This has likely been asked before, but if so I’ve missed it.
What is the purpose of the bizarre names that accompany a lot of spam? You know:
Singularly L. Drenching
Mentalities B. Surmount
Percolation R. Clarence
These are all from my current trash bin.
However, other spammer names in my current trash are:
John Elmond
Elvira King
Maynard Lopez
Doug Whitaker
Brenda Kaufman
Now, I can understand wanting to vary names randomly in order to prevent blocking. But what, if any, is the advantage of weird names over normal-looking names? Is it just whimsy on the part of the spammers?
Now, I automatically delete any mail from people with bizarre names. But since I sometimes get inquiries from people I don’t know, if the subject line is innocuous or unclear I may actually open mail from those in the latter. Now, two of the three names in the first list had subjects sufficiently vague that I might actually have opened them if the name itself hadn’t been a dead giveaway. If the object of the spammer is to get you to read the spam, why give additional clues to allow a recipient to delete it unread?
A certain percentage of people will read every piece of mail that shows up in their inbox, and some of them will buy products advertised in that manner.
This might be slightly OT here if so sorry about the hijack but when trying to find more information on the fun names spammers use, I came across this jgc.org/tsc with some of the most informative and interesting spam techniques. Sneaky is a key term for spammers I think.
I suspect it has to do with attracting people’s attention. If a mail looks like spam and is addressed from “lask32345” you might not hesitate to delete it, but if it comes from “Firefly Ambidexterous” you might open it up on lark. Whether this would lead to more click-thrus I have no idea, but you can’t click-thru if you don’t open the mail.
Maybe the names are actually the spammers monikers and the odd name has led the person down a path to spamming as a way of getting even after decades of teasing. Or maybe not.
If I understand Bayesian filtering correctly (and I may not), the more unique the words in the spam, the more likely the filter with think it isn’t spam, because its “test set” of known spam that it compares to will not have the unique words.
I always thought it had to do with blending in. It is easier to hide a “Robust P. Fondler” in a list of “from” names than it is to hide “NATURAL V1AGRA” in your inbox. Which means that if it does make it past the filtering, it could still be read as you hit next, next, next through your inbox.
I can see how this would work in the body of the spam, and explain why there is often nonsense blocks of text in the message. However, I don’t understand how it would work in the “from” field, since genuine e-mails will often have very common names in them.
This might make some sense if the “subject” field in messages with weird names always indicated that it was spam. However, in many e-mails with weird names I have received, the “subject” is vague or phrased so it is not obvious it is spam. I don’t know why you try to disguise spam in the subject line, while making it obvious in the “from” field. I’m not convinced that the humor value would motivate anyone to open these after they have received more than a couple.
I don’t understand this point at all. “Dave Wilson” would blend in more and and fact would be unnecessary to “hide.” If you are trying to blend in, it would be much better to use an ordinary name. And actually, the majority of spam that makes it through my filters actually has an ordinary name. A quick look through my trash shows about 10% of my spam is of the weird-name variety, the rest being from ordinary names (first and last, or often just first), or else are from “milfs gone wild” or “4in1 offer”.
Well, the way I assume it works is that because it doesn’t see ‘Singularly’ or ‘Mentality’ or whatever the name is in the list of words/names generated from known spam, this is a “point” in favor of it being genuine. If they use the same name every time, then it becomes a known spam word, and then your filter detects it as point towards being spam, and not genuine mail.
I got an email from “Laurie Raymound,” with the subject “leitmotivemoney,” and which had a text which said only one word: “bath”. I didn’t even have to open it, and it had no attachments. But…why?
’