Tag Archives: funny

SPAM comment(s) is/are funneh


Lately there has been many comments flocking in, thanks to my recent ‘interesting’ articles. It seems like this tiny blog of mine has gathered some attention from both positive and negative sides of the net.

I remember a few weeks ago I got one unusual spam comment. It was automatically caught by Akismet system because the person who posted it did an obviously humiliating mistake; using a fake email address which is “lol@lol.com”. That person must be too dumb for not knowing how his/her message was going to be treated by the system. Akismet will first hand verify the authenticity of the email addresses associated with any posted comments, which is why a user who are not logged in are required to type in their email address before they could submit any comment.

So what did I do then? I deleted that spam of course but before that, I noticed the message is very similar, almost words-by-words to the one that I approved earlier, and I suspected it was from the same person. Then I saw the IP addresses from where the two comments were posted and I found that both are posted from IP addresses started with “120.140.XXX.XXX” and made me became more confident that those comments came from the same person. I am extremely familiar with that IP address, especially those started with “120.140.XXX.XXX”. When I said “I am extremely familiar…” I really meant that I know exactly which country that IP addresses are from and the ISP behind it (which I will reveal later). And I know exactly among people that I know who are using that ISP as well. On that time I decided not to bother to reveal who the comment poster is because I think I can forgive that person since that was the first time and I hope nothing like that will happen again. However the story didn’t end there, and the following is even more interesting.

Two days ago I received another spam comment with obviously similar characteristics. Still using a fake email address, albeit a bit different from the previous one but still pretty much similar, but still can’t fool me. On top of that, the similar IP address with the previously deleted spam (read above) revealed something. Take a look below:

Then a quick IP lookup shows this:

Hmm. Malaysia? Packet One (a.k.a. P1)? Looks very familiar to me. Next I performed a simple whois and not surprisingly though, this is the details I get:

% [whois.apnic.net node-2]
% Whois data copyright terms    http://www.apnic.net/db/dbcopyright.html

inetnum:      120.140.0.0 – 120.141.255.255
netname:      P1NETWORKS-MY
descr:        Packet One Networks (M) Sdn
descr:        Internet Service Provider
descr:        Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
country:      MY
admin-c:      SL2018-AP
tech-c:       CL1719-AP
status:       ALLOCATED PORTABLE
remarks:      -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-++-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
remarks:      This object can only be updated by APNIC hostmasters.
remarks:      To update this object, please contact APNIC
remarks:      hostmasters and include your organisation’s account
remarks:      name in the subject line.
remarks:      -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-++-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
changed:      hm-changed@apnic.net 20080414
mnt-by:       APNIC-HM
mnt-lower:    MAINT-MY-P1NETWORKS
source:       APNIC

person:       Seng Hoon Lee
nic-hdl:      SL2018-AP
e-mail:       senghoon.lee@packet-1.com
address:      Level 4, PacketHub,
address:      59 Jalan Templer,
address:      46050 Petaling Jaya, Selangor,
address:      Malaysia.
phone:        +603-74508888
fax-no:       +603-74508891
country:      MY
remarks:      ————————————
remarks:      To report network abuse & spam cases
remarks:      please email to abuse@packet-1.com
remarks:      ————————————
changed:      senghoon.lee@packet-1.com 20061110
mnt-by:       MAINT-NEW
changed:      hm-changed@apnic.net 20090401
source:       APNIC

person:       Chee Kong Leong
nic-hdl:      CL1719-AP
e-mail:       cheekong.leong@packet-1.com
address:      Level 4, PacketHub,
address:      159 Jalan Templer,
address:      46050 Petaling Jaya, Selangor,
address:      Malaysia.
phone:        +603-74508888
fax-no:       +603-74508891
country:      MY
remarks:      ————————————
remarks:      To report network abuse & spam cases
remarks:      please email to abuse@packet-1.com
remarks:      ————————————
changed:      senghoon.lee@packet-1.com 20071010
mnt-by:       MAINT-NEW
changed:      hm-changed@apnic.net 20090401
source:       APNIC

The data above may have showed that the location was in Kuala Lumpur but I know how the network works here. P1 is a wimax ISP so that only leads to one thing; NAT-ed (dynamic IP) or non-NAT (static IP) network. Using a geolocator service, I found that the IP address is pointing to P1 building, which means it is NAT-ed network that is being used here, because using a simple logic, there’s no way for the P1 staff to spam me when we don’t have any business between us (obviously they have better jobs to do than messing around with me). In other words, the person who did this had to be elsewhere outside KL. Yeah, that person might just want to make fun of me but as all of you my readers can see, it was a total failure. I could reveal more than that if I wanted to but for now I choose to be more considerate.

So what was that comment is all about? Actually that person might have thought that he/she has found the picture of me in my real life circulating on the net in response to this article. However there are serious problems with that picture:

  1. I never upload my photo(s) on the net.
  2. I rarely take any pictures of myself.
  3. I never deliberately give copies of my pictures to my friends, inclusive digital copies
  4. I only take pictures of myself during the day
  5. I only take pictures of myself indoors
  6. I don’t take solo pictures
  7. Whenever I take pictures, there has to be at least two people including myself, and any one of us has to be a female
  8. I don’t wear glasses, except for shades occasionally
  9. I always have quite long hair, almost covered my ears on both sides
  10. I am taller than that
  11. I am bulkier than that
  12. I have brighter skin
  13. And the most important thing is, refer back to #2

So all of the above (with exception of candid moments though) concludes that the person in the picture is not me. Sorry to say this but the effort was totally wasted (because the search was done by relying on the net), but anyways good luck for finding the real one in the future.

(6/7 of deliberate spam comments come from ridiculously stupid people)