byte.org
19962013
Random Bytes, 2003–2009

[Fwd: CHEAP DOMAIN NAMES @ NETNAMES.COM]

in Random Bytes

Domain name registration spam doesn't usually come directly from accredited registrars - usually, the ne'er do wells hide behind a reseller front so they can throw their hands in the air when someone has a problem with this type of despicable behavior. Apparently, the charade is no longer needed.
Nice to see that the industry has risen to new levels of desperation.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: CHEAP DOMAIN NAMES @ NETNAMES.COM
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 19:40:02 -0100
From: NetNames
Reply-To: NetNames
To: rwmrader@tucows.com
CHEAP DOMAIN NAMES:
http://www.netnames.com
RUSH NOW - $10 LOW PRICES!!

See this post as it first appeared on Blogware.

4 comments

Comments are closed - these are kept exactly as they were left.

  1. (name not saved), August 29, 2003

    Intresting. Thanks for sharing.

  2. (name not saved), August 31, 2003

    And people will occasionally send "fake" spam in order to discredit an organisation. Is that what is happening here? I work for NetNames (part of NetBenefit plc) and as far as I know we were not involved in creating these messages.
    Any information about the source of this spam would be greatly appreciated. The examples I've seen all seem to come from widely disparate networks.

  3. (name not saved), August 31, 2003

    ...and therein lie one of the catch-22's...

    Header information doesn't amount to spit nowadays - moderately trivial to forge, definitely trivial to use relays etc, etc. The value of the path information is largely anecdotal.

    The only thing that matters is who pressed the send key and who (if applicable) paid them to hit it.

    All I know is that I've received a bunch of spam puportedly from Netnames. If you guys didn't send it, it would be really helpful if you tracked down who did.

    Here's the headers you were looking for...

    -------- Original Message --------
From: - Fri Aug 29 19:08:00 2003
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: 
Received: from [68.80.104.41] (HELO pcp04933791pcs.benslm01.pa.comcast.net)  by fr2.webmaillogin.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.1)  with SMTP id 5222713 for rwmrader@tucows.com; Fri, 29 Aug 2003 15:39:59 -0400
Received: from [15.203.181.64] by pcp04933791pcs.benslm01.pa.comcast.net with ESMTP id <692115-33904>; Fri, 29 Aug 2003 19:40:02 -0100
Message-ID: <4v55$8$3z$w-29a$0g$748@43ig.91j4u.vww>
From: NetNames 
Reply-To: NetNames 
To: rwmrader@tucows.com
Subject: CHEAP DOMAIN NAMES @ NETNAMES.COM
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 19:40:02 -0100
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;	boundary="85C9E1AD.A2B6FDCFEC..."
X-Priority: 3

  4. (name not saved), September 15, 2003

    Nonsense. Netnames.com did send this spam. They bought a list off an unscrupulous provider.
    It is true one may attempt to disparage another company, but it does not make commercial sense in this instance due to the volume and nature of this UCE.
    It is sad day when listed companies resort to this activity.