Latest VBSpam tests show web host spam harder to block

Posted by   Virus Bulletin on   Jun 17, 2013

Most filters see a small increase in their catch rates overall.

The results of VB's latest spam filter test show that the spam sent from web hosts is significantly harder to block than spam sent via other means.

Following various reports on the amount of spam sent from compromised web hosts, we compared delivery rates for spam sent from web hosts with that of other spam - and found that the former kind of spam was more than three times as likely to make it past a spam filter.

This is a big difference, even if delivery rates remain low: spam sent from web hosts had a 1.04% chance of making it past a spam filter, compared to 0.29% for other kinds of spam. As a single spam campaign easily sends millions of emails, this difference can make or break the campaign.

In recent years, the security community has placed a lot of focus on botnets of compromised home PCs. Recently, however, cybercriminals have turned their attention to web hosts, many of which are easy to compromise and have good and reliable Internet connectivity. The results of this test show that this isn't merely a quantitative shift, but that by sending spam from web hosts, spammers can signficantly increase their delivery rates.

Most of the 20 full solutions tested saw an overall improvement in their spam catch rates since the last test - although catch rates didn't fully recover to their previous levels.

There was good news for most of the products in the test: 19 full solutions reached the required standard to achieve a VBSpam award, and two of them - Bitdefender and Libra Esva - combined a very high catch rate (99.50% or more) with a lack of false positives and thus earned a VBSpam+ award.

For Virus Bulletin subscribers, the full test report is available here. Non-subscribers can purchase the report as a standalone article ($19.95) here.

More on the VBSpam tests, including historical performance of the participating products, can be found here.

Posted on 17 June 2013 by Martijn Grooten

twitter.png
fb.png
linkedin.png
googleplus.png
reddit.png

 

Latest posts:

New paper: Does malware based on Spectre exist?

It is likely that, by now, everyone in computer science has at least heard of the Spectre attack, and many excellent explanations of the attack already exist. But what is the likelihood of finding Spectre being exploited on Android smartphones?

More VB2018 partners announced

We are excited to announce several more companies that have partnered with VB2018.

Malware authors' continued use of stolen certificates isn't all bad news

A new malware campaign that uses two stolen code-signing certificates shows that such certificates continue to be popular among malware authors. But there is a positive side to malware authors' use of stolen certificates.

Save the dates: VB2019 to take place 2-4 October 2019

Though the location will remain under wraps for a few more months, we are pleased to announce the dates for VB2019, the 29th Virus Bulletin International Conference.

Necurs update reminds us that the botnet cannot be ignored

The operators of the Necurs botnet, best known for being one of the most prolific spam botnets of the past few years, have pushed out updates to its client, which provide some important lessons about why malware infections matter.

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.