Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Survey finds one in six consumers act on spam
MacWorld ^ | July 14, 2009 | Jeremy Kirk

Posted on 07/14/2009 9:34:09 AM PDT by Stoat

Survey finds one in six consumers act on spam

by Jeremy Kirk, IDG News Service

About one in six consumers have at some time acted on a spam message, affirming the economic incentive for spammers to keep churning out millions of obnoxious pitches per day, according to a new survey.

Due to be released Wednesday, the survey was sponsored by the Messaging Anti-Abuse Working Group (MAAWG), an industrywide security think tank composed of service providers and network operators dedicated to fighting spam and malicious software.

Eight hundred consumers in the U.S. and Canada were asked about their computer security practices habits as well as awareness of current security issues.

Those who did admit to opening a spam message -- which in and of itself could potentially harm their computer -- said they were interested in a product or service or wanted to see what would happen when they opened it.

"It is this level of response that makes spamming a lot more attractive as a business because spam is much more likely to generate revenues at this response rate," according to the survey.

One other study, conducted by the computer science departments of the University of California at its Berkeley and San Diego campuses, showed the number people who actually made a purchase following a spam pitch was just a fraction of a percent.

Those researchers infiltrated the Storm botnet, a network of hacked computers used to send spam.

They monitored three spam campaigns, in which more than 469 million e-mails were sent. Of the 350 million messages pitching pharmaceuticals, 10,522 users visited the advertised site, but only 28 people tried to make a purchase, a response rate of .0000081 percent. Still, that rate is high enough to potentially generate up to $3.5 million in annual revenue, they concluded.

MAAWG's survey showed that nearly two-thirds of the 800 polled felt they were somewhat experienced in Internet security, a highly complex field even for those trained in it, said Michael O'Reirdan, chairman of MAAWG's board of directors.

And some 80 percent of people felt their machine would never be infected with a bot, or a piece of malicious software that can send spam, harvest data and do other harmful functions. That's dangerous, O'Reirdan said.

"If you don't believe you aren't going to get one, you aren't going to look for one," he said. "If you get a bot, you're a nuisance to other people."

Interestingly, 63 percent of consumers said they would allow remote access to their computer to remove malware. That idea is under increasing discussion in the security community, which is grappling with how to deal with botnets. Botnets can also conduct denial-of-service attacks against Web sites, such as the ones attacked last week in South Korea and the U.S.

Some ISPs are building automated systems that can cut off a computer's Internet access if the machine is suspected of containing malware. Consumers are then given instructions on how to patch their machine and install security software. When their PC is clean, they are restored full access to the Internet. MAAWG is close to issuing a set of guidelines for ISPs on how to battle botnets.

"The best thing a user can do is patch their machine religiously," O'Reirdan said. "It's incredible easy to do."



TOPICS: Business/Economy; Computers/Internet
KEYWORDS: advertising; advertsing; computersecurity; itsecurity; napl; noobs; security; spam; survey; techping
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-36 next last
One naturally wonders what the statistical correlation is between spam-responders and 0bamavoters......
1 posted on 07/14/2009 9:34:09 AM PDT by Stoat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Stoat

So, one in six are totally brain dead morons...I figured the ratio would be much higher...


2 posted on 07/14/2009 9:36:44 AM PDT by SandWMan (While you may not be able to legislate morality, you can legislate morally.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stoat

Acting on spam? I’d pay good money for someone to beat the ever loving $#!t out of spammers. Post the results on UTube. Vigilantes at work!


3 posted on 07/14/2009 9:37:20 AM PDT by Drango (A liberal's compassion is limited only by the size of someone else's wallet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stoat

And we call these people...IDIOTS.


4 posted on 07/14/2009 9:37:48 AM PDT by Constitution Day (Eschew exclamatory abuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Slings and Arrows

I d0n^T 3v@n know how two re ad spa m emails.

palin pills lottery vacation winner ticket


5 posted on 07/14/2009 9:39:50 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (There is no truth in the Pravda Media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SandWMan
So, one in six are totally brain dead morons...I figured the ratio would be much higher...

You can count on it.


6 posted on 07/14/2009 9:41:30 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (There is no truth in the Pravda Media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Stoat
Of the 350 million messages pitching pharmaceuticals, 10,522 users visited the advertised site, but only 28 people tried to make a purchase, a response rate of .0000081 percent. Still, that rate is high enough to potentially generate up to $3.5 million in annual revenue, they concluded.

And that's why they do it. I would have laughed at the idea of a .0000081% response generating a profit, which is why I'm not a millionaire.

7 posted on 07/14/2009 9:42:01 AM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: adam_az; Swordmaker; AntiGuv; ShadowAce

IT security ping


8 posted on 07/14/2009 9:42:49 AM PDT by Stoat (Palin / Coulter 2012: A Strong America Through Unapologetic Conservatism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stoat
One naturally wonders what the statistical correlation is between spam-responders and 0bamavoters......

That was my intital reaction.

9 posted on 07/14/2009 9:43:19 AM PDT by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stoat

I would have guessed 1 in 5000.

Obama voters once again skew the results.


10 posted on 07/14/2009 9:46:31 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA (If guns cause crime, then all of mine are defective!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise

ROFL!


11 posted on 07/14/2009 9:47:14 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA (If guns cause crime, then all of mine are defective!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Stoat; rdb3; Calvinist_Dark_Lord; GodGunsandGuts; CyberCowboy777; Salo; Bobsat; JosephW; ...

12 posted on 07/14/2009 9:47:49 AM PDT by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stoat
I can't remember the last time I checked my email. I get so much spam I quit downloading my email. My work account gets no spam so I use that for important stuff.
I guess it is time to get a new email address, and retire the old one.

If you send me your bank account number and $100 I will deposit $15 mill it so I can illegally transfer funds into the us, don't worry it is not really illegal, because I am just going to keep the $100 and you will never be bothered by me again.

13 posted on 07/14/2009 9:49:47 AM PDT by DYngbld (I have read the back of the Book and we WIN!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stoat

Time to appoint a “Spam Czar”!


14 posted on 07/14/2009 9:53:02 AM PDT by COBOL2Java (Big government more or less guarantees rule by creeps and misfits.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stoat

Unbelievable.


15 posted on 07/14/2009 9:53:25 AM PDT by exist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stoat

Based on the spam email titles I receive, that should mean about 1 in 6 are walking tripods...


16 posted on 07/14/2009 9:54:07 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (I loathe the ground he slithers on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SandWMan

One in six actually believes that you can get something for (near) nothing. One in six has not heard or has forgotten “if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.”


17 posted on 07/14/2009 9:55:08 AM PDT by Clara Lou (Leave children out of politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SandWMan
...I figured the ratio would be much higher...

The article is written in such a way that it suggests at least some of the data was derived from people's responses to questions, which suggests that these are only the people who will 'admit' to acting on a spam mail.  From the article:

 

Eight hundred consumers in the U.S. and Canada were asked about their computer security practices habits as well as awareness of current security issues.

Those who did admit to opening a spam message -- which in and of itself could potentially harm their computer -- said they were interested in a product or service or wanted to see what would happen when they opened it.

So, the 'actual' percentage of people who act on spam mails may indeed be much higher, as you suggest....the rest are too embarrassed of their own stupidity to admit it.

18 posted on 07/14/2009 9:56:36 AM PDT by Stoat (Palin / Coulter 2012: A Strong America Through Unapologetic Conservatism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
Thank you very much for pinging your list  :-)

 Thank You

19 posted on 07/14/2009 9:58:42 AM PDT by Stoat (Palin / Coulter 2012: A Strong America Through Unapologetic Conservatism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Stoat
About one in six consumers have at some time acted on a spam message

Seems misleading to me. Not that I argue with the ultimate point, but what does "at some time" prove? If I opened a spam in my AOL mail in 1997 and never opened one since, do I count? If somebody opens a spam once and henceforth learns their lesson, their "YES" is still be counted here and they're still basically being branded a "moron".

"The best thing a user can do is patch their machine religiously," O'Reirdan said. "It's incredible easy to do."

Until you wake up the next day and a program that worked just yesterday suddenly doesn't work anymore. A techie knows to take a look at their update history. A grandma doesn't.
20 posted on 07/14/2009 10:16:04 AM PDT by mmichaels1970
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-36 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson