>About tarpitting. It seems to me that any half technical spammer will 
>use a multi threaded program that opens thousands of simultaneous SMTP 
>connections. A tar pit would only stall one of those connections, using 
>a few KB of RAM. Hundreds of tar pits would only slow the spammer by a 
>fraction of a percent.

Basically true, but that's only one aspect of tarpitting.  Since the
spammer has to keep open an available port, that's one less port he
can use from any given IP address (using vanilla port management) to
blast out his spam.  65000 or so simultaneous injections going on via
multithreading sounds like a lot, but compare that to the size of the
typical data base of intended recipients of spam.

I've done some pretty mundane tarpitting via patches to qmail-smtpd,
and noticed that remote port numbers for incoming connections often
reach the 50000 and 60000 range.  That's not necessarily due to my own
tarpitting (I'm running just one tiny system), but it suggests those
systems already run out of available ports at times, so tarpitting
would definitely hurt *their* throughput.  (Some of them are legit
MTAs that unfortunately relay spam and vermin on behalf of their
customers.)

As spam runs take substantially longer, spamware vendors will find
their customers asking for methods to cut down the time they take, so
as to reduce their exposure to TOS, law, and other forms of
enforcement.

Yet most any algorithm spamware uses to counteract tarpitting would
likely make it easier for SMTP servers to distinguish such clients
from other, including legitimate, clients.

A hundred or so systems tarpitting probably aren't enough to make a
dent.  But at some point the penetration can reach high enough to
cause spammers to purposefully route around such systems in order to
improve their productivity, just as door-to-door proselytizers quickly
learn to not bother certain types of people: those who invite them in
to "talk" but are already solidly committed to their *own* religion.

Since a major distinction between unsolicited bulk email (UBE) -- spam
and vermin -- and legitimate email (including mailing lists) is the
comparatively vast, yet untargeted, data base of recipients for which
UBE is intended, it could be that any measure that artificially slows
down the rate of successful deliveries within a mail run to all
recipients (especially if the slowdown itself is targeted at unknown
senders) will disproportionately hurt senders of UBE.

-- 
James Craig Burley
Software Craftsperson
<http://www.jcb-sc.com>

Reply via email to