Talk:NetEase/Archives/2012
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
163.com is shame of the Earth!
163.com is the worst spammer domain on the net. I've spoken with security researchers and they consistently said 163.com traffic alone accounts for at least 10% of all unwanted commercial e-mail sent globally.
They said they would swap one chinese spammer for five russian virus writers any day, because malware is like poison that hurts particular victims only, but spam is like the medieval open canal sewer systems, that hit everybody who went on the town streets, burying them in filth.
Due to cultural issues, asians think it is a great honour to receive as many communications as possible, so they mail the whole damn world and you can't explain why that is bad, they simply won't understand. 82.131.210.162 (talk) 10:14, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
163.com sites are responsible for over 40% of the spam I receive and are related to 126.com sites. Illegal spam with no opt out info or address info, contact info on their web pages either have broken links or refer one to a page that has nothing to do with them. The wiki here definitely smells of being written by them to promote them as something good for the world. NOT. Please read on...
The whois contact (the whois isn't legal either, does not have true contact info for the sites) is associated with at least 739 websites. He is believed to be affiliated with Russian criminal spammers Leo Kuvayev, Alex Polyakov and Vincent Chan. Numerous law enforcement agencies continue to investigate as much as possible regarding the spamming, website setup, DNS setup and alleged order processing. This investigation is ongoing. It is believed that no product has ever been delivered from these sites.
more info here:
http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/reosoo.com/postid?p=1053085
Blue eyedbear (talk) 01:14, 14 August 2008 (UT
- If you have some links to verify these claims, I agree that this info would be appreciated on this page. It is supposed to be unbiased (but based on verifiable sources).