Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Spam gets 1 response per 12,500,000 emails

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Greyhatter
    replied
    Re: Spam gets 1 response per 12,500,000 emails

    I love Spam, and so does me wife. But if I didn't, any new free email address would do.

    Leave a comment:


  • erehwon
    replied
    Re: Spam gets 1 response per 12,500,000 emails

    Originally posted by bascule View Post
    http://www.techradar.com/news/comput...c=rss&attr=all

    According to the article, students at the University of California, Berkeley and UC, San Diego infiltrated the Storm network, taking control of 75,869 hijacked machines to conduct their own fake spam campaigns. "The best way to measure spam is to be a spammer," claims the study:

    Is it really ethical to usurp control of a botnet for the purposes of academic research, and moreover, is it ethical to use the botnet to send out 350 million spam messages?

    I'll certainly admit I've often wondered how often spam actually results in a sale, and these researchers have come up with a way to answer that, but I can't help but question their methods.
    I'm having a hard time with their stats, it says in the article the researchers used 'proxy bots' to control 75,869 hijacked machines to conduct their own fake spam campaigns. I can't see why they had to hack control of the botnet, over leasing the network by the week like all the other spammers end up doing.

    I'd be willing to bet had they dragged someone from the Berkeley Haas School of Business they could have crafted a good stock pick that would have converted better sales than with herbal Viagra.

    Leave a comment:


  • YenTheFirst
    replied
    Re: Spam gets 1 response per 12,500,000 emails

    I think those 28 people need to be talked to. If not for that incredibly small percentage of people, spam wouldn't be a problem.

    Leave a comment:


  • bascule
    started a topic Spam gets 1 response per 12,500,000 emails

    Spam gets 1 response per 12,500,000 emails

    http://www.techradar.com/news/comput...c=rss&attr=all

    While the figures of the study are interesting in and of themselves, what I thought was far more interesting was their methodology.

    According to the article, students at the University of California, Berkeley and UC, San Diego infiltrated the Storm network, taking control of 75,869 hijacked machines to conduct their own fake spam campaigns. "The best way to measure spam is to be a spammer," claims the study:

    "After 26 days, and almost 350 million email messages, only 28 sales resulted," says the research paper.

    Yet even with this apparently abysmal response rate of less than 0.00001 per cent, the researchers still estimate that the controllers of a network the size of Storm are still bringing in about $7,000 (£4,430) a day or $3.5m (£2.21m) over a year.
    Is it really ethical to usurp control of a botnet for the purposes of academic research, and moreover, is it ethical to use the botnet to send out 350 million spam messages?

    I'll certainly admit I've often wondered how often spam actually results in a sale, and these researchers have come up with a way to answer that, but I can't help but question their methods.
Working...
X