Shoutbox

lol I could 'annoy a spammer' all night. Right time to get back at those pesky porn newsletters and ads.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Attitude Extreme
I might try this to get revenge on the spammers............ will Omar be effected?

---

No, Omar will not be affected. He's a person, not a website.

I can't get the site to work!!! Can someone please either attach it or link to it?

Edit: Download link worked.....somehow.....

this actualy seems really retarded. your fighting spam by ddos'ing their web site. ddos'ing it what kills the net in the first place. and just think of what would happen if the program ever got hacked., the hacker doesn't even need to upload a virus, the hacker will hvae the program installed on millions of comps.
*claps* i will never install that kinda program on my computer

I installed it, but every time I try to use it I get this error message, I added it to my accepted programs list in my (McAfee) firewall and then tried it with it down, it didn't work...Boo! I want to annoy Mr. ...I attached a screenshot. But my main guess is that my ISP doesn't reach them, for some reason...

It looks like makelovenotspam.com is back up but they've suspended the service.  Both the screensaver and the website load, but simply say "stay tuned".  I hope it's temporary

By the way, can I just point out that this was my idea. I distinctly remember suggesting this a few years back

Striker: yes ddossing affects all of the net, but so does spam traffic.  Compared to the fairly small scale of this so far, big spam businesses put huge load on the internet. At the end of the day, it's just making spammers pay more for that load and hopefully be persuaded to give up.  Somehow I don't think that any hacking attempt is ever going to get as far as to run a ddos attack on a harmless victim either.

I like this idea. Recently I have been receiving spam in my spam folder... Quite irritating people want me to buy their warez and drugs...

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996752 (originally posted by WDZ.)

quote:

---

Originally posted by newscientist.com
A controversial service enabling frustrated computer users to attack sites associated with spam has been halted.

---

Damn !

quote:

---

Originally posted by newscientist.com
[...]several backbone internet service providers could have blacklisted the site, refusing to route traffic to or from it.
"It's probably because they believe it's unethical or perhaps because it breaks their terms of agreement,"[...]

---

Unethical ?? What's unethical, spamming innocent people to death with fucking penis enlargement mails, or pinging the companie's websites to death ? Calling this unethical is totally stupid. The definition of unethical is: "not conforming to approved standards of social or professional behavior" If these spam-companies are considered as "ethically correct", then, good night, let the spam rule the world. As distributing spam is not ethically correct, fighting the people who distribute spam can't be accused of beeing unethical from my point of view.

quote:

---

Originally posted by newscientist.com
Lycos Europe maintains that their approach is legal and says the service is not designed to knock sites offline, only to slow their network capacity to 5%.

---

Exactly. That's the point, it isn't designed as a DDoS attack, it just slows the sites down, increases the spammers bills and doesn't hurt anyone exept the spammer (and Lycos' servers).

quote:

---

Originally posted by newscientist.com
But many experts question the ethics of the project, suggesting that it contravenes accepted protocols.

---

Is spamming ethical ?? Doesn't spamming contravene with "accepted protocols" ? How can people see fucking ethics everywhere, they're just websites owned by companys that distribute huge amounts of spam all around the web and increase the amount of traffic.

quote:

---

Originally posted by newscientist.com
And, by 2 December, several sites targeted by the Lycos software had crashed completely.[...]

---

Who cares ??

quote:

---

Originally posted by newscientist.com
"You can't fight abuse with abuse," says Steve Linford, of the UK antispam group Spamhaus. "We don't support it because, technically, it is a denial-of service attack and nobody should be doing it."

---

Of course Anti-spam companies are against fighting spam, they would without spam and probably even support spammers. And, it's not meant as DDos Attack ! A DDoS attack is harmless in comparison to the fact that spamming companies use even more illegal ways to distribute their spam, e.g via worms. And, if we shouldn't fight abuse (spam) with abuse, what alternatives do we have ? None.

quote:

---

Originally posted by newscientist.com
Linford says the main trouble is that targeted sites will typically share hosting services with several other sites, which are also likely to suffer from a DoS bombardment.

---

Of course some webcompanies will be affected but whoever cooperates with Spammers is a half illegal subject himself. The problem is that antispam companies or providers will never act against spammers because they are a huge source of income.

quote:

---

Originally posted by newscientist.com
"Attacking a spammer's website is like poking a grizzly bear sleeping in your back garden with a pointy stick,” says Graham Cluley of Sophos, an anti-virus company in the UK. "Not only is this screensaver similar in its approach to a potentially illegal distributed denial-of-service attack, but it is also in danger of turning innocent computer users into vigilantes."

---

Why not try poking the grizzly to death ? Again sometimes attack is the best defence; if we just leave them, they will grow even bigger and more economical damage will be done by gigantic amounts of spam sent across the internet. And again, it is not meant to be a DDoS attack. Anti-virus / Anti-spam companies will of course never have the slightest desire to "kill" spammers, they would kill themselves. If they don't act, we have to.
I don't see anything unethical in attacking spammers. period.

this post was way too excessive

quote:

---

Originally posted by AndreY
Unethical ?? What's unethical, spamming innocent people to death with fucking penis enlargement mails, or pinging the companie's websites to death ? Calling this unethical is totally stupid. The definition of unethical is: "not conforming to approved standards of social or professional behavior" If these spam-companies are considered as "ethically correct", then, good night, let the spam rule the world. As distributing spam is not ethically correct, fighting the people who distribute spam can't be accused of beeing unethical from my point of view.

---

By calling one method (used by lycos) unethical they don't say the other method (used by spammers) is ethical. In fact _both_ methods can be considered unethical...

quote:

---

Originally posted by AndreY
Exactly. That's the point, it isn't designed as a DDoS attack, it just slows the sites down, increases the spammers bills and doesn't hurt anyone exept the spammer (and Lycos' servers).

---

It has the same effect. No matter how it is "designed". Read the article further: they stated also that many other sites have been down due to this lycos attack. also they state that other companies who don't have anything todo with the spam-sites can be effected too if they happen to be on the same server.

quote:

---

Originally posted by AndreY
Is spamming ethical ?? Doesn't spamming contravene with "accepted protocols" ? How can people see fucking ethics everywhere, they're just websites owned by companys that distribute huge amounts of spam all around the web and increase the amount of traffic.

---

Again, by saying that what lycos is doing is unethical, they do _not_ say that what spammers are doing is ethical...

quote:

---

Originally posted by AndreY
Of course Anti-spam companies are against fighting spam, they would without spam and probably even support spammers.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by AndreY
The problem is that antispam companies or providers will never act against spammers because they are a huge source of income.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by AndreY
Of course some webcompanies will be affected but whoever cooperates with Spammers is a half illegal subject himself.

---

Several companies who have _nothing_ in common can still be on the same server; Being on the same server has _nothing_ to do with being affiliates. It could be that they are affiliated, but also in many cases they are not.

quote:

---

Originally posted by AndreY
it is not meant to be a DDoS attack

---

The result is the same.
<sarcastic>
  Let's send a B52 and drop some cluster bombs on the server-complex.
  Hu? Illegal? Unethical? Why? It isn't a DDoS attack, isn't it?
</sarcastic>

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised
By calling one method (used by lycos) unethical they don't say the other method (used by spammers) is ethical. In fact _both_ methods can be considered unethical...

---

Yes, I wanted to say that sometimes our current view of ethics and such things has to be revised. Some things must be done in order to end another thing that is just as bad/even badder. See Iraq: US intervention was considered unethical but was still needed to end Saddam Husseins regime because he killed many thousands Iraqis. We can't just sit there and do nothing because it could be unethical; because this spamming is unethical too and has to get to an end, no matter how.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised

quote:

---

Originally posted by AndreY
Of course Anti-spam companies are against fighting spam, they would without spam and probably even support spammers.

---

---

meant to be "Of course Anti-spam companies are against fighting spammers, they would die without spam; thus probably even support spammers."

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised
Let's send a B52 and drop some cluster bombs on the server-complex.
  Hu? Illegal? Unethical? Why? It isn't a DDoS attack, isn't it?

---

lol thats a bit too drastic...a DDoS attack doen't destroy the server, it disconnects it from the internet by overflowing it. ..But, bombing spammy servers would be a good idea actually ...

As I said, as we have almost no other way to fight the spammers, we must do something against them even if some innocent people are hit. The Lycos attempt to help solve the problem was a step in the right direction which should be continued.