Thanks, Jeff, for the explanation, and to all in our IT department for your
hard work - especially recently. The forces of cyber-darkness are legion, we
know. And tricky, too.

Greg O'Dea
--
Dr. Gregory O'Dea
UC Foundation Associate Professor of English
Assistant Director of University Honors
The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
Chattanooga, TN 37403  USA




> From: Jeff Kell <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2003 12:43:03 -0400
> To: Gregory O'Dea <[log in to unmask]>
> Cc: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [UTCSTAFF] Spam
>
> Gregory O'Dea wrote:
>> Mike and All:
>> Yes, certainly. Since the switch to Onenet, I'd say my receipt of spam has
>> increased 200-300 percent, if not more. I often get four or five offers a
>> day for the same exact product (and the spam catalog is not slight, filled
>> as it is with fat reducers and finance expanders, skin softeners and
>> herbal...um...rigidifiers - you name it). I don't know for sure that the
>> move to onenet is responsible, but it might be worth some investigation.
>
> The reason for the increase in SPAM is two-fold:
>
> * Spammers are getting smarter.  Most new viruses come complete with an
> "open proxy" kit that turns the victimized machine into a spamming
> slave.  Traceback of the spam after-the-fact points to the victimized
> machine.  We have had at least two machines on campus abused in that
> very way.
>
> * The number of proxies is astounding.  Previous spam filters in use at
> UTC amounted to ~14000 lines to cover the spam sources.  The number of
> open proxies is estimated to be ~240000, growing, and on-the-move.
> The spammers divide their payload among a few thousand proxies and can
> stay "below the radar" for a time before being detected.
>
> Prior to the OneNet problems of last week, we began testing a proxy
> "blacklist" approach that was unavailable before OneNet.  Initially it
> was a success, but with the recent problems with OneNet mail we have had
> to delay further testing until the baseline system is working well.
> I think it was the sudden withdrawal of the recent spam controls that
> made things look much worse all of a sudden.  But then again, pick up
> any news article or press clipping about spam and you will hear the same
> story -- spam is getting worse -- period.
>
> If you can bear with us over the next few days we fully intend to
> reactivate the newer spam filtering available in OneNet mail.
> Meanwhile, the traditional filters are still amazingly effective, even
> if it doesn't look that way.  We turn away tens of thousands of delivery
> attempts a day that you DON'T see.
>
> OneNet has been around since March.  It was not the cause of the
> increase, but it can provide assistance in preventing spam (as soon as
> that testing can begin again).
>
> Jeff
>
>