Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Analytics

Spammers Attack IT

A new wave of spam attacks uses 'IT-speak' to escape filters and fool data center staff

Expert spammers love a challenge, so they've decided to take on the world's most unlikely victims: the IT staff itself.

Researchers at MessageLabs Ltd. , a messaging security vendor, say they have detected a new form of spam that attempts to hide itself from content filters and human recognition by masquerading as legitimate email among IT staff.

The new spam messages include words and phrases such as ".NET," "XSS," or trouble ticket numbers that simultaneously avoid Baysian content filters and trick IT staffers into opening it.

"With words and phrases like that, a message is much more likely to be scored as non-spam by a content filter, and the subject lines are socially engineered to make an IT staffer believe they are legitimate," says Matt Sergeant, senior anti-spam technologist at MessageLabs.

The spam, which was likely created by top spam minds in Russia, creates an ironic twist: IT staffers falling for the same spam they always warn users not to open, Sergeant notes.

MessageLabs expects the spammers to expand their exploits to other industries, such as accounting or legal firms, using vertical jargon to fool content filters while making their messages seem more legitimate.

This approach could cause a lot of trouble for so-called "learning" content filters that pick up common terminology to help classify non-spam, Sergeant observes. "If this keeps up, the content filter could start scoring non-spam as spam," he says.

To avoid the problem, Sergeant advises companies to approach spam with filters that use more than one screening technique, avoiding sole reliance on Baysian or learning filters.

— Tim Wilson, Site Editor, Dark Reading

Tim Wilson is Editor in Chief and co-founder of Dark Reading.com, UBM Tech's online community for information security professionals. He is responsible for managing the site, assigning and editing content, and writing breaking news stories. Wilson has been recognized as one ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
News
Former CISA Director Chris Krebs Discusses Risk Management & Threat Intel
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  2/23/2021
Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
Security + Fraud Protection: Your One-Two Punch Against Cyberattacks
Joshua Goldfarb, Director of Product Management at F5,  2/23/2021
News
Cybercrime Groups More Prolific, Focus on Healthcare in 2020
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  2/22/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win an Amazon Gift Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: "The truth behind Stonehenge...."
Current Issue
2021 Top Enterprise IT Trends
We've identified the key trends that are poised to impact the IT landscape in 2021. Find out why they're important and how they will affect you today!
Flash Poll
Building the SOC of the Future
Building the SOC of the Future
Digital transformation, cloud-focused attacks, and a worldwide pandemic. The past year has changed the way business works and the way security teams operate. There is no going back.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2021-27886
PUBLISHED: 2021-03-02
rakibtg Docker Dashboard before 2021-02-28 allows command injection in backend/utilities/terminal.js via shell metacharacters in the command parameter of an API request. NOTE: this is NOT a Docker, Inc. product.
CVE-2016-8153
PUBLISHED: 2021-03-02
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: The CNA or individual who requested this candidate did not associate it with any vulnerability during 2016. Notes: none.
CVE-2016-8154
PUBLISHED: 2021-03-02
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: The CNA or individual who requested this candidate did not associate it with any vulnerability during 2016. Notes: none.
CVE-2016-8155
PUBLISHED: 2021-03-02
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: The CNA or individual who requested this candidate did not associate it with any vulnerability during 2016. Notes: none.
CVE-2016-8156
PUBLISHED: 2021-03-02
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: The CNA or individual who requested this candidate did not associate it with any vulnerability during 2016. Notes: none.