[Scspamcop] Re: low importance - anyone know what this spammer is peddling?

[Mike Easter]

ed wrote:
Subject: low importance - anyone know what this spammer is peddling?

As a general rule, it is of no value to try to 'read the mind' of a
piece of spam, as if it were a piece of mail from your friend.  The
principles are not the same.

It is not of value to wonder why particular kind of spam bogosity is
found in the headers and it is not of value to wonder why a spammer
chose the subject or From and it is not of value to wonder why the
spammer used this word instead of that word.

In fact, as a rather strong general rule, I recommend against reading
spam.  It is almost never of any antispam value.  Spam reading is
generally a pastime that 'spammees' do - which spammees are 'interested
in' spam.  Spamfighters should not be curiously interested in spam
content.  It is rare indeed that some particular antispam advantage is
gained from being a curious spammee instead of a 'dedicated'
spamfighter.

When you get a piece of spam, it is most likely that the most positive
thing you can do with it is to feed it to spamcop so that it can be
reported for source.  It is hardly ever necessary to open the spam or
read the spam in order to report it for source.  My spamfilter tags my
spamheaders so that the basis for the spam being filter is 'readable'
without ever opening or reading a spam.  My spamfilter tags the
spamsubject and my mailuser agent puts all of the spam into my Junk
folder for reporting.  It is not necessary for me to read spam's subject
or from to know that it is spam, because a closer inspection than that
has already been performed.

If I should ever be 'confused' about whether or not a particular item in
my Junk folder is actually spam, I can inspect its headers first.  It
isn't necessary for me to open or read the spam.  If an item in my Inbox
is possibly spam, it is highly likely that I can determine that it is
spam by examining its headers.  It isn't necessary for me to open and
read the body.

> I was wondering, is this spammer trying to perform ID fraud?

It is possible that such a spam as this might have some 'elaborate'
scheme up its sleeve that starts with the recipient answering the spam.
Then the respondent is engaged in email and potentially telephone
dialogue, based on the response of the respondent.

Generally a spammer knows that he has a fish on the line by the fact
that the fish was reading his spam.


-- 
Mike Easter
kibitzer, not SC admin