No, Twitter has not been hit by a massive spam botnet
thenextweb.com
No, Twitter has not been hit by a massive spam botnet
1–8 of 8 posts
Re: No, Twitter has not been hit by a massive spam botnet
#2They refute themselves here. They say there isn't a massive botnet, but dismiss it by saying spam isn't unique and most of the accounts are deleted now. So, yes, it was a massive botnet. Sure, it's not uncommon and Twitter deals with them regularly, but that doesn't mean it was not hit by a massive botnet, it was.
Re: No, Twitter has not been hit by a massive spam botnet
#3They refute themselves here. They say there isn't a massive botnet, but dismiss it by saying spam isn't unique and most of the accounts are deleted now. So, yes, it was a massive botnet. Sure, it's not uncommon and Twitter deals with them regularly, but that doesn't mean it was not hit by a massive botnet, it was.
You and I have much different interpretations of "massive"
Re: No, Twitter has not been hit by a massive spam botnet
#4They refute themselves here. They say there isn't a massive botnet, but dismiss it by saying spam isn't unique and most of the accounts are deleted now. So, yes, it was a massive botnet. Sure, it's not uncommon and Twitter deals with them regularly, but that doesn't mean it was not hit by a massive botnet, it was.
Well, they also assert that the supposed number of accounts (35,000~) doesn't qualify as "massive".
Re: No, Twitter has not been hit by a massive spam botnet
#5They refute themselves here. They say there isn't a massive botnet, but dismiss it by saying spam isn't unique and most of the accounts are deleted now. So, yes, it was a massive botnet. Sure, it's not uncommon and Twitter deals with them regularly, but that doesn't mean it was not hit by a massive botnet, it was.
Well, they also assert that the supposed number of accounts (35,000~) doesn't qualify as "massive".
It's not massive to Twitter's spam team but it seems reasonably massive by most standards. I just think it's a bit daft of TNW to dismiss the original author this way.
Re: No, Twitter has not been hit by a massive spam botnet
#6They refute themselves here. They say there isn't a massive botnet, but dismiss it by saying spam isn't unique and most of the accounts are deleted now. So, yes, it was a massive botnet. Sure, it's not uncommon and Twitter deals with them regularly, but that doesn't mean it was not hit by a massive botnet, it was.
Well, they also assert that the supposed number of accounts (35,000~) doesn't qualify as "massive".
If Twitter just had 35,000 spam bots in all of Twitter, they'd sign up for that in a heartbeat.
Re: No, Twitter has not been hit by a massive spam botnet
#7The 35,000 accounts number was merely the total no. of accounts found from a sample of just 33 tweets. The real total number of bots would be a multiple of 35,000: http://www.businessinsider.com/twitter-fighting-a-massive-bo...
Re: No, Twitter has not been hit by a massive spam botnet
#8The crux of the story should be XML-RPC and it's delirious security model, not some half-assed contemporary messaging service company.