Re: [gnso-ff-pdp-may08] Understanding Fast Flux Fraud

[Dave Piscitello <dave.piscitello@xxxxxxxxx>]

Greg offered this answer before I could. His is a specific case of a less 
obvious form of fast flux, one that stays covert and would not benefit (in fact 
would be harmed by) using spam to lure visitors/victims.


On 7/18/08 10:35 AM, "Greg Aaron" <gaaron@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



Most flux-enabled abuses/crimes/frauds have a spam component.  But not all,
and it can depend upon the type of crime or abuse involved.  An example are
child pr)nogrphy sites that are hosted on fast-flux networks.  (There are
some such sites active right now.)  The operators of such sites do not
advertise via spam, because it is a sure-fire way for them to attract the
public attention they wish to avoid.  This is why such domains do not show
up on spam blacklists.

So spam is an excellent indicator, but it will not point to or be applicable
to all fast-flux domains.

All best,
--Greg


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-ff-pdp-may08@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-ff-pdp-may08@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Marc Perkel
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 10:10 AM
To: gnso-ff-pdp-May08@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-ff-pdp-may08] Understanding Fast Flux Fraud


Tell me if this is accurate. Whenever there is fraud based fast flux
there is also a spam component that is spreading the word that links to
the fast flux domain. That's what gets people interested in the fluxing
domain. Fast Flux scams have a spam component.

Is this an accurate assumption?