12.02.08
Gemini version available ♊︎Microsoft’s Own Servers Become Zombies, Spew Out SPAM
We’ve already covered the fiasco that’s MSNBot deliberately spamming Web sites with bogus referrals and we explained why Microsoft is indirectly responsible for the world's SPAM. It’s now being reported that “it’s getting worse as MSNBot machines behind the following 172 IP addresses must have been infected or cracked, because they’re trying to deliver SPAM to mail servers all around the world.”
65.55.109.163 (msnbot-65-55-109-163.search.msn.com)
65.55.109.143
65.55.109.94
65.55.109.76
65.55.109.47
65.55.109.243
65.55.109.241
65.55.109.98
65.55.109.67
65.55.109.230
65.55.109.189
65.55.109.185
65.55.109.45
65.55.109.52
65.55.109.244
65.55.109.13
65.55.109.122
65.55.109.147
65.55.109.119
65.55.109.148
65.55.109.190
65.55.109.145
65.55.109.245
65.55.109.15
65.55.109.74
65.55.109.101
65.55.109.77
65.55.109.63
65.55.109.188
65.55.109.203
65.55.109.70
65.55.109.115
65.55.109.227
65.55.109.211
65.55.109.48
65.55.109.135
65.55.109.141
65.55.109.84
65.55.109.197
65.55.109.139
65.55.109.206
65.55.109.39
65.55.109.157
65.55.109.117
65.55.109.113
65.55.109.191
65.55.109.75
65.55.109.149
65.55.109.205
65.55.109.215
65.55.109.202
65.55.109.144
65.55.109.24
65.55.109.59
65.55.109.110
65.55.109.194
65.55.109.85
65.55.109.120
65.55.109.61
65.55.109.140
65.55.109.213
65.55.109.214
65.55.109.14
65.55.109.219
65.55.109.218
65.55.109.156
65.55.109.66
65.55.109.239
65.55.109.242
65.55.109.29
65.55.109.53
65.55.109.62
65.55.109.168
65.55.109.20
65.55.109.35
65.55.109.186
65.55.109.195
65.55.109.64
65.55.109.162
65.55.109.108
65.55.109.111
65.55.109.192
65.55.109.27
65.55.109.146
65.55.109.72
65.55.109.170
65.55.110.40
65.55.110.111
65.55.110.202
65.55.110.146
65.55.110.43
65.55.110.68
65.55.110.197
65.55.110.216
65.55.110.124
65.55.110.171
65.55.110.189
65.55.110.217
65.55.110.190
65.55.110.16
65.55.110.208
65.55.110.239
65.55.110.39
65.55.110.210
65.55.110.75
65.55.110.115
65.55.110.183
65.55.110.12
65.55.110.29
65.55.110.149
65.55.110.230
65.55.110.83
65.55.110.116
65.55.110.211
65.55.110.131
65.55.110.62
65.55.110.125
65.55.110.65
65.55.110.95
65.55.110.240
65.55.110.25
65.55.110.218
65.55.110.20
65.55.110.161
65.55.110.123
65.55.110.58
65.55.110.97
65.55.110.207
65.55.110.170
65.55.110.213
65.55.110.26
65.55.110.179
65.55.110.193
65.55.110.206
65.55.110.235
65.55.110.219
65.55.110.88
65.55.110.101
65.55.110.181
65.55.110.134
65.55.110.71
65.55.110.99
65.55.110.76
65.55.110.168
65.55.110.238
65.55.110.11
65.55.110.18
65.55.110.163
65.55.110.21
65.55.110.46
65.55.110.172
65.55.110.178
65.55.110.241
65.55.110.72
65.55.110.212
65.55.110.132
65.55.110.231
65.55.110.22
65.55.110.209
65.55.110.188
65.55.110.108
65.55.110.10
65.55.110.27
65.55.110.91
65.55.110.187
65.55.110.159
65.55.110.37
65.55.110.15
65.55.110.107
65.55.110.14
65.55.110.191
65.55.110.220
Mainframes that run Windows are already under attack by worms. And some people actually consider putting Windows on large-scale supercomputers? █
ᶃ Gemini Space
This post is also available in 
Content is available under CC-BY-SA
Gentoo User (and proud of it) said,
December 2, 2008 at 1:41 pm
You’ve explained nothing of the sort, you know very well that Windows machines in botnets are there because of vulnerabilities for which patches have been made available in a timely fashion by Microsoft, or because the users opened and executed email attachments from strangers with titles like “Your fan sents U a Greetings Card!!!” and so on. My company has 60,000 XP desktops and none of them are in any botnets. How exactly do you rationalize that?
And mainframes don’t run Windows. At least try to get your technical terms right.
(The ominous-looking text in RED that Roy Schestowitz attaches to all my comments accuses me of engaging in “witch hunts”. Consider that in the context of the comments here and ask yourself if you need to be best buddies with Roy in order to avoid being branded for doing essentially the same thing)
Note: comment arrived from a witch hunter that does not even use GNU/Linux.
David Gerard said,
December 2, 2008 at 3:30 pm
This is already in the Slashdot firehose and is well worth clicking up.
G. Michaels said,
December 2, 2008 at 9:26 pm
I don’t $ee many vote$ though? I’m not $ure why it ha$n’t made it to the front page where everyone can $ee it? Maybe it ha$ grammar or $pelling error$, or $omething el$e I mu$t be mi$$ing at thi$ point. $ometimes I ju$t don’t under$tand. Clearly, tho$e claim$ of the $la$hdot Fireho$e being “gamed” $hould be revi$ited at thi$ point.
Note: writer of this comment adds absolutely nothing but stalking and personal attacks against readers, as documented here.