<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.4" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: UPDATE: Spammer Desperately Tries to Undermine Blue Security</title>
	<link>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/3011</link>
	<description>Independent Tech News and Product Reviews from former VP and head of CNET.com and Longtime Computer Shopper Columnist, Alice Hill author of the popular "Hard Edge" column. Originally named AliceandBill.com.</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2008 00:16:16 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: spiel konto</title>
		<link>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/3011#comment-743702</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2008 10:12:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/3011#comment-743702</guid>
					<description>&lt;strong&gt;party poker games...&lt;/strong&gt;

As shown in party poker games play baccarat online...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>party poker games&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>As shown in party poker games play baccarat online&#8230;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: canadian loan payday association canadian loan payday</title>
		<link>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/3011#comment-723724</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2008 07:50:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/3011#comment-723724</guid>
					<description>&lt;strong&gt;gagner au video poker...&lt;/strong&gt;

In this case keno gratis expekt poker bonus...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>gagner au video poker&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>In this case keno gratis expekt poker bonus&#8230;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: potential soldier</title>
		<link>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/3011#comment-32053</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jun 2006 00:42:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/3011#comment-32053</guid>
					<description>too bad they gave up so early. yes they can get tons of botnets but how many more people who have joined the fight. anyone got a copy of the frog still?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>too bad they gave up so early. yes they can get tons of botnets but how many more people who have joined the fight. anyone got a copy of the frog still?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: SpamSlayer</title>
		<link>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/3011#comment-28076</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 May 2006 23:34:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/3011#comment-28076</guid>
					<description>Well, it looks like BlueSecurity.com didn't have the 'cajones' to withstand the spammers' attacks... that's too bad, because I've found (through extensive experience) that spammers are, for the most part, cowards... hit them hard enough, and they run with their tails tucked between their legs, begging for mercy the whole way.

BlueSecurity said they didn't feel that they had the right to bring their users into an all-out war with spammers... well, guess what... it already IS an all-out war. It has been for quite some time. And judging by the comments here, we're all itching to get our turn to kick a spammer in the nuts.

So, I guess it's back to using SpamVampire and Refi Retaliator II. That's much more brutal to the spammers than the Blue Frog could ever be, but if that's what the spammers want, that's what they get... at least until a distributed version of Blue Frog is available that doesn't rely upon a centralized server (and therefore is immune to DDoS attacks). BTW, SpamVampire and Refi Retaliator II aren't susceptible to DDoS, because they don't rely upon a central server. They're harder to use (you have to know a bit of Javascript programming, but it's not hard to learn), but much more effective.

I encourage everyone to use SpamVampire and Refi Retaliator II against the spammers bothering them... I've done it for the last couple years, and my spam receival rate is almost nothing, without filtering any emails.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, it looks like BlueSecurity.com didn&#8217;t have the &#8216;cajones&#8217; to withstand the spammers&#8217; attacks&#8230; that&#8217;s too bad, because I&#8217;ve found (through extensive experience) that spammers are, for the most part, cowards&#8230; hit them hard enough, and they run with their tails tucked between their legs, begging for mercy the whole way.</p>
<p>BlueSecurity said they didn&#8217;t feel that they had the right to bring their users into an all-out war with spammers&#8230; well, guess what&#8230; it already IS an all-out war. It has been for quite some time. And judging by the comments here, we&#8217;re all itching to get our turn to kick a spammer in the nuts.</p>
<p>So, I guess it&#8217;s back to using SpamVampire and Refi Retaliator II. That&#8217;s much more brutal to the spammers than the Blue Frog could ever be, but if that&#8217;s what the spammers want, that&#8217;s what they get&#8230; at least until a distributed version of Blue Frog is available that doesn&#8217;t rely upon a centralized server (and therefore is immune to DDoS attacks). BTW, SpamVampire and Refi Retaliator II aren&#8217;t susceptible to DDoS, because they don&#8217;t rely upon a central server. They&#8217;re harder to use (you have to know a bit of Javascript programming, but it&#8217;s not hard to learn), but much more effective.</p>
<p>I encourage everyone to use SpamVampire and Refi Retaliator II against the spammers bothering them&#8230; I&#8217;ve done it for the last couple years, and my spam receival rate is almost nothing, without filtering any emails.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Nora E.</title>
		<link>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/3011#comment-26420</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 May 2006 01:28:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/3011#comment-26420</guid>
					<description>I have been sending all my spam mail to the spam@uce.gov address since Blue Frog went down due to the DDoS attack. Hopefully now the governments out there will see how much damage these people can do, will get off their fat politician asses and sic their respective law enforcement agencies on them! Until then I'm going to encourage all my friends to deluge the spam reporting address with all their spam mail. It's not much but as it stands it's about all you can do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have been sending all my spam mail to the <a href="mailto:spam@uce.gov">spam@uce.gov</a> address since Blue Frog went down due to the DDoS attack. Hopefully now the governments out there will see how much damage these people can do, will get off their fat politician asses and sic their respective law enforcement agencies on them! Until then I&#8217;m going to encourage all my friends to deluge the spam reporting address with all their spam mail. It&#8217;s not much but as it stands it&#8217;s about all you can do.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Rob S</title>
		<link>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/3011#comment-25991</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 May 2006 17:57:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/3011#comment-25991</guid>
					<description>More thoughts:

Blue Security's reasons for shutting down have been way to curt.  

The only thing Reshnef, Blue Security's founder, has said was that this was too big a battle to win.  This is an odd change of face from what Blue Security has been saying since the attack by PharmaMaster began in early May.

Reshnef also mentioned that members were being too adversely affected by the PharmaMaster attack, but this is an odd statement given the support I have see for Blue Security on the web AND the fact that Blue Security's membership INCREASED after the attack began.

I personally am more than willing to continue sending hundreds of emails every day to my Blue Frog so it can put in opt-out requests for me--that was the beauty of Blue Frog: it submitted the opt-out requests for me so I didn't have to do it myself.  

Every member of Blue Security, with few exceptions--from what I have read, was behind Blue Security.

Thus, I am guessing that one or more of the following ideas occurred to cause Blue Security to give up the fight (this is probably what is not being said on the news):

1) Prolexic--the company Blue Security was hosting with which purports itself to be able to withstand DOS attacks, said no to Blue Security after it's own servers got too heavily attacked.  Corporations are notorious for giving out useless information.

2)Prolexic tried to charge Blue Security too much money to continue fending off the DOS attacks.  On another website (I forget where) the founder of Blue Security Eran Reshnef noted that fighting spam would cost $100 million and that a government should do it.

3)The attack on Prolexic messed up too many of Prolexic's other websites.  When customers start complaining companies start thinking about their bottom line: $$$.

4)A government, asked Blue Security to shut down because the attacks were causing too much trouble on the internet itself.  

Apparently the spammer knocked out most of the internet in Canada and shut down many, many .org addresses.  The spammer went after the DNS host of Blue Security and supposedly crashed millions--yes that is right--millions of websites due to his attacks (can you say FBI and Interpol anyone?).

It is not well known, but a fact, that if someone wants to perform a DOS attack--if the evil doer has enough resources--there is no way to stop them.  They can--as has just recently occurred, shut down large, large portions of the internet.

Again, the above are just my thoughts, since no one is giving out any "real" details at Blue Security or Prolexic, but I suspect one or more of them occurred.

Since it looks like Blue Security is permanently gone I have been reporting my spame to the US Governments Federal Trade Commission at: spam@uce.gov

The above email address is designed to receive spam you don't want then hopefully the US Government will take action on the spammers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>More thoughts:</p>
<p>Blue Security&#8217;s reasons for shutting down have been way to curt.  </p>
<p>The only thing Reshnef, Blue Security&#8217;s founder, has said was that this was too big a battle to win.  This is an odd change of face from what Blue Security has been saying since the attack by PharmaMaster began in early May.</p>
<p>Reshnef also mentioned that members were being too adversely affected by the PharmaMaster attack, but this is an odd statement given the support I have see for Blue Security on the web AND the fact that Blue Security&#8217;s membership INCREASED after the attack began.</p>
<p>I personally am more than willing to continue sending hundreds of emails every day to my Blue Frog so it can put in opt-out requests for me&#8211;that was the beauty of Blue Frog: it submitted the opt-out requests for me so I didn&#8217;t have to do it myself.  </p>
<p>Every member of Blue Security, with few exceptions&#8211;from what I have read, was behind Blue Security.</p>
<p>Thus, I am guessing that one or more of the following ideas occurred to cause Blue Security to give up the fight (this is probably what is not being said on the news):</p>
<p>1) Prolexic&#8211;the company Blue Security was hosting with which purports itself to be able to withstand DOS attacks, said no to Blue Security after it&#8217;s own servers got too heavily attacked.  Corporations are notorious for giving out useless information.</p>
<p>2)Prolexic tried to charge Blue Security too much money to continue fending off the DOS attacks.  On another website (I forget where) the founder of Blue Security Eran Reshnef noted that fighting spam would cost $100 million and that a government should do it.</p>
<p>3)The attack on Prolexic messed up too many of Prolexic&#8217;s other websites.  When customers start complaining companies start thinking about their bottom line: $$$.</p>
<p>4)A government, asked Blue Security to shut down because the attacks were causing too much trouble on the internet itself.  </p>
<p>Apparently the spammer knocked out most of the internet in Canada and shut down many, many .org addresses.  The spammer went after the DNS host of Blue Security and supposedly crashed millions&#8211;yes that is right&#8211;millions of websites due to his attacks (can you say FBI and Interpol anyone?).</p>
<p>It is not well known, but a fact, that if someone wants to perform a DOS attack&#8211;if the evil doer has enough resources&#8211;there is no way to stop them.  They can&#8211;as has just recently occurred, shut down large, large portions of the internet.</p>
<p>Again, the above are just my thoughts, since no one is giving out any &#8220;real&#8221; details at Blue Security or Prolexic, but I suspect one or more of them occurred.</p>
<p>Since it looks like Blue Security is permanently gone I have been reporting my spame to the US Governments Federal Trade Commission at: <a href="mailto:spam@uce.gov">spam@uce.gov</a></p>
<p>The above email address is designed to receive spam you don&#8217;t want then hopefully the US Government will take action on the spammers.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Rob S</title>
		<link>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/3011#comment-25879</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 May 2006 17:14:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/3011#comment-25879</guid>
					<description>More thoughts:
From the article on Blue Security at Security Focus I am guessing that one of three things happened:

Prolexic said no to Blue Security after it's own servers got too heavily attacked--again I have no way to prove this AND.
Prolexic tried to charge Blue Security too much money to fend off the attacks.
The attack on Prolexic messed up too many of its other websites and so it booted Blue Security.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>More thoughts:<br />
From the article on Blue Security at Security Focus I am guessing that one of three things happened:</p>
<p>Prolexic said no to Blue Security after it&#8217;s own servers got too heavily attacked&#8211;again I have no way to prove this AND.<br />
Prolexic tried to charge Blue Security too much money to fend off the attacks.<br />
The attack on Prolexic messed up too many of its other websites and so it booted Blue Security.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Rob S</title>
		<link>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/3011#comment-25869</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 May 2006 17:07:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/3011#comment-25869</guid>
					<description>At first I thought that the internet posts were fake.  Then I noticed that one of them had come from The Washington Post and then spied the article on Prolexic's website--the actual DOS-preventing host that Blue Security was using before they gave up.  Currently Prolexic's website is down--I suspect the spammers are still attacking it, but luckily I made a PDF of the article on their site.  Here is the text:

May 17, 2006
As we've detailed previously, Prolexic has been fending malicious cyber attacks from one or more criminal spammers attempting to
intimidate the firm, subsequent to Prolexic deploying its system to defend a recent customer. We can now reveal this customer to be Blue
Security.
Blue Security was our client since May 5th, and we successfully repelled several attacks against them since we started protecting their site.
We understand that once customers of Blue Security started receiving real threats of viruses/worms/DDoS/etc. attacks against them
personally, Blue Security realized that they were putting their customers in jeopardy by continuing the fight with the spammers. Not wanting
to escalate the war on their customers, Blue Security, understandably but regrettably, decided to exit the anti-spam business on May 16th.
Currently Blue Security has taken their site offline, to avoid themselves being responsible for any further attacks on their customers.
Whether you applauded Blue Security for taking the fight to the spammers, or criticized them for vigilantism, I'm sure you'll agree that it is a
sad day when criminal spammers win.
Blue Security will be missed.
Darren Rennick
Chief Executive</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>At first I thought that the internet posts were fake.  Then I noticed that one of them had come from The Washington Post and then spied the article on Prolexic&#8217;s website&#8211;the actual DOS-preventing host that Blue Security was using before they gave up.  Currently Prolexic&#8217;s website is down&#8211;I suspect the spammers are still attacking it, but luckily I made a PDF of the article on their site.  Here is the text:</p>
<p>May 17, 2006<br />
As we&#8217;ve detailed previously, Prolexic has been fending malicious cyber attacks from one or more criminal spammers attempting to<br />
intimidate the firm, subsequent to Prolexic deploying its system to defend a recent customer. We can now reveal this customer to be Blue<br />
Security.<br />
Blue Security was our client since May 5th, and we successfully repelled several attacks against them since we started protecting their site.<br />
We understand that once customers of Blue Security started receiving real threats of viruses/worms/DDoS/etc. attacks against them<br />
personally, Blue Security realized that they were putting their customers in jeopardy by continuing the fight with the spammers. Not wanting<br />
to escalate the war on their customers, Blue Security, understandably but regrettably, decided to exit the anti-spam business on May 16th.<br />
Currently Blue Security has taken their site offline, to avoid themselves being responsible for any further attacks on their customers.<br />
Whether you applauded Blue Security for taking the fight to the spammers, or criticized them for vigilantism, I&#8217;m sure you&#8217;ll agree that it is a<br />
sad day when criminal spammers win.<br />
Blue Security will be missed.<br />
Darren Rennick<br />
Chief Executive
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Rob S</title>
		<link>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/3011#comment-25857</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 May 2006 17:00:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/3011#comment-25857</guid>
					<description>It is a shame that the spammers have won, at least temporarily.  A number of internet sources are reporting that Blue Security called it quits including:
The Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/16/AR2006051601873.html
Prolexic--the host Blue Security was using after the DOS began
http://www.prolexic.com then click on the link to the Blue Security news
Security Focus
http://www.securityfocus.com/news/11392</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is a shame that the spammers have won, at least temporarily.  A number of internet sources are reporting that Blue Security called it quits including:<br />
The Washington Post<br />
<a href='http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/16/AR2006051601873.html' rel='nofollow'>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/16/AR2006051601873.html</a><br />
Prolexic&#8211;the host Blue Security was using after the DOS began<br />
<a href='http://www.prolexic.com' rel='nofollow'>http://www.prolexic.com</a> then click on the link to the Blue Security news<br />
Security Focus<br />
<a href='http://www.securityfocus.com/news/11392' rel='nofollow'>http://www.securityfocus.com/news/11392</a>
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Sarah</title>
		<link>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/3011#comment-25673</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 May 2006 15:37:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/3011#comment-25673</guid>
					<description>What! They can't give up yet! That can't be right.

They have so many people who wants to fight on, who supports them in their battle and they quit? That'll just prove to the spammers they can win.

All of that, for nothing?

Come on Blue Security! Fight on, what you're doing is for the better!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What! They can&#8217;t give up yet! That can&#8217;t be right.</p>
<p>They have so many people who wants to fight on, who supports them in their battle and they quit? That&#8217;ll just prove to the spammers they can win.</p>
<p>All of that, for nothing?</p>
<p>Come on Blue Security! Fight on, what you&#8217;re doing is for the better!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.353 seconds -->
