<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The blog about spam &#187; Phishing</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.spamdrain.net/category/phishing/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.spamdrain.net</link>
	<description>SpamDrain - E-mail peace of mind</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 18 Dec 2011 19:49:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Expert warns of insufficient virus protection</title>
		<link>http://blog.spamdrain.net/2010/11/expert-warns-of-insufficient-virus-protection/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.spamdrain.net/2010/11/expert-warns-of-insufficient-virus-protection/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Nov 2010 12:48:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>henric</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Anti-spam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Phishing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spam filter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spam filtering]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spamdrain.net/?p=570</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There is an interesting article on viruses and filters in a Swedish newspaper today. Experts warn us that some filters are not efficient enough. They claim that some filters only catch 30% of the harmful e-mails. The reason for this being that the virus makers are quick at making new version and varieties of the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>There is an interesting <a href="http://www.gp.se/dela/1.493112">article</a> on viruses and filters in a Swedish  newspaper today. Experts warn us that some filters are not efficient  enough. They claim that some filters only catch 30% of the harmful  e-mails. The reason for this being that the virus makers are quick at  making new version and varieties of the code so it is hard to keep a  traditional filter updated.</div>
<div>At SpamDrain we  use artificial intelligence to continually refine the filtering process.  This means that the filter can &#8216;learn&#8217; what is spam and what is valid  e-mail. The filter can therefore keep itself updated and quickly learn  new tricks used by hackers to get their e-mails through spam filters.</div>
<div>This works quite nicely in Spamdrain when filtering spam and e-mail viruses. It would though be interesting to know if one could do something similar with desktop virus protection. I know that anti-virus companies have done some efforts in trying to &#8220;learn&#8221; the patterns of viruses and block viruses they don&#8217;t know about, but it&#8217;s unclear how well these techniques work.</div>
<div><a href="http://www.gp.se/nyheter/sverige/1.493112-antivirus-chanslost-mot-nya-nathot">Article link</a>.</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.spamdrain.net/2010/11/expert-warns-of-insufficient-virus-protection/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Virus and spam levels back to normal again</title>
		<link>http://blog.spamdrain.net/2009/12/virus-and-spam-levels-back-to-normal-again/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.spamdrain.net/2009/12/virus-and-spam-levels-back-to-normal-again/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 08:26:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>henric</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Anti-spam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Botnet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Phishing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spam filter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spam filtering]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.spamdrain.net/?p=474</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As we earlier reported virus levels have been rather higher than normal lately, but this now seem to have changed. We now see that virus level is back below 1 % which is more normal. Furthermore the dominating viruses aren&#8217;t actually viruses but phishing attempts. Interesting to see  is that the spam rate seems to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As we <a href="http://blog.spamdrain.net/2009/10/one-e-mail-virus-for-every-tenth-valid-message/">earlier reported</a> virus levels have been rather higher than normal lately, but this now seem to have changed. We now see that virus level is back below 1 % which is more normal. Furthermore the dominating viruses aren&#8217;t actually viruses but phishing attempts.<span id="more-474"></span></p>
<div id="attachment_479" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 310px"><img class="size-medium wp-image-479" title="virus-phishing-share-dec-2009" src="http://blog.spamdrain.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/virush-phishing-share-300x145.png" alt="Virus and phising share december 2009" width="300" height="145" /><p class="wp-caption-text">Virus and phising share last 6 months - 2009</p></div>
<p>Interesting to see  is that the spam rate seems to have followed the virus rate. Spam rate has been around 85 % but is now back to around 80 % again. Since many of the viruses are used to create botnets sending spam this is not that suprising.</p>
<div id="attachment_480" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 310px"><img class="size-medium wp-image-480" title="spam-rate-dec-2009" src="http://blog.spamdrain.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/spam-rate-dec-2009-300x139.png" alt="Spam rate last 6 months 2009" width="300" height="139" /><p class="wp-caption-text">Spam rate last 6 months 2009</p></div>
<p>More statistics at our <a href="http://www.spamdrain.net">main page</a> and the <a href="http://www.spamdrain.net/home/spam-info.html">Security Centre</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.spamdrain.net/2009/12/virus-and-spam-levels-back-to-normal-again/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

