2 Agenda Solutions Proposed solution Appliances – Server Side Software Pros and ConsCloud Based SolutionEnd User SoftwareMethods usedLegal and Other SolutionsProposed solutionStrength/ WeaknessesCost / ImplementationConclusion - Questions
3 Problem StatementMost enterprise users are exposed to spam, which means they are exposed to more threats. Spam is an issue affecting all industrial sectors, government and education.While missing an due to a false positive when it comes to personal use might not seem like a big deal, it is important for the enterprise to be cautious on optimizing communication to reach better business results.SPAM is an attack on authenticity with the following characteristics:70.7% of all traffic is Spam2.3% of all s contain malicious attachments1.8% – 3% of spam makes it through spam filtersOnly 1 in 25,000 spam needs to be opened to be profitable for spammersCosts 20 billion dollars annuallyWe will review the defense mechanisms and recommend a solution to this problem.
4 Anti Spam AppliancesAnti-spam appliances are hardware-based solutions integrated with on-board anti-spam software and are normally driven by an operating system optimized for spam filteringThey are deployed at the gateway or in front of the mail serverAppliances provide a solution that does not require configuration of the existing mail server, and can be more effective and of higher performance than a software solution installed on the mail serverExamples: Barracuda, SpamTitan, Fortinet, Cisco IronportHow does Barracuda work?All incoming mail is screened according to the rules of the Barracuda device and by the rules that are manually createdNon spam messages will go directly to inbox folderMessages that are suspected as being spam are informed by a Spam Quarantine
5 Server Side SoftwareAnti-spam software is either installed on the mail server itself or in front of mail server. The purpose of this software is to remove the burden of filtering from the server.Examples:Bogofilter- Used by a MTA to classify messages as they are received from the sending SMTP server. Bogofilter examines tokens in the message body and header to calculate a probability score that a new message is spamSpamAssassin- It can be run as a standalone application on server or as a subprogram of another applicationMailwasherEnterprise- It works as a proxy, sits in front of mail server blocking and denying spam from getting to mail server and usersPOPFile- Typically it is used to filter spam mail. It can also be used to sort mail into other user defined "buckets" or categories
6 PROs and CONs Antispam Appliances Server Side Software PROs CONs High reliability that works out of the boxOperating system and application software is pre-loaded and configuredStable OS guarantees less downtimeUpdates itself automatically with no user interventionUpfront costsIf the hardware fails, it requires a warranty or an upfront cost to fix/replaceServer Side SoftwarePROsCONsCustomized filters which can be personalized according to individual user requirementWhitelisting capabilitiesQuarantines spam mails which are kept for a certain durationDifficult to installSoftware updates can cause compatibility issues with other software on the systemRequires updating the server OS with the latest patches
7 Cloud based SolutionsAnti Spam Cloud based solutions enable to filter on content and authenticity outside the LAN and provide only legitimates to the organization.Sample of Providers:eluna https://heluna.com/ $49/yearMcAffee SaaS and Web securityMessage LabsSophosUntangleGoogle AppsExample of incoming mail:
8 PROs and CONsPROsCONsDoes not slow down or interfere with program on workstationNo need to update virus definitionTemporary store mail if LAN issuesBuilt in white / gray / black listsSubscription based(# $30/user/year)Security of the cloud
9 End User SoftwareClients – Most Clients have built in basic spam filterOutlook uses Whitelists/Blacklists and Word BlockingAdd-ons to Clients – Add more powerful spam filtering to ClientsSpam Reader - Uses Bayesian filtering and Whitelist/BlacklistVircom - Uses Bayesian filteringStand Alone Software – Works with clients and web mailSpamhilataor– Uses combination of Word Blocking, Bayesian filtering and user defined listsMailwasher – Uses combination of Word Blocking, Bayesian filtering and user defined lists
10 Pros and ConsProsConsFilters can easily be customized for individual userFewer false positivesBlocked and filtered still reaches the mail serverDifficult for admins to configure for each userScalability
11 Methods Outbound filters using Transparent SMTP proxy SMTP Proxies are inserted between sending mail servers on a local network, and the receiving servers on the Internet in order to filter outgoing spamDNS based BlacklistsServers maintain a list of IP addresses of via the DNS to reject from those sourcesChecksum based filteringSpam messages sent in bulk are identical except for few changes in content. Checksum based filters determine checksum and compare with database which stores checksum values of spam messagesStatistical content filtering (Bayesian Filtering)Users mark messages as spam or non-spam and the filter learns from user judgmentsPattern DetectionMonitors a large database of messages worldwide to detect spam patterns
12 MethodsHoney PotsMTA which gives the appearance of being an open mail relay, or a TCP/IP proxy server which gives the appearance of being an open proxy is setup to detect spammers who probe systems for open relays/proxiesAuthentication and reputationAllow from servers that have been authenticated as senders of legitimateDomain-based Message Authentication, Reporting and Conformance (DMARC)A DMARC policy allows a sender to indicate that their s are protected by SPF and/or DKIM, and tells a receiver what to do if neither of those authentication methods passesSPFDKIM
13 Sender Policy Framework Sender Policy Framework (SPF): an anti-spam approach in which the Internet domain of an sender can be authenticated for that sender, thereby discouraging spam mailers, who routinely disguise the origin of their .
14 DomainKeys Identified Mail DKIM is a specification for cryptographically signing messages. A signing domain (eg: Gmail) claims responsibility for the by adding a DKIM-Signature header field to message’s header.The verifier recovers the signer's public key using the DNS, and then verifies that the signature matches the actual message's content. The receiving SMTP server uses the domain name and the selector to perform a DNS lookup.
15 DKIM workflow 4 5 6 3 7 2 1 Sending Servers Message generated by a user is transmitted into the Message Handling Service(MHS) to an Mail Submission Agent (MSA) that is within user’s administrative domain.MSA accepts the message submitted by an user and enforces the policies of the hosting domain and the requirements of Internet standards.The domain owner generates a public/private key pair to be used for signing outgoing messages. The default signing algorithm is RSA with SHA-256. The public key is published in a DNS TXT record, and the private key is made available to the DKIM-enabled outbound server.When an is sent by an authorized user of the server, the server uses the stored private key to generate a digital signature of the message, which is inserted in the message as a header, and the is sent as normalReceiving Servers5. The signed message then passes through the Internet via Message Transfer Agents (MTAs). Relaying is performed by a sequence of MTAs until the message reaches a destination Mail Delivery Agent (MDA)6. At the destination, the MDA extracts the signature and claimed From: domain from the heade7. The public key is retrieved from the DNS system for the claimed From: domain. The public key is used by the MDA to verify the signature before passing the message on to the destination client1
16 Other Current Solutions End user actionsWhitelisting : Reject everything except the addresses accepted one by oneSpam Poisoning: Restrict the distribution of one’s address to only trusted parties, effectively hiding from spammer. (eg.Collaborative filtering: detect messages being sent to large number of recipientsIdeas under consideration:Micropayment: Charging 1cent per sent. If answer remove the charge.Internet Mail 2000: “Internet 2000” mail messages are stored by the sender. The receiver is pulling his(her) message from the sender server.
17 Existing SPAM legislations: http://en. wikipedia CountryLegislationArgentinaPersonal Data Protection Act (2000)AustraliaSpam Act 2003AustriaAustrian Telecommunications Act 1997BelgiumLoi du 11 mars 2003CanadaPersonal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act 2000 (PIPEDA)Fighting Internet and Wireless Spam Act 2010ChinaRegulations on Internet Services - Death penalty risked by spammersCyprusRegulation of Electronic Communications and Postal Services Law of 2004Czech RepublicAct No. 480/2004 Coll., on Certain Information Society ServicesDenmarkDanish marketing practices actEuropean UnionDirective on Privacy and Electronic CommunicationsFinlandAct on Data Protection in Electronic Communications (516/2004)FranceLoi informatique et libertee JanGermanyGesetz gegen Unlauteren Wettbewerb (UWG) ("Act against Unfair Competition")Hong KongUnsolicited Electronic Messaging OrdinanceHungaryAct CVIII of 2001 on Electronic CommerceIndonesiaUndang-undang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronic (ITE) (Internet Law)IrelandEuropean Communities (Electronic Communications Networks and Services) (Data Protection and Privacy) Regulations 2003IsraelCommunications Law (Telecommunications and Broadcasting), 1982 (Amendment 2008)ItalyData Protection Code (Legislative Decree no. 196/2003)JapanThe Law on Regulation of Transmission of Specified Electronic MailMalaysiaCommunications and Multimedia Act 1998MaltaData Protection Act (CAP 440)NetherlandsDutch Telecommunications ActNew ZealandUnsolicited Electronic Messages Act 2007PakistanPrevention of Electronic Crimes Ordinance 2007SingaporeSpam Control Act 2007South AfricaElectronic Communications and Transactions Act, 2002Consumer Protection Act, 2008South KoreaAct on Promotion of Information and Communication and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection ofSpainAct 34/2002 of 11 July on Information Society Services and Electronic CommerceSwedenMarknadsföringslagen (1995:450) Swedish Marketing ActUnited KingdomPrivacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003United StatesControlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act of 2003 (CAN-SPAM Act of 2003)NoneBrazil, India, Mexico, Russia
18 Examples of penaltiesUK Nov 2012 Christopher Niebel and Gary McNeish fined $700,000 sending million SMSNetherlands Oct 2012 Companeo fined 100,000 €, 15 Million between 2009 and 2011 without the consent of the recipientshttps://www.signal-spam.fr/actualites/une-soci%C3%A9t%C3%A9-condamn%C3%A9e-%C3%A %E2%82%AC-damende-pour-lenvoi- de-spamsFranceOne man fined 22,000 € 1 Million SPAMs. +1,000 € per new SPAM.CASL: Canada Anti Spam LegislationValue Click has settled charges today with the Federal Trade Commission, netting the FTC $2.9 million in civil penalties.Failure to disclose that users must first sign up for other offers (ones that cost them money) before collecting the prize.[9:26:06 PM] Samar Patel:Australian Communication and Media Authority: Spam Act regulates the sending of commercial electronic messages (CEMs) and prohibits the sending of these messages except in certain limited circumstances. , MMS, SMS.Oct 9th 2013: Grays has become the latest online retailer to get caught ing people without providing an unsubscribe button, and the company has paid AU$165,000 for the mistake.Russia: The biggest spammer was found dead in his apartment.
19 PROs and CONs PROs CONs Several Countries have legislation Organization are being finedMajority of the countries do not have legislationFines against individuals rarely work. Either too high or too lowLack of identificationHard to have legislation keep up with technologyLegislators are not tech savvy
21 Proposed Solution Gmail Spam filter Gmail spam filters use combination of statistical filtering, content filtering and authentication methods like SPF and DKIM to filter spamUsers can train system by marking as spam or not spamAdministrators can set up whitelists/graylists/blacklistsScans all attachments for viruses before reaching the userLess than 1% of in the inbox reported as spam (average is between 1.8% and 3%)Less than 1% of falsely marked as spam
22 Cost & Implementation Cost - $50/user/year .Cost - $50/user/yearIncludes other services and not just spam protectionImplementation - FeasibilityEasy to migrate from Exchange serverUsers can continue using current client like outlook or use web mailCan be implemented in 90 days for large enterprise(>750 users), in 4 weeks for medium businesses and within 1 hour for a small businessStatistics:Gmail has no more than 1% of the enterprise market, but it has close to 50% of the market for enterprise cloud (2011 Gartner) 39% of small companies <50p use Gmail20% of large companies use Gmail
23 Strength and Weaknesses STRENGTHSWEAKNESSESUses multiple techniques to block spam includes DMARCGoogle acquired Postini (2007) that made them superior.Less than 1% spam (Avg. 1.8% - 3%)Google Apps is better suited for heterogeneous environmentsEasy to implementAutomatic updated and easy to configure by users and administratorsIncludes complete productivity suites in the cost of subscriptionTrusting data to cloud providerLegal concern over privacy of dataExpensive if only looking for anti spam solution and not any other functionalitySolution is as good as the capacity of Spammer to find a new exploit
25 Conclusion - Questions While there are no perfect solutions to stop all SPAM, the protection mechanisms can be very efficient.This does not solve the generation of 70% traffic that weight on the internet.The impetus for change is likely to be given by governments requesting ISP to find solutions.Once ISP find the value of non spam network and avoid the inherent threats posed by these messages, they will seriously work on the issue and find solution.