Australian raid over billions of Viagra spams

Send to a friend Print

Help more people find out about this story

Del.icio.us
StumbleUpon

Dan Warne12 September 2006, 5:06 AM

The Australian communication regulator has raided an Australian house over claims that its resident was involved in sending billions of spam emails.


The Australian Communication and Media Authority today announced it had raided an Australian home over allegations that the resident had sent billions of spam emails.
"Preliminary analysis of the email messages contained in the spam campaign has identified that over two billion emails were sent in one spam campaign," said Lyn Maddock, Acting ACMA Chair.

"ACMA analysis to date has identified that the messages in the spam campaign primarily promoted Viagra products."

The investigation commenced after ACMA received information from OPTA, the Dutch Independent Regulator of Post and Telecommunications. ACMA said it was working closely with overseas agencies in its investigation.

In an interesting test of Australia's spam legislation, ACMA confirmed that most of the spam appeared to have been sent from overseas. However, "section 7 of the Spam Act 2003 makes it an offence for an Australian to be involved in the sending of spam if there is an 'Australian link'."

"As part of its investigation, ACMA is investigating whether there is an Australian link associated with this spam campaign."

ACMA is now analysing the materials it seized as part of its raid.

The government body said penalties for contravention of the Spam Act can be up to $A220,000 per day for first-time corporate offenders and up to $A1.1 million per day for repeat offenders.

Profits can also be forfeited and compensation paid to victims.

As the matter is still under investigation, ACMA refused to make any further comment on the specifics of the identity of the person raided, however it encouraged people to report spam to ACMA using the SpamMATTERS reporting tool which can be downloaded from the ACMA website.


Post your comment



Comments

RSS feed Email alert

Teaspoon:

"Everyone here should subscribe the scumbag to every piece of snail mail junk mail that they know of."

Wow, it's self-righteous vigilante "poetic justice", just like on Slashdot that one time!

Alan Ralsky was Slashdot's victim, if anybody wants to look it up.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Atom:

If the accused is found guilty. Everyone here should subscribe the scumbag to every piece of snail mail junk mail that they know of.
Makes me wonder how effective the ACMA's SpamMATTERS reporting service is if it takes the Dutch authorities to initiate action. I will continue to use SpamMATTERS even if it only makes me feel good.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tin:

Compensation to the victims? If the victim is the person that had bandwidth wasted receiving this crap, where do we sign up for the compo??

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

DriverGeek:

Alan Ralsky is no victum. Next time, try a teaspoon of reality.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Teaspoon:

Alan Ralsky is a victim of Slashdot's "poetic justice" vigilantes. I'm not saying he's not a bastard, but the Slashdotters had no legal (or moral, IMO) right to do what they did. The legal system exists to penalise people for acting against society's interests, and if they're not effective enough then people should force changes in the legal system. Taking the law into your own hands isn't in society's interests, no matter how justified you personally might feel at the time. Imagine a world where anybody could punish anybody for any act (real or imagined) in whatever way they thought was appropriate. Be realistic. Messy, underpopulated place you're imagining, isn't it?

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Conan:

If one day I become Prime Minister or President of Australia, I will place in prizon any spammer for 20 years. Also anyone who consider a spammer a "victim" will be force to meet the people who received spam emails on the inbox. Also anyone who new about the crime of the spammer but did nothing about because they did not want to get involve or loose their spammer friend will share for 5 years in prizon the same room. A few years ago I got a lot of spam emails from a spammer who was sued for 15.000.000 dollars by Microsoft. Did the spammer learn his lesson? No he didn't. He keeps sending Microsoft a Postcard from China and he is happy that China do nothing about spammers. One day in the future there will be Snipers going after spammers who think that by registering their Domain Name in China they can get away. Is good that Australia is not sitting on a couch watching TV and letting TERRORIST Spammers get away. Australia should use the Soldiers to go after the Spammers, they are Internet Terrorists.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Teaspoon:

I meet people who receive spam emails all the time. Also, I am one myself.

This doesn't mean that Alan Ralsky's not a victim. He suffered due to a malicious act. That's what a victim is. Criminal acts a person may have committed in one situation do not preclude them from being a victim in another. The Slashdotters involved may have felt they were justified and clever in doing this, but that just goes to show how immature and self-absorbed this huge chunk of the geek community is. If you Google for Alan Ralsky, you'll see that he was eventually shut down when the FBI raided his home and confiscated all his computers. The FBI [b]do[/b] have the legal authority to do this. The random geeks on slashdot who decided it would make them feel like cool cyber-vigilantes to fraudulently apply for junk mail in someone else's name did not, so their actions were malicious and illegal.

Also, spammers are not terrorists. They're not attempting to force policy changes by threatening civilians, or any of those other things terrorists do. They're more along the lines of thieves and harrassers. They certainly cost the world an awful lot of money in uninvited data transfer, which I would argue counts as theft. Their intrusions into our inboxes when we clearly don't want them to could be construed as harrassment and might be able to be stretched as far as trespass.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

J. Jeltes:

Teaspoon,

There is a major difference between receiving spam and having your perfectly legal (and very costly) domain hijacked and abused by spammers. As a case in point, my company had to shut one of our domains last year because spammers abused it so badly that our servers and our staff simply could not manage the load.

That's not simply stealing and certainly not a little bit of harrassment or some bandwidth issue. It is the callous and wholesale hijacking of property that legally belongs to someone else, for which someone else is paying, and for which someone else suffers real financial losses; not simply a few dollars worth of bandwidth.

Your defence of leaches like Allan Ralsky at the expense of IT professionals that frequent Slashdot is grossly misplaced. Slashdotters are the same people who have to clean up tens of thousands of spam emails every day of their professional life, and spend their weekends and nights away from their families yet again cleaning viri and adware from their installations.

Frankly, you are either a spammer yourself and therefore an apologist, or you simply don't have a clue. Please feel free to do some research in future before you comment on complex things you may not fully understand.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

paradox:

“Preliminary analysis of the email messages contained in the spam campaign has identified that over two billion emails were sent in one spam campaign,” said Lyn Maddock, Acting ACMA Chair.

“ACMA analysis to date has identified that the messages in the spam campaign primarily promoted Viagra products.”


I am musing as to how he figured 2 billion ppl would need viagra, wouldn't that alone highlight his way of thinking?

On the topic its unfortunate that it takes that many emails too trigger a response i realise they were probably overtime etc but 2 billion!? isnt that a tad more than say a normal mailgroup would send or such even?

regards

paradoxical

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (9 months ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

anonymous user Anonymous user


Tags