Increase in spam

Hugo van der Kooij hvdkooij at
Fri Oct 30 07:05:31 GMT 2009

On 10/30/09 03:47, Alex Neuman wrote:
> It's not that you *did* bring it up, it's the *how* you brought it up
> that's more likely to have been the cause of the head-off-biting. Some
> people probably mistook your tone for "I've noticed a crazy spam
> increase it so it must be true and if you didn't you're dumb" or
> something like that. Paul, however, IMHO, was a bit more cautious (the
> use of "wondering, seems" instead of more categorical words, mentioning
> stats, asking for input) so it's less likely his question would be
> misinterpreted.
> I, for one haven't noticed it - but it's more likely to mean that I
> don't look hard enough, not that Paul is mistaken. He probably looks
> more at his logs and performance issues more than I do, since I usually
> only notice there's a problem when the excrement is already hurtling
> towards the rotary cooling device (you know, your servers either deliver
> e-mail in 30 seconds or less or your clients start ringing your phone
> off the hook).

I can't recall having seen an significant increase in general terms 
recently. The trend seem to go up all through the year:

You can also keep an eye on to 
see the combineed statistics of quite a few anti-spam boxes.

The only difference is that the old "me at" to "me at" 
junk is back in force during the last few months.

I guess either 1 or more botnet(s) changed tactics or a new one emerged. 
But most RBL's will kill of most of these attempts anyway so you can get 
rid of them at the MTA level.


More information about the MailScanner mailing list