Re: Mail Attack

From: Steve Phillips (steve_at_focb.co.nz)
Date: 08/24/05

  • Next message: Kurt Heine: "nv_sata performance issues"
    Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 10:32:39 +1200
    To: General Red Hat Linux discussion list <redhat-list@redhat.com>
    
    

    Jessica Zhu wrote:
    > Hi Steve,
    >
    > Below is one. It is from mx.maria.choppy.com.cl, right? I guess I have to
    > scan all the bounces. It will be really time consuming.
    >
    > Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 03:43:57 +0800 (CST)
    > From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON@ms28.hinet.net>
    > To: Jessica@mathforum.org
    > Subject: Returned mail: Service unavailable
    >
    > The original message was received at Wed, 24 Aug 2005 03:43:52 +0800 (CST)
    > from [211.106.177.167]
    >
    > ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
    > <chingyu7@ms28.hinet.net>
    >
    > ----- Transcript of session follows -----
    > mail.local: /var/mail/c/chingyu7: Disc quota exceeded
    > 554 <chingyu7@ms28.hinet.net>... Service unavailable
    >
    > ----- Original message follows -----
    >
    > Return-Path: <Jessica@mathforum.org>
    > Received: from 168.95.5.28 ([211.106.177.167])
    > by ms28.hinet.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id DAA01186;
    > Wed, 24 Aug 2005 03:43:52 +0800 (CST)
    > Received: from mx.maria.choppy.com.cl (HELO 24-138.F.dial.o-tel-o.net)
    > by mx.maria.munich.com.cl (Estfix) with ESMTP id F86203BD55
    > for <Jessica@mathforum.org>; Wed, 24 Aug 2005 01:38:50 +0500

    These are the important lines.

    It should also be noted that as spammers forge these lines the first one
    is generally the only one that can be trusted, but lets follow them all
    as an example.

    The above says

    "Mail originated from a machine that thought it was called
    24-138.F.dial.o-tel-o.net but was mx.maria.choppy.com.cl and was recived
    by mx.maria.munich.com.cl"

    The next line reads

    "Mail originated from a machine that called itself 168.95.5.28 but was
    infact 211.106.177.167 and was recived by ms28.hinet.net"

     From this we can tell that either the first recived line is bogus or
    somehow the message magically jumped from Chile to the USA (whic his
    unlikely)

    As a result, the only _real_ information we have is that the spam
    originated from 211.106.177.167, which was also trying to lie about its
    identity by calling itself 168.95.5.28 (which is actually the IP of
    ms28.hinet.net)

    211.106.177.167 is a Korean network block, and looking up via APNIC

    whois 211.106.177.167@whois.apnic.net

    produces..

    # ENGLISH

    KRNIC is not a ISP but a National Internet Registry similar to APNIC.
    The followings are information of the organization that is using the
    IPv4 address.

    IPv4 Address : 211.106.177.0-211.106.177.255
    Network Name : KORNET-INFRA000001
    Connect ISP Name : KORNET
    Connect Date : 20031129
    Registration Date : 20031209

    [ Organization Information ]
    Organization ID : ORG1600
    Org Name : Korea Telecom
    State : GYUNGGI
    Address : 206, Jungja-dong, Bundang-gu, Sungnam-ci
    Zip Code : 463-711

    [ Admin Contact Information]
    Name : IP Administrator
    Org Name : Korea Telecom
    State : GYUNGGI
    Address : 206, Jungja-dong, Bundang-gu, Sungnam-ci
    Zip Code : 463-711
    Phone : +82-2-3674-5708
    Fax : +82-2-747-8701
    E-Mail : ip@ns.kornet.net

    [ Technical Contact Information ]
    Name : IP Manager
    Org Name : Korea Telecom
    State : GYUNGGI
    Address : 206, Jungja-dong, Bundang-gu, Sungnam-ci
    Zip Code : 463-711
    Phone : +82-2-3674-5708
    Fax : +82-2-747-8701
    E-Mail : ip@ns.kornet.net

    This could potentially create problems for you unless you are versed in
    korean. I would try to send an e-mail to them and hope that someone
    there understands the language you compose your e-mail in. Failing this,
    you may want to redirect a bunch of these messages to the admin and
    technical contacts (which happen to be the same address) and hope there
    is someone there that understands e-mail headers.

    You should also examine the other messages however as you may find that
    this box (211.106.177.167) is a comprimised machine that is being used
    to relay spam and hide the real person.

    In this case you are goign to have a major job tracking these people
    down - if this is the case try to find an address range used that
    originated in a country that you speak the language of fluently and try
    calling them - they may be able to help you track down the actual
    originator of these messages and you can then either persue legal
    proceedings or request their real ISP to shut them down.

    However, the problem can get worse, if the spam is originating from a
    "spam gang" then you are pretty much out of luck and will either have to
    shut down the domain or buy a bigger box to cope with the attack.
    Eventually the spam will stop..

    Hope this helps..

    -- 
    Steve.
    (PS: sorry it took so long to reply, we had a fire alarm go off :-) )
    -- 
    redhat-list mailing list
    unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe
    https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
    

  • Next message: Kurt Heine: "nv_sata performance issues"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: "Overview of the Einsteinhoax Website"
      ... meaning that the originator is intentionally ... If that doesn't qualify as spamming, ... The defense spam that is frequently posted here ... however my ISP provides for multiple user names and permits them to be ...
      (sci.physics.relativity)
    • Re: Mail Attack
      ... On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Steve Phillips wrote: ... > KRNIC is not a ISP but a National Internet Registry similar to APNIC. ... > to relay spam and hide the real person. ... > originator of these messages and you can then either persue legal ...
      (RedHat)
    • Re: avoid bouncing of rejected messages
      ... If you reject the spam during the SMTP transaction, ... Maybe one can do that on a private server but unfortunately not in our ... The directive in RFC2821 says that "undeliverable mail" notification must be ... sent to the "originator" of the undeliverable mail. ...
      (comp.mail.sendmail)
    • Re: Protect Your Images!
      ... > but who are you going to report the unwanted posting to? ... It was reported to Google where the spam originated. ... Nasty e-mail to an originator is _never_ in order. ... participants who DO complain to ISP's. ...
      (rec.photo.darkroom)
    • Re: Flood of Recipient Unknown Messages - Partition Filled
      ... Buy a spam filter ... your server is idle for 55 seconds in every minute. ... The originator of this SPAM is spending ...
      (microsoft.public.exchange2000.admin)