Forum Moderators: phranque
Security vendors have warned e-mail users to be as vigilant about PDF attachments as they would for other documents, after seeing a sharp rise in spam embedded within PDF documents.E-mail security vendor Messagelabs reports that PDF's made up 20 percent of image-based spam messages in July, up 10 percent on the month prior. Image-based spam makes up around 22 percent of total spam, the company said.
The security company believes attackers are using the PDF format due the fact that it more easily bypasses antivirus and anti-spam filters, and that users tend to trust the authenticity of a PDF over other types of documents, even if they don't recognise the sender.
PDFs Can't Always Be Trusted [zdnet.com.au]
Once again, take care, especially with the pdf spam going round.
I don't think the no reports is correct one thing for sure I know there is a big problems with bad pdf's on wiki.
Personally I haven’t gotten one, Yet, nor any email account on several domains I manage that have GreyListing enabled.
On the other hand, the email software should have a feature that enables administrator to activate to receive attachments only from the trusted source. Once the source is compromised, the ISP that is liable for spam delivered should paying an hourly rate to the person who opened an email. This might sound like BLAH but money talks, sometimes backwards is the only way to go.
I have spam filters in place, and they block the JPG spam just fine, but the PDF spam has gotten through (although it does seem to be learning and getting better).
It's annoying because I actually get PDFs from clients, so the staff has to be extra vigilant.
I actually thought they were viruses and not spam, so I just don't open them.
I have one desktop instance of a link followed in the "spam" pdf's installing a worm email virus with up to date antivirus watching (grumble); this happened Tuesday last week. The end results were not funny...
I had a catchall email address setup on the domain(s). Remove the catchall and setup forwarding email addresses for the addresses you need / desire and just bounce the rest.
Doesn't this just pass the problem onto someone else? I see how it helps the webmaster of the domain in question but if we bounce them doesn't that just pass on the problem?
I also have been receiving a lot of .pdf attachment spam. Not opened one yet but must admit they are quite clever as the name of the attachment and subject line are quite on target for me.
Doesn't this just pass the problem onto someone else?
Another Short answer is that most ISP's request you phase out use of catchalls on their servers for various technical reasons.
I also have been receiving a lot of .pdf attachment spam. Not opened one yet but must admit they are quite clever as the name of the attachment and subject line are quite on target for me.
its all fun stuff...
Most email systems don't filter out as spam any messages that are supposedly telling you that some other message that you have sent has now been bounced by the recipient.
So, the spammer sends thousands of messages addressed to you, and each one is bounced by your server. Each message came from a different email address, and that "from" email address is the target email address that the spammer actually wanted the spam sent to.
I would silently blackhole those messages, or else configure the server to send a "message not delivered" response without including the content of the original mail.