Riders on a Storm

Posted by   Virus Bulletin on   Nov 11, 2008

Researchers hijack botnet - and find spam success rates lower than previously believed.

Less than 1 in 12 million spam emails sent through the infamous Storm botnet led to a purchase attempt, according to researchers at the University of California in San Diego and Berkeley - a much lower spam success rate than previously estimated.

To carry out their study, the researchers hijacked a part of the Storm botnet for 26 days, during which time they instructed it to send almost 350 million dummy spam emails advertising a dummy pharmacy site controlled by the researchers.

The researchers measured the activity of their campaign and concluded that less than one quarter of the emails sent had reached the recipients' mail clients, after which a large portion would have been filtered by spam filters. Users clicked on the link contained in the email in just over 0.003% of the emails and only 28 people (less than 1 in 12 million) attempted to buy something from the dummy website. The website deliberately gave an error just before the checking out process.

In two other spam campaigns the researchers mimicked a self-propagation attack, which attempted to install an executable on the user's machine. This method is commonly used by botnets such as Storm to replicate. The researchers found that this campaign had a higher success rate, with just over 1 in 229,000 users attempting to install the trojan.

The researchers believe that they controlled only about 1.5% of the total Storm botnet and, based on these assumptions, they estimated that the real botnet can generate revenue of between $7,000 and $9,500 a day. They estimated the number of new bots generated by self-propagation campaigns to be between 3,500 and 8,500 a day.

The ethics of a piece of research that involves actively sending spam may be questioned by security experts. However, the researchers claim to have effectively sidestepped legal and ethical issues: the campaigns under their control, they say, did not send any spam that would not otherwise have been sent, thus did not add to the total amount of harm done. Moreover, they did not collect people's personal data, nor did the self-propagation campaign lead to actual malware being installed on users' computers.

While the researchers admit that different spam tactics or different botnets might result in different metrics, the success rates they measured are significantly lower than those previously estimated by the anti-spam industry. With the retail price of spam thought to be slightly less than $80 per million emails, had this been a real spam campaign the spammers would have lost money. This led to speculation that Storm's botherders are involved in the pharmacy websites pushed by their spam.

More can be found at the BBC here or at The Register here, while the research paper can be downloaded in PDF format here.

Posted on 11 November 2008 by Virus Bulletin

 Tags

spam botnet storm
twitter.png
fb.png
linkedin.png
hackernews.png
reddit.png

 

Latest posts:

New paper: Collector-stealer: a Russian origin credential and information extractor

In a new paper, F5 researchers Aditya K Sood and Rohit Chaturvedi present a 360 analysis of Collector-stealer, a Russian-origin credential and information extractor.

VB2021 localhost videos available on YouTube

VB has made all VB2021 localhost presentations available on the VB YouTube channel, so you can now watch - and share - any part of the conference freely and without registration.

VB2021 localhost is over, but the content is still available to view!

VB2021 localhost - VB's second virtual conference - took place last week, but you can still watch all the presentations.

VB2021 localhost call for last-minute papers

The call for last-minute papers for VB2021 localhost is now open. Submit before 20 August to have your paper considered for one of the slots reserved for 'hot' research!

New article: Run your malicious VBA macros anywhere!

Kurt Natvig explains how he recompiled malicious VBA macro code to valid harmless Python 3.x code.

We have placed cookies on your device in order to improve the functionality of this site, as outlined in our cookies policy. However, you may delete and block all cookies from this site and your use of the site will be unaffected. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to Virus Bulletin's use of data as outlined in our privacy policy.