Re: [Asrg] request for review for a non FUSSP proposal

Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> Tue, 23 June 2009 06:21 UTC

Return-Path: <vesely@tana.it>
X-Original-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1E5228C276 for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 23:21:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.819
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.819 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xFKroPMJYi5u for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 23:21:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wmail.tana.it (mail.tana.it [62.94.243.226]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D4CD3A6E3F for <asrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 23:21:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mach-4.tana.it (mach-4.tana.it [194.243.254.189]) (AUTH: CRAM-MD5 ale@tana.it, TLS: TLS1.0, 256bits, RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1) by wmail.tana.it with esmtp; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 08:21:56 +0200 id 00000000005DC02F.000000004A407484.000039BC
Message-ID: <4A407499.1030401@tana.it>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 08:22:17 +0200
From: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Macintosh/20090302)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
References: <4A3DFC91.2090506@telmon.org> <4A3F9B2B.8020603@tana.it> <4A3FF3AF.9030401@telmon.org> <4A3FF7F1.1060705@nd.edu> <2CCA5AC9-154F-494B-B9BB-63D83AC4393C@blighty.com> <20090622215254.GB2137@gsp.org>
In-Reply-To: <20090622215254.GB2137@gsp.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Asrg] request for review for a non FUSSP proposal
X-BeenThere: asrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/asrg>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 06:21:42 -0000

Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 02:37:16PM -0700, Steve Atkins wrote:
>> Also any actual usage of an email address leads to it being in a mailbox
>> on a Windows machine. That, in turn, leads to it being sprayed all over
>> the internet by viruses, and hence harvested by spammers.
>>
>> I have lots of uniquely created addresses that were provably not guessed
>> that get a lot of spam via that route.
> 
> Precisely correct, and worth emphasizing.  I've gone so far as to
> deliberately embed non-guessable addresses in the headers of single
> messages sent to single recipients -- and have subsequently received spam
> at some of them.  And of course addresses used repeatedly with multiple
> recipients tend to attract spam much quicker, since such usage increases
> the probability that the addresses will show up on a compromised system.

And are you sure their machines were actually infected? I 
experienced spam after sending to organizations that should be 
secured, e.g. nic.es. As I wrote a few minutes ago, I recognized the 
connection by timely receiving spam in the relevant foreign 
language. My guess is that spammers have also other means to sniff 
mail traffic.