elind Posted December 26, 2005 Share Posted December 26, 2005 Have others been receiving spam on spam with this title? I have had hundreds, perhaps, of all the same spam come in the last few days, but from different origins although mostly the same Chinese, courtesy of Sprint. A few weeks ago there was another blitz of something from an AaronShara that came in with massive numbers. I did get one last message claiming that this website was not responsible for the spam however. I don't get it though. Is this a sabotage attempt of someone against a particular company? The Chinese in particular must be complicit in the scheme, whatever it is, since each message is identical and if they gave a damn they would easily be able to stop this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agsteele Posted December 26, 2005 Share Posted December 26, 2005 Have others been receiving spam on spam with this title?38449[/snapback] I certainly have been receiving a large quantity of this spam. All my reports indicate differing IP addresses as the source. I cannot say whether it is a spam or an attempt to cause trouble for an innocent bystander. But the junk is arriving through a range of IPs and reporting these IPs certainly helps identify them and keep mailboxes clear. The URLs in the message are all obfuscated and not resolved in the parser so no reports going to the ISP for the domain. Andrew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petzl Posted December 26, 2005 Share Posted December 26, 2005 Have others been receiving spam on spam with this title? 38449[/snapback] Getting floods of this, none getting anywhere but SpamCops Very Easy Reporting folder The web address (miss-configured) looks like a Joe Job Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlyn Posted December 26, 2005 Share Posted December 26, 2005 looks like a Joe Job 38451[/snapback] I also heard it was a Joe Job but as yet I have not seen any proof except for spam. I am not ready to believe it is a Joe Job. I think the jury is still out on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff G. Posted December 26, 2005 Share Posted December 26, 2005 Some factors for the jury to consider: The site appears to have no Privacy Policy. The site appears to have no AUP or TOS (but see http://support.magma.ca/abuse.cfm). The site appears to have no disclaimer of responsibility for the spam (but then again, neither does magma.ca). In the 23+ hours since this started, abuse[at]magma.ca has yet to do anything about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agsteele Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 I also heard it was a Joe Job but as yet I have not seen any proof except for spam. I am not ready to believe it is a Joe Job. I think the jury is still out on this one. 38452[/snapback] I'm leaning toward it being genuine but, the key thing for me is that even if it is a joe-job, the joe-jobbers are exploiting servers that are insecure, used for spamming etc. So reporting is still a good way to go since it keeps these spamming IPs on the SCBL. Andrew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publisher1 Posted January 1, 2006 Share Posted January 1, 2006 I'm the owner of the domains in question, and as soon as I return from vacation, will file a report with the police. As a private individual, I have been posting on cattyshaq.com, conducting investigations into a pyramid/ponzi scam Reality Millions/Divinus Opulentia. I guess the bad guys wanted to make life difficult for me. As soon as I saw the Joe Job in process, I reported the matter to my ISP. I suspect the criminals thought setting the thing up just before Christmas would cause maximum aggravation and result in the ISP pulling the plug first, and then researching later. Fortunately staff at Magma could see clearly that I was not the cause of the spam, and have maintained the account. Of course, I experienced many complaint calls and some very angry emails. We have taken some security measures to reduce the probabilty of a repeat occurence, but the people who set this up are certainly capable of causing more trouble. One thing that saved my skin was this posting on cattyshaq some months ago. Tech support at Magma, reading this stuff, realized that I wasn't faking it! See the posting from Publisher1 in this thread. http://www.cattyshaq.com/forum/modules.php...&t=1708&start=0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff G. Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 I'm the owner of the domains in question, and as soon as I return from vacation, will file a report with the police.38728[/snapback] I'm sure that will be helpful. It would also be helpful for you to address the concerns I raised in Linear Post #5 above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.