Increase in spam

[Hugo van der Kooij]

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: 
http://balin.waakhond.net/#MailGraph

You can also keep an eye on http://www.barracudacentral.org/data/spam to 
see the combineed statistics of quite a few anti-spam boxes.

The only difference is that the old "me at example.com" to "me at example.com" 
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.

Hugo.