<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
	xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
	<channel>
		<title>CircleID: Spam</title>
		<link>http://www.circleid.com/</link>
		<description>Latest Spam related postings on CircleID</description>
		<dc:language>en</dc:language>
		<dc:rights>Copyright 2008, unless where otherwise noted.</dc:rights>
		<dc:date>2008-08-29T10:37:00-08:00</dc:date>
		
		
		<item>
			<title>First Letter of Your Email Address May Be a Factor in Your Spam Volume</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/first_letter_email_address_spam/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/first_letter_email_address_spam/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Everyone knows that some people get more spam than others, but new research shows that it may have something to do with the first letter of your email address. Richard Clayton, a security researcher at the University of Cambridge in the U.K., says he found evidence that the more common the first letter in your email address is, the more spam you get: in other words, alice@company.com typically gets a higher volume of spam than quincy@company.com, or zach@company.com. He says that's simply because there are more combinations of names that begin with "A" than with "Q" or "Z." <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/first_letter_email_address_spam/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-29T10:37:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>spam</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Spam Fighters: Revenge is a Dish Best Left in the Freezer and Forgotten</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/88214_spam_fighters_revenge/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/88214_spam_fighters_revenge/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[There's no denying that the fight against spam attracts a lot of crazies, both pro- and anti-spam. One of the common attributes of the anti-spam kooks is that they often think in terms of somehow taking revenge against the spammers -- regardless of who else gets hurt along the way. In 2005, that revenge came in the form of BlueFrog, a service which purported to launch what can only be called denial of service attacks against spammers' web sites... This week, a company called SpamZa was hurriedly making a similar mistake... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/88214_spam_fighters_revenge/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-21T16:47:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>cyberattack</category><category>spam</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Lies, Damn Lies, and Anti&#45;Spam Vendor Press Releases</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/88212_damn_lies_anti_spam_vendors/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/88212_damn_lies_anti_spam_vendors/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[There's a lot of chatter about a recent study purporting to show that 29.1% of internet users has bought something from spam. <a href="http://www.itwire.com/content/view/20121/53/">As ITWire reported</a>, "Marshal were not only interested in how many people were purchasing from a spam source, but also what goods and services they were buying. Perhaps less surprisingly this revealed that sex and drugs sell well online." But at downloadsquad, Lee Mathews <a href="http://www.downloadsquad.com/2008/08/20/survey-people-buy-from-spam-email/">discovered the shocking truth</a>: "the survey only involved 600 people." <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/88212_damn_lies_anti_spam_vendors/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-21T14:32:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>spam</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Studies Indicate 29% of Internet Users Buying Goods from Spam Emails</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/internet_users_buying_from_spam/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/internet_users_buying_from_spam/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[29 percent of Internet users have purchased goods from spam emails, according to new research by Internet security company Marshal. The most commonly purchased items include sexual enhancement pills, software, adult material and luxury items such as watches, jewellery and clothing. Marshal's research, which asked 'What purchases have you made from spam,' attracted 622 responses with 29.1 percent indicating that they had made purchases. The poll showed the proportion of spam purchases had risen when compared to a similar Forrester Research poll from 2004, which surveyed 6,000 active Web users and reported 20 percent had made purchases from spam. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/internet_users_buying_from_spam/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-20T09:52:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>spam</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Georgians Use Spam to Explain Their Situation</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/88137_georgians_use_spam/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/88137_georgians_use_spam/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Call it outreach, call it propaganda or call it brilliance or even desperate measures, spammers (people) who favour the Georgian side in the recent conflict have been spamming using email, to get their point across. Depending on where in the world you are from, your ideological standpoint on Russia and your beliefs, when it comes to what email should be like, can be different and you may judge the action as you will. I call it spam. An Estonian colleague Viktor Larionov was quoted saying that whether there is a cyber war in Georgia or not, we know there is in fact a media war in play... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/88137_georgians_use_spam/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-13T07:38:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>cyberattack</category><category>spam</category><category>web</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Spam Arrest Chooses UltraDNS to Enhance Service Delivery</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/88122_spam_arrest_ultradns/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/88122_spam_arrest_ultradns/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[NeuStar has announced that Spam Arrest, a Seattle-based company that efficiently monitors and stops automated junk email, has chosen NeuStar's UltraDNS Managed DNS and Traffic Management Services to support the delivery of services to Spam Arrest's global customer base. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/88122_spam_arrest_ultradns/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-12T11:51:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>dns</category><category>spam</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>CNN Spam Outbreak Quickly Morphing Into a New Breed</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/88184_cnn_spam_outbreak/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/88184_cnn_spam_outbreak/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[This past week we have been seeing some heavy CNN spam -- that is, spam in the form of breaking news stories from CNN.com... These all look like legitimate news stories, and indeed, they probably are taken straight from an actual CNN news bulletin (I don't subscribe so I wouldn't know). Indeed, the unsubscribe information and Terms of Use actually link to actual CNN unsubscribe pages. However, if you mouse-over all of the news links, they go to a spam web page wherein the payload is either a spam advertisement or you click on another link to download a file and flip your computer into a botnet. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/88184_cnn_spam_outbreak/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-10T16:05:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>security</category><category>spam</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>ACLU, Anti&#45;Spam Laws, and the First Amendment</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/aclu_anti_spam_laws_and_the_first_amendment/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/aclu_anti_spam_laws_and_the_first_amendment/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[In <a href="http://techliberation.com/2008/08/07/anti-spam-laws-and-the-first-amendment/">an article published by the Technology Liberation Front</a>, Cato Institute adjunct scholar Tim Lee dissects a <a href="http://www.acluva.org/docket/jaynes.html">recent argument by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)</a> regarding free speech &amp; anti-spam laws. It's been interesting to watch the ACLU wrestle with anti-spam legislation. Their entire purpose is to work through the legal system to protect our civil rights, as defined in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bill_of_Rights" >First Amendment</a> -- which is why I've been a card-carrying member since before I was old enough to vote... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/aclu_anti_spam_laws_and_the_first_amendment/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-08T10:43:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>law</category><category>policy_regulation</category><category>spam</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Technologists vs. Marketers: Talking Incompatible Talk Leads to Walking in the Wrong Direction</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/88715_technologists_vs_marketers/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/88715_technologists_vs_marketers/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[As if conversations between technologists and marketers weren't already difficult enough, it appears that the Direct Marketing Association's (DMA) Email Experience Council <a href="http://blog.emailexperience.org/2008/07/make_it_pop_know_the_lingo_ema.html">wants to redefine</a> long-standardized terms such as "header" and "message." <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/88715_technologists_vs_marketers/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-07T13:49:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>spam</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>If Thou Be&apos;st as Poor for a Subject as He&apos;s for a King&#8230;</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/88711_spam_kings/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/88711_spam_kings/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Way back in 1995, Wired reporter Simson Garfinkel <a href="http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/4.02/spam.king_pr.html">gave Jeff Slaton</a> the name "Spam King." Less than a year later, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanford_Wallace">Sanford Wallace</a> earned the title -- and soon had to share it (and his upstream provider) with Walt Rines. Others have come and gone; Sanford and Walt reappear every few years, together or separately, only to be <a href="http://boxofmeat.net/post/34718471/chicago-tribune-myspace-tells-ap-it-has-won-234m-spam">sued away again</a>... it seems as if any spammer noticed by law enforcement is immediately crowned "the Spam King," even when there are multiple such crownings happening at the same time. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/88711_spam_kings/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-07T11:42:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>law</category><category>spam</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Is Anti&#45;Virus Dead?</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/87312_is_anti_virus_dead/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/87312_is_anti_virus_dead/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Each <a href="http://www.sans.org/sansfire08">SANSFIRE</a>, the Handlers who can make it to DC get together for a panel discussion on the state of information security. Besides discussion of the hot DNS issue, between most of us there is a large consensus into some of the biggest problems that we face. Two come to mind, the fact that "users will click anything" and that "anti-virus is no longer sufficient". These are actually both related in my mind... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/87312_is_anti_virus_dead/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-07-31T13:29:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>security</category><category>spam</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Why We&apos;ll Never Replace SMTP</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/replacing_smtp/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/replacing_smtp/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[An acquaintance asked whether there's been any progress in the oft-rumored project to come up with a more secure replacement for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smtp">SMTP</a>. Answer: No. Truly, spam isn't a technical problem, it's a social one. If we could figure out some way to make mail recipient networks and hosts willing to shun known bad actors, even at the cost of losing some real mail for a while until the bad actors cave, it would make vastly more difference than any possible technical changes. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/replacing_smtp/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-07-30T07:59:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>spam</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Pump&#45;n&#45;dump Spammer Eddie Davidson and Family Found Dead</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/spammer_eddie_davidson_found_dead/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/spammer_eddie_davidson_found_dead/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Edward Davidson, notorious spammer who had escaped from a minimum-security facility on Sunday has been found dead in Colorado, along with his wife and three-year-old child, in what is suspected to be a murder-suicide. Edward "Eddie" Davidson, 35, was serving 21 months in the minimum security facility in Florence, Colorado, for sending hundreds of thousands of spam emails. He had pleaded guilty to tax evasion and falsifying email headers. It was estimated that Davidson made at least $3.5 million from spamming activities through his company Power Promoters between 2003 and 2006. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/spammer_eddie_davidson_found_dead/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-07-24T18:14:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>law</category><category>spam</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Targeted Social Engineering Attacks Against Corporations Reach Record Levels</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/social_engineering_attacks_record_levels/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/social_engineering_attacks_record_levels/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[A <a href="http://labs.idefense.com/news/press/bbb/">recent report</a> by iDefense Labs estimates that there have been 66 distinct <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/protect/yourself/phishing/spear.mspx">spear phishing</a> attacks between February 2007 and June 2008, with the rate of attacks continuing to accelerate. Spear phishing groups have claimed more than 15,000 corporate victims in 15 months, with victim losses exceeding $100,000 in some cases. Victims include Fortune 500 companies, financial institutions, government agencies, and legal firms. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/social_engineering_attacks_record_levels/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-07-23T09:01:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>cyberattack</category><category>security</category><category>spam</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Notorious Spam King Gets 4 Years in Prison</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/spam_king_4_years_prison/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/spam_king_4_years_prison/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Robert Soloway, dubbed the "Spam King", <a href="http://tinyurl.com/5wvnb4">who was charged</a> with defrauding people through tens of millions of spam has been given four years in prison for mail fraud, electronic mail fraud, and failing to file a tax return. According to recent <a href="http://techland.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/07/22/tech-chiefs-ponder-the-internets-future/">reports</a>, federal prosecutors allege that from November 2003 to May 2007, Soloway sent tens of millions of email messages to advertise his company, which offered software to send out broadcast emails. For $495 customers could have an ad sent to 20,000,000 emails, or receive software allowing them to send up to 80,000,000 e-mails. Judge Marsha Pechman said laws governing Spam are very new territory for the courts, and the CAN-SPAM Act allows for only a maximum sentence of only five years. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/spam_king_4_years_prison/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-07-22T16:48:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>law</category><category>spam</category>
		</item>
		
	</channel>
</rss>