IL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2008 1:33 PM
> To: Paul Kelly :: Blacknight
> Cc: Frank Bulk; 'Peter Serwe'; Skywing; nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: McColo and SPAM
>
> What's very interesting to me is the very rhythmic peaks-and-valleys
> you show... Se
x27;Peter Serwe'; Skywing
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: McColo and SPAM
We experienced exactly no decrease with the McColo shut down a few
weeks
back, even though we receive 2M+ messages per day. It's interesting
that
each service provider's spam populations are as different as
Paul,
I read Gregg Keizer's piece in CW where FireEye's Fengmin Gong is quoted
as "We have registered a couple hundred domains," Gong said, "but we
made the decision that we cannot afford to spend so much money to keep
registering so many [domain] names."
Now interposing on the Srizbi system
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 11:10 PM, Paul Kelly :: Blacknight
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We saw a dramatic decrease. Attached is our dnsbl mirror in .ie, it
> mirrors spamhaus amoungst other things.
>
McColo was just an exercise in "managing" cyber cri
nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: McColo and SPAM
We experienced exactly no decrease with the McColo shut down a few weeks
back, even though we receive 2M+ messages per day. It's interesting that
each service provider's spam populations are as different as they are. Some
experienced gigantic
7;s not like we have
just one domain.
I know MessageLabs examines spam rates per industry type.
Frank
-Original Message-
From: Peter Serwe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 2:57 PM
To: Skywing
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: McColo and SPAM
Certainly, I have se
Seen behind my ISP (gmx.de),
I get almost no spam. Looking into the spam folder I
see some 10% of what I used to see.
On the other other hand when they closed I got an
alarm for my homepage. I got so many wordbooks on
my ssh that they exceeded my traffic limit.
I had to move my sshd to IPv6 only
Friday, December 05, 2008 4:03 PM
To: Revolver Onslaught; nanog
Subject: RE: McColo and SPAM
We have not seen any decrease. In the last 24 hours we have seen 3.5
million messages blocked.
-Mike
-Original Message-
From: Revolver Onslaught [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, Decem
We have not seen any decrease. In the last 24 hours we have seen 3.5
million messages blocked.
-Mike
-Original Message-
From: Revolver Onslaught [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 2:14 PM
To: nanog
Subject: McColo and SPAM
Hello,
Since McColo closed, we noticed
nd didn't
> originate spam directly, at least primarily, according to my understanding.
>
> - S
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Peter Serwe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 3:49 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: McColo and SPAM
>
On Dec 5, 2008, at 12:51 PM, Skywing wrote:
McColo hosted the command and control servers for spam botnets and
didn't originate spam directly, at least primarily, according to my
understanding.
- S
That is correct. Srizbi and Rustok, primarily.
--
bk
bject: Re: McColo and SPAM
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 11:34 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 20:14:08 +0100
> From: Revolver Onslaught <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: McColo and SPAM
> To: nanog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Message-ID:
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 11:34 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 20:14:08 +0100
> From: Revolver Onslaught <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: McColo and SPAM
> To: nanog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859
Sorry, and we have the premium spam add-on too.
-Original Message-
From: Charles Wyble [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 2:28 PM
To: Dave Larter
Cc: Revolver Onslaught; nanog
Subject: Re: McColo and SPAM
Is that an off the shelf tool or custom built?
, December 05, 2008 2:28 PM
To: Dave Larter
Cc: Revolver Onslaught; nanog
Subject: Re: McColo and SPAM
Is that an off the shelf tool or custom built?
And delivered spam is about the same too. This is just spam I receive, May was
when I brought our new smtp gateways online.
-Original Message-
From: Revolver Onslaught [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 2:25 PM
To: Dave Larter
Cc: nanog
Subject: Re: McColo and
: NANOG list
Subject: Re: McColo and SPAM
Jeff Shultz wrote
>>
> I've been getting an fair number of e-mails (up from zero) from
> customers asking about spam they are getting with their e-mail address
> being in the From: address. I know that this has always been
> happening, I&#
Is that an off the shelf tool or custom built?
Jeff Shultz wrote
I've been getting an fair number of e-mails (up from zero) from
customers asking about spam they are getting with their e-mail address
being in the From: address. I know that this has always been
happening, I'm just wondering if it's been buried under the McColo
stuff so th
Very stange. I could notice our Spamhaus rejects were the same as before
Dave Larter a écrit :
> It is still way down for me, see attached.
>
> Dave
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Revolver Onslaught [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 2:14 PM
> To: nanog
> S
It is still way down for me, see attached.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Revolver Onslaught [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 2:14 PM
To: nanog
Subject: McColo and SPAM
Hello,
Since McColo closed, we noticed the spam was far more intensive than
before.
However
Revolver Onslaught wrote:
Hello,
Since McColo closed, we noticed the spam was far more intensive than before.
However, it seems the amount of spam is similar than than before.
Do you feel the same ?
Many thanks,
RO
I've been getting an fair number of e-mails (up from zero) from
customers
22 matches
Mail list logo
