Quale è meglio: rilevare lo spam al destinatario o alla fonte?

0

Sfondo

Ho ricercato un rilevamento dello spam inviato utilizzando i bot. Dopo aver studiato diverse tecniche utilizzate dai bot per fornire spam, non ho una soluzione generalizzata per rilevare lo spamming alla rete di origine (dove i robot risiedono) in diversi scenari (ad esempio: utilizzare il record Mx per inviare direttamente spam al server di posta destinato, utilizzando i relay aperti , usando i servizi di webmail, usando il proxy aperto, usando l'indirizzo IP falsificato). Quindi, mi sono trasferito a un livello destinatario, in cui tutte le mail vengono consegnate perché al ricevente dobbiamo semplicemente dire se una mail era spam o legittima, secondo alcune euristiche.

Query

Tuttavia, qualcuno potrebbe suggerire un approccio generalizzato per rilevare lo spamming alla rete di origine e, se possibile, fornire alcune osservazioni che potrebbero essere utili, rilevando la posta indesiderata sul ricevitore o lo spamming nella rete di origine, dove risiedono tutti i robot? p>     

posta user10012 01.07.2016 - 19:21
fonte

1 risposta

-1

È un classico per un motivo:

Your post advocates a

(X) technical ( ) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante

approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)

( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
( ) Users of email will not put up with it
( ) Microsoft will not put up with it
( ) The police will not put up with it
(x) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business

Specifically, your plan fails to account for

( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
(x) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
(x) Open relays in foreign countries
( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
(x) Asshats
( ) Jurisdictional problems
( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
(x) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
( ) Extreme profitability of spam
( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
( ) Technically illiterate politicians
( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
(x) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
( ) Outlook

and the following philosophical objections may also apply:

( ) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever
been shown practical
( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
( ) Blacklists suck
( ) Whitelists suck
( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
( ) Sending email should be free
(x) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
( ) I don't want the government reading my email
( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough

Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
    
risposta data 01.07.2016 - 22:01
fonte

Leggi altre domande sui tag