Subject: [Asrg] New type of spam?

From: Reinhold Jordan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 15:33:01 +0200

Hello,

I found more and more requests to my website with referers that
doesn't link to me. Porn and other useless things known from spam.

The requests come from servers like *.rogers.com, *.rr.com,
*.comcast.net already known from sending spam. Or new servers
like *.dial1.boston1.level3.net

I add a few lines of code to my website to forward such requests to
the referer. So there is less traffic for me and more for them.

Did anyone notice such requests?

Regards, Reinhold

-- 
                         Reinhold Jordan
WWW: http://reinhold.bachrain.de         Mail: [email-masked]
qmail-spam-protection with intelligent-greylisting, reverse-smtp...
qmail.spamfilter.050601.047.tar.bz2 actual rejects 99.94% of spam!!

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg

---

From: Daniel Feenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 09:50:22 -0400 (EDT)

> the referer. So there is less traffic for me and more for them.

But the way you describe the situation, the request must come from a
broken browser or robot. After all, if the other server doesn't link to
you, how would it get into the referrer field? Am I confused? What would
be the motive?

---

From: James Lick <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 22:13:26 +0800

>you, how would it get into the referrer field? Am I confused? What would

They are trying to get onto the 'sites that link to us' lists that are 
usually automatically generated from referer logs.  Also some blogging 
software automatically adds links to other sites that reference an 
article.  If they can get those links onto other pages then they 1) get 
more people clicking through to their site and 2) their page rank in 
search engines goes up.

-- 
James Lick -- 黎建溥 -- [email-masked] -- http://jameslick.com/

---

From: Reinhold Jordan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 16:17:29 +0200

Hello,

> you, how would it get into the referrer field?

e. g. wget can do this with option --referer

> Am I confused? What would be the motive?

I think some sites show their referers (like my own). If one treat
enough sites to show his name, searching-engines list this name
at a better position.

Regards, Reinhold