Pants Full of Unix

In an effort to avoid being filtered, these fucktards are dropping the one thing that might have any marginal value: their advertising. Instead, they just clog my inbox with EMPTY FUCKING MESSAGES. This crowd is a real bunch of winners, let me tell you.

Just in case you don't believe me, here are three examples from this morning. These are not just the message headers, these are the full emails. In fact, what follows the <pre> tag below is the output of a :r mail/blank-spam on an mbox-format file within vi(1).

From gnplmfpgifuwar@india.com  Tue Jan 13 04:08:20 2004
Return-Path: 
Delivered-To: gr@eclipsed.net
Received: from mail.netisland.net (ellesmere.netisland.net [209.163.107.162])
	by uriel.eclipsed.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 1FDA249702
	for ; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 04:08:19 -0500 (EST)
Received: (qmail 12231 invoked from network); 13 Jan 2004 09:08:13 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO h24-87-77-54.vc.shawcable.net) (24.87.77.54)
  by mail.netisland.net with SMTP; 13 Jan 2004 09:08:13 -0000
Received: from [24.87.77.54] by 3001hosting.comIP with HTTP;
	Tue, 13 Jan 2004 02:59:58 +0600
From: "Richie"@eclipsed.net
Message-Id: <20040113090819.1FDA249702@uriel.eclipsed.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 04:08:19 -0500 (EST)
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on uriel.eclipsed.net
X-Spam-Report:  *  0.2 NO_REAL_NAME From: does not include a real name * -0.0 BAYES_44 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 44 to 50% *      [score: 0.4679]
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=4.1 tests=BAYES_44,NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60
X-Spam-Level:
Status: RO
Content-Length: 0
Lines: 0

From fqsehyjwwsoqxa@web.de  Tue Jan 13 04:08:45 2004
Return-Path: 
Delivered-To: gr@grappa.eclipsed.net
Received: from ip503c4b67.speed.planet.nl (ip503c4b67.speed.planet.nl [80.60.75.103])
	by uriel.eclipsed.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 84FD349702
	for ; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 04:08:43 -0500 (EST)
Received: from [80.60.75.103] by 3001hosting.comIP with HTTP;
	Mon, 12 Jan 2004 14:03:31 -0700
From: "Grant"@eclipsed.net
Message-Id: <20040113090843.84FD349702@uriel.eclipsed.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 04:08:43 -0500 (EST)
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on uriel.eclipsed.net
X-Spam-Report:  *  0.2 NO_REAL_NAME From: does not include a real name *  1.6 BAYES_60 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 60 to 70% *      [score: 0.6364]
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.8 required=4.1 tests=BAYES_60,NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60
X-Spam-Level: s
Status: RO
Content-Length: 0
Lines: 0

From fiufxhshnanq@india.com  Tue Jan 13 06:46:08 2004
Return-Path: 
Delivered-To: gr@grappa.eclipsed.net
Received: from va-spotsy-cuda2-c2a-163.frbgva.adelphia.net (va-spotsy-cuda2-c2a-163.frbgva.adelphia.net [68.65.42.163])
	by uriel.eclipsed.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 4A89649702
	for ; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 06:46:06 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20040113114606.4A89649702@uriel.eclipsed.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 06:46:06 -0500 (EST)
From: fiufxhshnanq@india.com
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on uriel.eclipsed.net
X-Spam-Report:  *  0.2 NO_REAL_NAME From: does not include a real name *  0.0 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 50 to 56% *      [score: 0.5069] *  3.0 MSGID_FROM_MTA_SHORT Message-Id was added by a relay
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.2 required=4.1 tests=BAYES_50,MSGID_FROM_MTA_SHORT,NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60
X-Spam-Level: sss
Status: RO
Content-Length: 0
Lines: 0

Wasn't the point of this, at some time back there, to advertise something? Has it all really devolved to just being an arms race, where they don't really ever expect to get returns from their advertising, but just want to irritate the populace? What possible purpose could this serve?

(Yes, I've considered the possibility that this is just some newbie loser trying out software–note the “3001hosting.comIP” in the initial Received: from header of two of the messages, which matches MO of our dear friends from a couple of weeks back–but that doesn't make this any less absurd… why would you test on your full campaign email list?)