* Peter N. M. Hansteen <pe...@bsdly.net> [2009-02-02 10:22]: > "Jose Fragoso" <inet_use...@samerica.com> writes: > > > This list has gone quite small in size recently. The size changed from > > above 100000 IP addresses to only 10000 now. Could it be because > > University of Alberta is not being targeted so often anymore? Or is > > it because they have become more selective in trapping addresses? > > I actually think that you are seeing a decrease in the number of > active spam senders. Other greytrappers (like my robot helpers) have > seen a decrease in trapped hosts too. This could the effect of events > like the McColo takedown last November, and possibly other less > publicized events could have helped too. > > There is even a tiny possibility that some former spam senders have > come under a more sensible sysadmin regime, and we can even hope that > our greytrapping and 'name and shame' efforts are having some effect. > We can dream, can't we? >
A little of both. In fact the list at 10K was probably an anomoly - I briefly partly "broke" it when I was shufflign machines around so you didn't get them all :) That's since been changed. Having said that my trapped volume is only around 35->40K hosts recently - but this corresponds to my total smtp connection volume has decreased abotu 50 to 60 percent since the MrColo and other spambot holder shutdowns in november. I used to peak over 2 million total in a day, and now peak just under a million. You can see this quite graphically here: http://bofh.ucs.ualberta.ca/cgi-bin/spam.cgi?days=125 (ignore the black line - it suffers from anomolies when my slaves do something wrong... :)
