Comments on: Blue Frog users may be hopping mad http://michaelgracie.com/2006/05/01/blue-frog-users-may-be-hopping-mad/ Clever Tagline Unavailable At Publication Time Sat, 22 Nov 2008 09:54:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Wortherston http://michaelgracie.com/2006/05/01/blue-frog-users-may-be-hopping-mad/#comment-170 Wortherston Tue, 02 May 2006 21:14:13 +0000 http://www.michaelgracie.com/blue-frog-users-may-be-hopping-mad/#comment-170 bluesecurity is done for... from the posts on specialham it appears they have set a mass ddos attack on their servers and have sent the entire blue security user database to over 200 spammers... if I had an email address registered with blue security, I would be changing it ASAP before my hard drive filled up with thousands of spam messages a day... they tried to fight fire with fire and the spammers fought back.. check specialham.com and see.. bluesecurity is done for that's for sure... bluesecurity is done for… from the posts on specialham it appears they have set a mass ddos attack on their servers and have sent the entire blue security user database to over 200 spammers…

if I had an email address registered with blue security, I would be changing it ASAP before my hard drive filled up with thousands of spam messages a day…

they tried to fight fire with fire and the spammers fought back.. check specialham.com and see.. bluesecurity is done for that’s for sure…

]]> By: Michael Gracie http://michaelgracie.com/2006/05/01/blue-frog-users-may-be-hopping-mad/#comment-169 Michael Gracie Tue, 02 May 2006 18:33:57 +0000 http://www.michaelgracie.com/blue-frog-users-may-be-hopping-mad/#comment-169 <p>I wish I could give some comfort here, but I did suggest that Blue Security might be needing some more servers soon.</p> <p>Seems the whole site is actually hurting: <cite>Safari could not open the page “http://bluesecurity.com/” because the server stopped responding.</cite></p> <p>Not good.</p> I wish I could give some comfort here, but I did suggest that Blue Security might be needing some more servers soon.

Seems the whole site is actually hurting: Safari could not open the page “http://bluesecurity.com/” because the server stopped responding.

Not good.

]]> By: mcsolas http://michaelgracie.com/2006/05/01/blue-frog-users-may-be-hopping-mad/#comment-168 mcsolas Tue, 02 May 2006 17:02:52 +0000 http://www.michaelgracie.com/blue-frog-users-may-be-hopping-mad/#comment-168 >There has been a lot of [untrue facts] running around about Blue Security [untrue facts] also known as falsifications. I am really interested to find out what is what here. I am a user of their system and "published" 3 of my email accounts with them. I am now getting ripped apart by the spammers. What makes me worry is that at the bottom of the messages now, they tell you the bluesecurity.com site is down, and it is! Im a bit worried. What is going to happen from here. Did bluesecurity screw everyone over here then leave us hanging? >There has been a lot of [untrue facts] running around about Blue Security

[untrue facts] also known as falsifications.

I am really interested to find out what is what here. I am a user of their system and “published” 3 of my email accounts with them. I am now getting ripped apart by the spammers.

What makes me worry is that at the bottom of the messages now, they tell you the bluesecurity.com site is down, and it is!

Im a bit worried. What is going to happen from here.

Did bluesecurity screw everyone over here then leave us hanging?

]]> By: Michael Gracie http://michaelgracie.com/2006/05/01/blue-frog-users-may-be-hopping-mad/#comment-167 Michael Gracie Tue, 02 May 2006 16:29:50 +0000 http://www.michaelgracie.com/blue-frog-users-may-be-hopping-mad/#comment-167 <p>Unfortunately for the above commenter, "michael" is actually the same "michael" that posts the entries (almost) each and every day here at Spamroll - I may not be able to attest to owning any useful technical knowledge, but I can attest to the authenticity of the "michael" comments above. A quick search of Spamroll will also uncover that I am not a fan of Blue Security, and that I give everyone equal footing when arguing here.</p> <p>Sorry user220, you are at least half wrong (and maybe all wrong, as there is only one "harry" poster above).</p> Unfortunately for the above commenter, “michael” is actually the same “michael” that posts the entries (almost) each and every day here at Spamroll - I may not be able to attest to owning any useful technical knowledge, but I can attest to the authenticity of the “michael” comments above. A quick search of Spamroll will also uncover that I am not a fan of Blue Security, and that I give everyone equal footing when arguing here.

Sorry user220, you are at least half wrong (and maybe all wrong, as there is only one “harry” poster above).

]]> By: user220 http://michaelgracie.com/2006/05/01/blue-frog-users-may-be-hopping-mad/#comment-166 user220 Tue, 02 May 2006 16:15:52 +0000 http://www.michaelgracie.com/blue-frog-users-may-be-hopping-mad/#comment-166 doesn't anyone realize all these "harrys" and "michaels" are simply blue security trying to save their image? They are acting like anonymous blue security users, but apparently their ship has sunk, and it appears as a last ditch effort to save their credability. They have been doing the same on specialham.com One can tell by their type, font and grammar that all of this is written by the same person at blue security. Unfortunately they learned like LYCOS that DDOSing doesn't work and only infuriates people.. after this message, there will be another "harry or "michael" under a new alias trying to save the company as well.. it's useless.. they are done for from what i have seen on specialham... doesn’t anyone realize all these “harrys” and “michaels” are simply blue security trying to save their image?

They are acting like anonymous blue security users, but apparently their ship has sunk, and it appears as a last ditch effort to save their credability.

They have been doing the same on specialham.com

One can tell by their type, font and grammar that all of this is written by the same person at blue security.

Unfortunately they learned like LYCOS that DDOSing doesn’t work and only infuriates people..

after this message, there will be another “harry or “michael” under a new alias trying to save the company as well.. it’s useless.. they are done for from what i have seen on specialham…

]]> By: Tomasz Andrzej Nidecki http://michaelgracie.com/2006/05/01/blue-frog-users-may-be-hopping-mad/#comment-165 Tomasz Andrzej Nidecki Tue, 02 May 2006 13:32:42 +0000 http://www.michaelgracie.com/blue-frog-users-may-be-hopping-mad/#comment-165 @Michael: yes, a dictionary attack would be easier. However, a friend of mine just analyzed the Blue Frog application, and found the list to be made up of SHA1 hashes (more difficult to break than MD5 as far as I know). Therefore, even with a dictionary attack, spammers would have to spend real huge resources to get the addresses from this list. However, they are using a different method. See, they have their own lists, which they use everyday to spam people. What they do, is they create SHA1 hashes of the addresses they have on their own lists, and simply check whether this SHA1 is on the Blue Frog list. Therefore, what they can do is they can check which addresses that they already have are on the Blue Frog list. And these are the addresses which receive threats and an increased number of spam e-mail now. From my experience, I have my whole domain and eight addresses on the Blue Security list. I am attacked at only one of them. There have also been reports, that people were receiving threats at addresses, which were not submitted to Blue Security. Therefore, this is all spammer's lies. My advice is, use Blue Frog and promote it even more. It HURTS spammers, therefore it's effective. I'm sure this media coverage will bring more new users than the spammers were hoping to discourage, so the spammers are harming themselves. @Michael: yes, a dictionary attack would be easier. However, a friend of mine just analyzed the Blue Frog application, and found the list to be made up of SHA1 hashes (more difficult to break than MD5 as far as I know). Therefore, even with a dictionary attack, spammers would have to spend real huge resources to get the addresses from this list.

However, they are using a different method. See, they have their own lists, which they use everyday to spam people. What they do, is they create SHA1 hashes of the addresses they have on their own lists, and simply check whether this SHA1 is on the Blue Frog list. Therefore, what they can do is they can check which addresses that they already have are on the Blue Frog list. And these are the addresses which receive threats and an increased number of spam e-mail now.

From my experience, I have my whole domain and eight addresses on the Blue Security list. I am attacked at only one of them. There have also been reports, that people were receiving threats at addresses, which were not submitted to Blue Security. Therefore, this is all spammer’s lies.

My advice is, use Blue Frog and promote it even more. It HURTS spammers, therefore it’s effective. I’m sure this media coverage will bring more new users than the spammers were hoping to discourage, so the spammers are harming themselves.

]]> By: harry http://michaelgracie.com/2006/05/01/blue-frog-users-may-be-hopping-mad/#comment-164 harry Tue, 02 May 2006 12:36:27 +0000 http://www.michaelgracie.com/blue-frog-users-may-be-hopping-mad/#comment-164 Hacking the list would probably qualify them for a nobel prize! If they'd hacked the list, all three of my email addresses on the blue frog register would have received the warning message. but only the one that has always got a lot of spam was targeted. i think its obvious that they had my email address already and marked it as one that was removed from their database by the blue security tool. all of which means that complying with their request merely means you'll get all the usual spam minus the crap begging you not to be a member of blue frog. moreover, if they were really nasty, they could compare the washed list from yesterday (your email removed) with a washed list after you quit (your email still present) and say 'aha - this guy really reads his spam' and put you on a special list for people susceptible to persuasion ;-) Hacking the list would probably qualify them for a nobel prize!

If they’d hacked the list, all three of my email addresses on the blue frog register would have received the warning message. but only the one that has always got a lot of spam was targeted. i think its obvious that they had my email address already and marked it as one that was removed from their database by the blue security tool.

all of which means that complying with their request merely means you’ll get all the usual spam minus the crap begging you not to be a member of blue frog.

moreover, if they were really nasty, they could compare the washed list from yesterday (your email removed) with a washed list after you quit (your email still present) and say ‘aha - this guy really reads his spam’ and put you on a special list for people susceptible to persuasion ;-)

]]> By: Michael Gracie http://michaelgracie.com/2006/05/01/blue-frog-users-may-be-hopping-mad/#comment-163 Michael Gracie Tue, 02 May 2006 05:19:01 +0000 http://www.michaelgracie.com/blue-frog-users-may-be-hopping-mad/#comment-163 <p>Tomasz,</p> <p>While I always appreciate a good challenge, this one is beyond my immediate capabilities. Then again, I doubt you were suggesting a brute force attempt. Considering that a number of characters in an email address can be assumed with a reasonable level of reliability (say the @ sign, as well as ending strings of .com, .net, .org, etc.), wouldn't that make any such attempt a bit easier (assuming you could create a table that take those factors into account)?</p> <p>Just a thought.</p> <p>michael</p> Tomasz,

While I always appreciate a good challenge, this one is beyond my immediate capabilities. Then again, I doubt you were suggesting a brute force attempt. Considering that a number of characters in an email address can be assumed with a reasonable level of reliability (say the @ sign, as well as ending strings of .com, .net, .org, etc.), wouldn’t that make any such attempt a bit easier (assuming you could create a table that take those factors into account)?

Just a thought.

michael

]]> By: Larry http://michaelgracie.com/2006/05/01/blue-frog-users-may-be-hopping-mad/#comment-162 Larry Tue, 02 May 2006 00:35:18 +0000 http://www.michaelgracie.com/blue-frog-users-may-be-hopping-mad/#comment-162 Pissed off? Yes. Pissed off at Blue Frog? No. Only pissed off at a spammer who is willing to look up people who he knows specifically DO NOT want spam and single them out for extra helpings of it. Pissed off? Yes. Pissed off at Blue Frog? No. Only pissed off at a spammer who is willing to look up people who he knows specifically DO NOT want spam and single them out for extra helpings of it.

]]> By: Tomasz Andrzej Nidecki http://michaelgracie.com/2006/05/01/blue-frog-users-may-be-hopping-mad/#comment-161 Tomasz Andrzej Nidecki Mon, 01 May 2006 22:38:35 +0000 http://www.michaelgracie.com/blue-frog-users-may-be-hopping-mad/#comment-161 Just for your amusement, Michael, and to support what I've said above, try to tell me what is the following e-mail address: MD5: 338320ca46e285ec44517354c793a0cb Please post your reply in a comment, when you manage to crack this MD5. But if you have the mail address, and want to check whether this is infact a valid MD5 for it, it takes a blink of an eye. That's the magic of hashes... Ah, also please accept my apologies for saying your post is bull. All us spamfighters should join hands, but please do look up the information more carefully before you post it. There has been a lot of untrue facts running around about Blue Security, all of them caused by the lack of understanding of the technology. It's harming the idea, because of lack of knowledge... Just for your amusement, Michael, and to support what I’ve said above, try to tell me what is the following e-mail address:

MD5: 338320ca46e285ec44517354c793a0cb

Please post your reply in a comment, when you manage to crack this MD5. But if you have the mail address, and want to check whether this is infact a valid MD5 for it, it takes a blink of an eye. That’s the magic of hashes…

Ah, also please accept my apologies for saying your post is bull. All us spamfighters should join hands, but please do look up the information more carefully before you post it. There has been a lot of untrue facts running around about Blue Security, all of them caused by the lack of understanding of the technology. It’s harming the idea, because of lack of knowledge…

]]>