[SC-Help] Re: Windows xp spam question
John E. Malmberg
wb8tyw at qsl.network
Thu Oct 13 09:38:40 EDT 2005
Stephen Johnston wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Does spam travel across different users in Windows XP? In other words, if
> somebody gets my email address and starts spamming me, will they also spam
> another user account on the same xp configuration?
Spammers will mix and match names and domains from e-mail addresses
found on the internet and possibly on machines infected with worms.
So if a if you have usernames that are in common use, and one user in a
domain gets a spam, chances are that the others will eventually get some
spam.
If a machine on your network is infected with a virus, the spammers and
other malware writers may have a copy of every document that was on that
computer or the users of that computer were authorized to access.
Note that virus and spyware scanners only find previously discovered
infections, not all possible infections. Such scanners are usually 8
hours behind the latest discovered worm in their definitions.
Depending on a virus scanner is like leaving your house unlocked and
depending on a burglar to trip an alarm that they are looking for.
The web browsers on many machines will give out a ton of personal
information on request of a website.
If the e-mail is HTML enabled, and automatically opens external links
when you read the e-mail, then it is a gold mine to the spammers, as
this has confirmed that their e-mail was read, confirms that they got
through your network spam filtering, and have reached an exploitable
computer.
For keeping spam out, the only thing that has been found to cause many
networks to clean up security problems or deliberate hosting of spam is
when all e-mail from those addresses is refused by either a number of
small networks or a large ISP or network.
This practice has been going on for so long, it is rare that an I.P.
address (considering all the internet) that sends a noticeable amount of
spam will actually be sending any real e-mail.
Because of that, the use of conservative blocking lists to keep spam out
of an e-mail server is far more accurate in both blocking and false
positives than any system that tries to content analyze all mail and
separate the spam from the real mail.
The difference is that in most cases, when a real mail is stopped by a
blocking list, the sender usually gets notified by their mail server.
This visible indication horrifies some people who would rather shoot
messengers than know about security / configuration problems in a mail
server and get the real problem fixed.
With user spam filters or most content type spam filters, when a real
e-mail is detected as spam it is silently deleted with both the sender
and the receiver ignorant of the problem.
For some strange reason, that is the currently the preferred way of
doing commercial and corporate spam filtering, where potentially
important e-mails will be tossed with out a trace.
With no spam filtering at all, real mails are even more likely to get
lost in the mess either from human errors or from mail server/network
overloads. Again because the problems are usually invisible, they
appear to be less than in the case that gives a true indication of what
is going on.
-John
wb8tyw at qsl.network
Personal Opinion Only
More information about the SpamCop-Help
mailing list