Why doesn't DCC help against image spam?

Mike Kercher mike at vesol.com
Wed Dec 27 19:24:14 CET 2006

-----Original Message-----
From: mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info on behalf of Dennis
Sent: Wed 12/27/2006 12:11 PM
To: MailScanner discussion
Subject: Re: Why doesn't DCC help against image spam?
I wrote my own... It's a milter that allows me to decare specific 
email addresses and even full domains to be honeypot addresses and it 
then collects the IP addresses of the senders and uses them as a 

It can run on the same Sendmail as your normal mail server as it does 
not interfere with non-honeypot email addresses (unless the source IP 
is in the blacklist, then optionally you can reject, discard or allow 
to continue for further processing).

I'm currently working to two extensions... One is a routine that will 
take the list of IP addresses and create a BIND zone file so that the 
blacklist can be shared via a DNSBL. Two is a mailwatch extension to 
manage and monitor the spamtrap and see statistics that it collects.

On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 11:58:32 -0600
  "Mike Kercher" <mike at vesol.com> wrote:
>-----Original Message-----
>From: mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info on behalf of Dennis
>Sent: Wed 12/27/2006 11:52 AM
>To: MailScanner discussion
>Subject: Re: Why doesn't DCC help against image spam?
>The only "image" Spam that is currently getting through my filters is 
>the "stock scam" images and they are different everytime I see it and 
>they are using wavy text, odd colors and mixed fonts, etc... to try 
>and fool the OCR scanners.
>So, my question would be, how effective are the OCR scanners when the 
>Spammers are doing this?
>Since I put my new Spam Trap in place I have seen a reduction of this 
>Spam getting through. It appears the honeypots are seeing the sources 
>of the images first (or close to it) and stopping that source... 
>ofcourse they rotate sources through out the day, but the honeypots 
>are getting over 2000-3000 new IP address every day. The "hit rate" 
>the now blacklisted source is fairly high.
>What spam trap did you put in place?


Interesting concept!

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 3761 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20061227/b8360508/attachment.bin

More information about the MailScanner mailing list