forgot a couple zeros there, this should encourage everyone to call the phone numbers of spammers they seeposted. to think that 20 lousy phone calls would actually make a difference. hell i get 20 phone calls a week from telemarketers, and this guy is complaining. but nevertheless, kudos to the antispammers out there clearly they are making a difference.

  • Oh, this is so NOT a good idea . . . (Score:5, Funny)

    by Brad Cossette ( 319687 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @07:31PM (#6728279)
    You realize, Mr. Atkinson, that by backing off now you're encouraging us to continue this kind of behavior on other spammers . . .

    In a truely please-don't-blink moment, the man who claimed to send out 100 million messages a day on such wonderful things as penis-enlarging pills complains about receiving 5 obscene phone calls . . . they were probably just disappointed customers. ;)

  • so instead of spamming.. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gl4ss ( 559668 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @07:34PM (#6728294) Homepage Journal
    .. he will devote his time to making linkfarms and other bogus websites with zero content? yeah that sounds like a plan to feed your family.

    for the one's that don't know, it involves making sites that attract clicks(by looking like there could be for example emulation roms downloadable, or pron from there) from for example google and link to other sites of the same author to get the authors sites up in the search, thus polluting the search service with meaningless s**t making some fields of 'research' quite impossible to search with google without scripts for filtering that kind of stuff out of the results (doesn't need that much of a work with googleapi, and there's just few of these assholes making these sites and they tend to use the same referral id's on their ads on all of their sites making it a bit easier to filter them this filtering on client side needs a lot of bandwith though,and isn't that fast, obviously).

    i'm wondering if somebody has made a decent easy to use program/scripts to use BIG blacklists with google (i hacked something together some time ago but it's not exactly easy to use for everyday stuff)?
    • Actually PHP-Nuke.org explits this flaw.

      Go to google and search for "god". They will be either 1 or 2.

      They did this by having other sites link to them in reference to god, and their intent was obviously not malicious, but it shows how easily these rankings are manipulated once you know the system.

      I learned this reading an article about how teoma.com is now one of the top search engines (they are now owned by askjeeves).
      • I think it's because the default superuser account on phpnuke is god. So god posts a lot of stuff on a lot on phpnuke sites that haven't been that modified.
    • who cares about google spamming i want some scripts for filtering out run-on sentences!

  • Really as naive ? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Crashmarik ( 635988 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @07:35PM (#6728297)
    please

    Do you spam ?
    Have you even considered it as an option ?

    If you said no its because you posess ethichs and a conscience. Congratulations and my sympathy you have things the typical spammer does not.

  • spammers do seem to drink their own kool-aid (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bennomatic ( 691188 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @07:37PM (#6728317) Homepage
    I've had SPAM-vertisers try to sign up the company I work for as a client, and I've had them try to convince me that it's OK to advertise that way. One guy got really aggrivated when I tried to explain that when it takes 20 minutes a day to delete all the viagra ads you get, 20 minutes for the mortgage ads, etc..., that very very very few people actually feel that they have been provided with a service when they receive SPAM e-mail.

    I don't think, for the most part, that they are naive in the classical sense of the word; I think that they are closer to delusional. They have been given all the information they need, and they have chosen the interpretation which is going to let them do what they want to do.

    However, I have seen a couple of occasions where a SPAM has been followed a couple of days later by an apology, where it truly does appear that someone has had a break-through experience and now understands that SPAM is a bad idea, where they truly did not understand that previously.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
      Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • One down... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by CoffeeDad ( 317394 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @07:40PM (#6728336) Journal
    The problem is that *real* spamlords sell/rent/MLM convenient little subscription kits, services, tools and utilities that enable mindless drooling head-bobbers like this to join the ranks of spammers. No way of telling now, whether it was just another spammerzombie, or one of the real kingpins. Shoot 'em all, I say.

    -- Don't just delete spam, delete spammers. join SpammerHunters [spammerhunters.com]

  • I can help... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Erik_the_Awful ( 675368 ) * on Monday August 18, 2003 @07:41PM (#6728346) Journal
    ...if only someone would post Shane Atkinson's Address and Phone Number. I don't think 20 phone calls is enough. I think Shane Atkinson needs to experience the power of "internet karma..."

    I'll be watching for any details you might post.
    -EtA

    • Here it is (Score:4, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 18, 2003 @08:17PM (#6728569)
      From my whitepages:

      Atkinson Shane
      2 O'Neill Ave Harewood Belfast
      0-3-323 6484

      And that's in Christchurch, New Zealand.

    • Re:I can help... (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      www.whitepages.co.nz

      There are 4 "S Atkinson"'s listed for Christchurch. Unfortunatly none of them are in the same suberb as the POBOX listed in his domains contact details. However is cellular phone is. However that cellular number is a pre-pay number, so odds are it's been replaced by now.

      P.O. Box 36289 Merivale
      Christchurch, NZ 8030
      NZ
      064211252557

  • Video of interview with the spammer (Score:5, Informative)

    by waynemcdougall ( 631415 ) <slashdot@codeworks.gen.nz> on Monday August 18, 2003 @07:44PM (#6728357) Homepage
    Mr Atkinson was interview on a 'current affairs' show on the state broadcaster.

    What I find most notable is that he can barely suppress the smirk [IMO] when he says he didn't do anything wrong, and also when he said he was going to stop.

    RealVideo can be found here: http://www.tvone.co.nz/programmes/holmes/ [tvone.co.nz]

    • From the video:
      I think that there's a very small percentage of people who've gone over the top.

      He recieved between 10 amd 20 orders per day.. that's about 1 order per 5million emails sent.

      I'd say that one order per 5 million emails sent would also classify as 'a very small percentage of people'. He's now suffering from the same statistical effect that he's been exploiting -- In a world of 6 billion people, there really is about one born every minute -- whether it's a sucker or just somebody who's very

  • ...AFLAC?

    (*ducks* for cover, get it, oh i murder myself...)

  • But on the bright side... (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    ...this guy must have the biggest penis in the world.

  • Keep in mind (Score:4, Insightful)

    by AndroidCat ( 229562 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @07:51PM (#6728400) Homepage
    had me wondering if he and other spammers are as really naive as the article makes out.

    Rule #1: Spammers always lie.
    Rule #2: When a spammer seems to be telling the truth, see rule #1.

    • So if a spammer "I am a spammer", it means that they're not? And if you mistakenly accuse someone of being a spammer (hey, it happens sometimes) and they deny it, their denial means nothing because they're a spammer and therefore lying?

      Damn, this problem is more difficult than I thought. There's mass stupidity on *both* sides.

      Cheers
      -b

  • Change of Heart? (Score:5, Informative)

    by z3ngine ( 635087 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @07:51PM (#6728402)

    This latest report shows a big change of heart from his comments of a few days ago:

    "If you don't want to receive spam, don't connect to the Internet, or don't have an e-mail address." - Shane Atkinson, 15th Aug 2003.

    See the full story here [stuff.co.nz] [stuff.co.nz].


    64% of all statistics are totally useless.
    z3ngine.
    • by the same logic

      if u dont want obscene phone calls disconnect your phone or dont have a phone line.

      so start calling ;-)


    • If he's sincere, I'll bet it was the implied threat against his family that got to him... probably sent his little conscience a-flutter.

      I dearly hope no well-meaning geek actually threatened this guy's family; that's really way over the line, folks. The probability is that the avalanche of malice he received made him wonder what someone possessed of such hatred might do... what lengths they would go to...

      Good riddance... I hope he's a better man because of it (though I won't hold my breath).

    • Re:Change of Heart? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Forgotten ( 225254 )
      If he's really making tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars per month in gross revenue, do you really think he's going to stop because some people are annoyed at him? Would you, honestly? Let alone if you were someone willing to begin the activity in the first place?

      Also, given that his business consists of netting suckers with semi-fraudulent claims (carefully not reproduced on the actual product), do you think he'd have a single qualm that would prevent him from lying about whether he's going to quit?

  • Somebody, please (Score:5, Funny)

    by Gherald ( 682277 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @07:54PM (#6728418) Journal
    Post his e-mail address and phone number!

    No really, this is for legitemate business. I represent a major supplier of penis enlargment pills, and I just want to offer him my company's services.... ten thousand times per day.

  • Vigilante justice... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ktakki ( 64573 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @08:04PM (#6728475) Homepage Journal
    From the article:
    New Zealand does not have specific anti-spam laws.

    I used to think that comparing the Internet to the Wild West was just as bad as that "superhighway" metaphor, but lately I've come to realize how appropriate it's come to be.

    You've got a legal vacuum for the most part, considering that most law enforcement authorities won't take action until a certain monetary dollar amount of damage has been done (with some notable exceptions such as child pornography). Thus, the medium is dominated by penis-enlarging snake oil salesmen, grizzled dataminers trying to pass off fool's gold as the real thing, men in black hats, men in white hats, Indians with H1B visas (yeah, I know...), and e-mail programs infected with smallpox.

    I only beat the Net Rush of '94 by a couple of years, but I've heard some of the oldtimers tell tales of yore, when the whole community would get together to raise a barn or wire a school with CAT-5, or how you could always rely on your neighbor to help mend a fence or patch sendmail.

    "Round up a posse, boys. We'll head 'em off at the router..."

    Yeah, it's a stretch. I know. But everytime I look in that Deadman's Gulch I call my inbox, my trigger finger starts to itch and I yearn for a nice .45-70 Henry rifle.

    k.

    • Re:Vigilante justice... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by NewtonsLaw ( 409638 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @09:59PM (#6729310)
      You've got a legal vacuum for the most part, considering that most law enforcement authorities won't take action until a certain monetary dollar amount of damage has been done (with some notable exceptions such as child pornography).

      Actually, the NZ government has described the spam problem as "too hard" from a legislative perspective.

      Instead of working in the interests of its citizens to develop a set of laws that will penalize local spammers, the NZ government has now decided it will more or less just adopt any anti-spam laws produce in Australia.

      Given the appalling track record Aussie legislators when it comes to regulating the Net I thing the cure might be worse than the complaint.

      It looks as if NZ's politicians are just too busy enjoying their perks to actually do something positive about the problem.

      In the meantime, if you show a picture of a naked couple having sex to an 8-year-old on a street corner you'll get arrested and thrown in the slammer. Send thousands of 8-year-olds the same picture via email while promoting your porno website via spam and you're in the clear.

      NZ has 4 million uncounted sheep -- they're the ones who never seem to call the government to account when they fail to perform.
    • Here is the quintessential humour piece about the absurdity of the "Information Superhighway" metaphor. I haven't attributed it, because the first five citations of it in Google list five unique authors. (If anyone can identify the real author, let me know.)

      There it is again. Some clueless fool talking about the "Information Superhighway". They don't know didley about the Net. It's nothing like a superhighway. That's a rotten metaphor.

      Suppose the metaphor ran in the other direction. Suppose the highwa

  • Smut to children not a crime? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gbnewby ( 74175 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @08:09PM (#6728505) Homepage
    This is something I don't understand. I hope someone can explain or point me to an explanation of what I will try to describe. We all know there are very few laws against spam, and jurisdiction problems even if such laws exist.

    Explain to me why it's not easy to demonstrate that someone that puts explicit spam in a child's mailbox isn't committing some sort of other crime. I don't mean "get a good mortgage rate," I mean some of the bad porn related stuff we all see, at least periodically.

    So, hypothetically, let's say it's against the law in California to send some gang-bang smut ad to young Timmy. What is preventing the district attorneys, Timmy's mom, etc. from getting an injunction against John Doe? From a subpoena being issued?

    Forget for now that tracing back the originator is tough. I'm asking, can't they be charged with a crime in, say, California? THEN, if they're discovered, OR if they ever travel to California & get caught (say, for a speeding ticket), they'll be in deep doo-doo.

    This costs money, takes time, and doesn't find the spammers, I agree. But it will make a spammer who wants to go to a conference or travel think twice....and maybe open a whole new dot-com business opportunity: bounty hunters for the charged-but-not-yet-caught spammers.

    Someone please explain why these people aren't guilty of crimes that are not spam specific, and why they can't be charged in jurisdictions where the spam is received.
  • subscribing after getting the following: The Ultimate Bulk Email Solution Has Finally Arrived! If you have a product, service, information or a message you would like to get out to millions of potential buyers, then this is the only way to go. No other form of marketing can compare. You may already have a web site. If you do, then you know that search engine submissions don't work and paying for an Internet classified ad doesn't work either. Also, if you are already sending email messages, but are having t
  • I wonder if he's ever got spam from his own company?

  • Good Job! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by corgicorgi ( 692903 ) <corgi_fun AT yahoo DOT com> on Monday August 18, 2003 @08:17PM (#6728566) Homepage
    Good job on publishing this guy's name. Now he tasted his own medicine and closed shop.

    This is a great way to get rid of spammers. People should be personally responsible for their own actions.

  • Naive? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Squidgee ( 565373 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @08:23PM (#6728600)
    Naive? I doubt it. More likely those comments were to paint him as a kind man; so that way, he doesn't look like the scumbag he is.

    This happens a lot, actually; criminals do it all the time...

  • legality vs. morality (Score:4, Insightful)

    by hankaholic ( 32239 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @08:40PM (#6728733)
    Isn't it amazing that people like this seem to equate legality with morality?

    There are lots of things which one can do which are legal but immoral, or moral but illegal. "I thought it was legal" is never an acceptable excuse for doing something which you know to be immoral.

  • He got off lightly (Score:5, Interesting)

    by The Famous Brett Wat ( 12688 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @08:41PM (#6728736) Homepage Journal
    Only 20 or so angry phone calls? I've had my personal phone numbers included in "Joe Job" spam (where a spammer deliberately impersonates you in order to cause you grief), and my phone rang off the hook all day with irate callers. Bit of an uneven playing field, wouldn't you say? I've never sent any spam at all, and I've had it far worse.

  • Yes I am sure many are Naive. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by jellomizer ( 103300 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @08:57PM (#6728853)
    wondering if he and other spammers are as really naive as the article makes out.

    It is quite possible that they are that naive a lot of them may not be on every mailing list on the planet then they get a couple of Spam mails then it seems like a good idea. I doubt that many of them don't realize the scale of the problem. As well many Spammers are the same type of people that read and fall for Spam. So they actually think they can make good money at it and many do. But like with many other things people tend to fail to stop and analysis what they do on a grand scheme of things.
    If I had no moral objection to it spamming seems like an interesting area of Work that is really interesting at an intellectual level. Working on methods to optimize bandwidth to maximize the amount of email out. Finding a method of hiding your true identity but allowing people to contact you to purchase. Understanding the limits of computer laws to allow yourself to use other computers without people knowing but still be legal. Finding ways around filters and other things. It would be interesting work in an intellectual level, but so would seeing a child grow up in a completely isolated of any nurture to see what are the true human instinct and what is what we learn. But there are a lot of people who have a hard time understanding more then themselfs and forget to see what they are doing is wrong.

  • right... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by tkill ( 698961 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @09:25PM (#6729007)
    ".. NZ based spammer who has shut up shop..."


    thats just what he wants us think. He is probably just buying time to find out how his details were traced and how to restart operations again...only this time making sure his privacy remains protected.....

    'The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist,' -the Usual Suspects

  • Think of it this way... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by jamesh ( 87723 ) on Monday August 18, 2003 @09:29PM (#6729032)
    ... if he got caught/found out, then he probably is just naive. Any who knew what they were doing wouldn't get caught.

  • Oh great... (Score:3, Funny)

    by taped2thedesk ( 614051 ) * on Monday August 18, 2003 @09:40PM (#6729133)
    "I'll just stick to search engines and web sites - that's still plenty of fun and money."
    Does that mean when I screw up and type www.gogole.com, instead of just a search engine, I'll get a penis enlargement ad?

  • Interesting (Score:4, Funny)

    by dtfinch ( 661405 ) * on Monday August 18, 2003 @10:36PM (#6729587) Journal
    It's been 20 days since I've received a penile enlargement ad, though I've received nearly 700 spams on different subjects over that period.

    Could it be that one guy was responsible for most of those ads?

    Ack! I almost clicked submit having left the word "ad" out of the first paragraph. Glad I caught it.

  • So hes stopped, now clean up the mess (Score:3, Interesting)

    by thogard ( 43403 ) on Tuesday August 19, 2003 @12:47AM (#6730203) Homepage
    Christchurch is a small town and I will run into the jerk at some time in the future and he owes me for every mesage my spam filters had to nuke. He better name every one of his "associates" and do it soon.

    Also I'll put up NZ$500 for the 1st person that can provide information to the proper authorites that leads to his arrest and jail time for this jerk. He broke NZ law by selling unlicensed drugs. If you want to claim it, get in touch with me. Any chance we can get this guy extradited someplace where he won't get a slap on the wrist? Maybe the US where peddling adult products to minors as well as selling illegal drugs will show the world that spaming is a bad idea.

  • Calling out the lawyers (again) (Score:4, Informative)

    by qtp ( 461286 ) on Tuesday August 19, 2003 @01:33AM (#6730351) Journal
    Uppage there are a few of the expected calls for government regulation of email that we see every time there is a story about spam, and there are the obligitory anecdotes about the hundreds of spam emails that some poor souls find every day in thier inbox.

    So here is my usual post about how asking the government to regulate everything is a bad idea, and how I have little sympathy for the poor saps who are getting flooded with thousands of spam emails a day that makes it difficult for them to see the one or two legitimate emails that thier friends might send them each year.

    First law. Bad idea because it won't work. As long as there are different countries with seperate governments that have differing attitudes towards the internet, commerce, and law it will be impossible to legislate spam out of existance. That is not to say that I am supporting the idea of one government rulling all peoples or that I am advocating any sort if international treaty on regulating email and the internet.

    Far from it.

    What I am saying is there are good methods of reducing the flow of spam to your in-box to a trickle, possibly blocking the spam flow completely.

    Use a provider that is as concerned about stopping the spam as you are. That means no AOL, no MSN, no Hotmail, etc. These companies are notorious for not only allowing you to get spam flooded, but for allowing thier customers to send spam and not discontiuing accounts that are being used as fake "reply to" and "from" addresses. There are other companies that are just as irresponsible as the ones I mentioned, so you should not think that I am saying that these companies are the only ones that should be avoided.

    If you like using the same email and access provider (I've been hijacking friends access accounts for years now), then you should know that smaller access providers often are more responsive to user's (knowlegable and legitimate) complaints than large companies. As an added bonus, thier access rates tend to be low, and they are as if not more reliable than thier corporate competitors.

    If you like using a separate provider for email, ask around, do some searches, and choose one that has effective filtering/blocking of spam included in thier basic package.

    You can filter the mail yourself with one of the many spam blocking services or filters that are readily available on the internet. Here are some links to some of the blacklists and filters that I know about:

    ORDB [ordb.org]

    MAPS [mail-abuse.org]

    junkfilter [zer0.org]

    Bogofilter [sourceforge.net]

    SpamCop [spamcop.net]

    SpamBouncer [spambouncer.org]

    There are others, some services are free, some charge money. If you are going to use a filter on your own machine that is not part of a service, I highly reccomend that you stick with Free Software so you can learn something about how it works.

    You should learn as much about the problem and potential solutions as possible by reading articles about spam that may be not quite as sensational as the currently popular "spammer hunting" genre, but are a little richer in detail and technique. Here [ibm.com] is a good primer including some good links, and there's lots of good info on dealing with spam around the web [google.com].

    You should attempt to encourage your provider to take an active role in helping users avoid spam troubles, either by providing information on how users can filter spam on thier own machines, by providing spam blocking/filtering service, or by allowing users to install thier own .procmailrc in thier shell account (if they provide thier subscribers with a shell acc

  • The Lumber Cartel (tinlc) is not impressed. (Score:3, Informative)

    by Agent R ( 684654 ) on Tuesday August 19, 2003 @03:12AM (#6730711)
    "He said that since the article was published, anti-spam activists had been "having a field day". He had received more than 20 phone calls, five of them obscene."

    Obscene ones? Must be "thank-you" kisses from his penis enlargement customers.

    His personal information, street address and phone numbers were "plastered all over the web". The article also led to rackshack.com, the US web service that hosts Mr Atkinson's servers, being entered in the Spam Early Warning System list, which many networks use for blocking email traffic.

    I mentioned this before. Just remember folks.. SPEWS has your name, number, address, change-of-address, time when you eat, when you sleep, and when you realize your Preparation H is not working.

    "Rackshack gave notice that it would shut down two of Mr Atkinson's servers because of the listing, forcing him to move the servers to a different network."

    So Rackshack.. exactly how many thousands of abuse reports did you receive and ignore before SPEWS tossed you into the dungeon? I think you love your pink contracts a bit too much.

    saying that he "never intended to break any regulations".

    Rule #1. Rule #2.

    "I sort of feel good now about stopping this," he said.

    Rule #1. Rule #2.

    "I'll just stick to search engines and web sites - that's still plenty of fun and money."

    Rule #1. Rule #2. Rule #3. Russell's Corollary.

    Please use your favorite search engine to review the "Rules of Spam" or go here. [killaspamm...christ.com]

  • "I have already banned my 5-year-old... (Score:3, Funny)

    by EzInKy ( 115248 ) on Tuesday August 19, 2003 @03:15AM (#6730723)
    But Daddy you told me you provided a very much needed service to the world, why would you be ashamed to let me here about exactly what it is?

  • yeah, right (Score:3, Interesting)

    by sootman ( 158191 ) on Tuesday August 19, 2003 @10:16AM (#6733124) Homepage Journal
    ...had me wondering if he and other spammers are as really naive as the article makes out.

    No fscking way. I'll believe they weren't aware of anything as they forged headers and return addresses while looking for open relays, changing ISPs every 10 minutes, and paying ISPs 3x the going rate to look the other way for 24 hours as soon as someone believes that I didn't really mean to rob a bank, I just found a gun, happened to wave it around, didn't notice the teller giving me $600k in cash, and didn't realize that I was driving that fast and that all those lights and sirens were for me--I just figured they wanted someone else.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Experience has proved that some people indeed know everything." -- Russell Baker

Close