-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
But using your spam size, , the slowdown factor becomes roughly 73 times. So they would need 73 machines running full tilt all the time to regain their old throughput.
Believe me, the professionals have enough 0wned machines that this is trivial.
On the flipside, it means the machines are "burned" faster.
only if the professionals are dumb enough to use the machines that are "making" the stamps to actually send the email (since it is only the latter which are, in practice, traceable)
unfortunately, I think you making some assumptions that are not fully warranted. I will try to do some research and figure out the number of machines compromised. The best No. I had seen to date was about 350,000.
It's at least an order of magnitude higher than this, possibly 2 orders, thanks to rampaging worms with spamware installation payloads compromising cablemodem- and adsl- connected Windows machines worldwide.
the easynet.nl list (recently demised) listed nearly 700K machines that had been detected (allegedly) sending spam... so since their detection was not universal it would certainly be more than 700K :(
--------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List
and in these schemes, where does our esteemed moderator get _his_ stamps from ? remember that not all bulk email is spam by any means... or do we end up with whitelists all over the place and the focus of attacks moves to the ingress to the mailing lists :( <moan> I never understand why people think spam is a technical problem :( let alone a cryptographic one :-( </moan> - -- richard Richard Clayton They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1 iQA/AwUBP/HWBhfnRQV/feRLEQIyoACgrWwhmPJJYbD7elJL1D7OMOQ5HV4AoIUL 5L3wNC2PEdE3BYlUiwMBps27 =jp2y -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----