Spam Brunton, Finn
2013, 20130329, 2019-06-20
eBook
What spam is, how it works, and how it has shaped online communities and the Internet itself. The vast majority of all email sent every day is spam, a variety of idiosyncratically spelled requests to ...provide account information, invitations to spend money on dubious products, and pleas to send cash overseas. Most of it is caught by filters before ever reaching an in-box. Where does it come from? As Finn Brunton explains in Spam , it is produced and shaped by many different populations around the world: programmers, con artists, bots and their botmasters, pharmaceutical merchants, marketers, identity thieves, crooked bankers and their victims, cops, lawyers, network security professionals, vigilantes, and hackers. Every time we go online, we participate in the system of spam, with choices, refusals, and purchases the consequences of which we may not understand. This is a book about what spam is, how it works, and what it means. Brunton provides a cultural history that stretches from pranks on early computer networks to the construction of a global criminal infrastructure. The history of spam, Brunton shows us, is a shadow history of the Internet itself, with spam emerging as the mirror image of the online communities it targets. Brunton traces spam through three epochs: the 1970s to 1995, and the early, noncommercial computer networks that became the Internet; 1995 to 2003, with the dot-com boom, the rise of spam's entrepreneurs, and the first efforts at regulating spam; and 2003 to the present, with the war of algorithms—spam versus anti-spam. Spam shows us how technologies, from email to search engines, are transformed by unintended consequences and adaptations, and how online communities develop and invent governance for themselves.
All papers published in this volume have been reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected ...of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing.• Type of peer review: Single Anonymous• Conference submission management system: Morressier and Email• Number of submissions received: 108• Number of submissions sent for review: 340• Number of submissions accepted: 106• Acceptance Rate (Submissions Accepted / Submissions Received × 100): 98.1• Average number of reviews per paper: 1.5• Total number of reviewers involved: 160• Contact person for queries:Name: Georgina FuEmail: issdaconf@163.comAffiliation: Georgina Fu
All papers published in this volume have been reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected ...of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing.• Type of peer review: Undefined• Conference submission management system: By email received from the organizing and editorial committee of the conference. The correspondence authors make the submission by email.• Number of submissions received: 14• Number of submissions sent for review: 12• Number of submissions accepted: 10• Acceptance Rate (Submissions Accepted / Submissions Received × 100): 71.4• Average number of reviews per paper: 2• Total number of reviewers involved: 14• Contact person for queries:Name: Ely Dannier V. NiñoEmail: info@foristom.orgAffiliation: Foundation of Researchers in Science and Technology of Materials (FORISTOM)
All papers published in this volume have been reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected ...of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. • Type of peer review: Double Anonymous • Conference submission management system: By email received from the organizing and editorial committee of the conference and Morressier web platform; the correspondence authors make the submission by Morressier web platform and email. • Number of submissions received: 17 • Number of submissions sent for review: 14 • Number of submissions accepted: 14 • Acceptance Rate (Submissions Accepted / Submissions Received × 100): 82.4 • Average number of reviews per paper: 2 • Total number of reviewers involved: 10 • Contact person for queries: Name: Ely Dannier V. Niño Email: info@foristom.org Affiliation: Foundation of Researchers in Science and Technology of Materials (FORISTOM)
All papers published in this volume have been reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected ...of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing Publishing.• Type of peer review: Single Anonymous• Conference submission management system: email: deepwind@sintef.no and sharepoint• Number of submissions received: 46• Number of submissions sent for review: 46• Number of submissions accepted: 44• Acceptance Rate (Submissions Accepted / Submissions Received × 100): 95.7• Average number of reviews per paper: 2• Total number of reviewers involved: 18• Contact person for queries:Name: John Olav Giæver TandeEmail: john.o.tande@sintef.noAffiliation: SINTEF Energi AS
All conference organisers/editors are required to declare details about their peer review. Therefore, please provide the following information:• Type of peer review: Single-blind / Double-blind / ...Triple-blind / Open / Other (please describe)Single blind• Conference submission management system: Morresises• Number of submissions received: 74• Number of submissions sent for review: 74• Number of submissions accepted: 47• Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 63.51 %• Average number of reviews per paper: 2• Total number of reviewers involved: 5• Contact person for queries:Dr. VijethEmail: vijethhebri@gmail.comAffiliation: Assistant Professor Department of Physics Nagaland University (A Central University), Lumami, Zunheboto Dist. NagalandDr. Ganesha HEmail: ganeshkumar4006@gmail.comAffiliation: Department of Chemistry Kasetsart University, 50 Ngamwongwan Rd, Lat Yao, Chatuchak, Bangkok 10900
Decisions that we make about email legitimacy can result in a pernicious threat to security of both individuals and organisations. Yet user response to phishing emails is far from uniform; some ...respond while others do not. What is the source of this diversity in decision-making? From a psychological perspective, we consider cognitive and situational influences that might explain why certain users are more susceptible than others. Alongside an email judgment task employed as a proxy for fraud susceptibility, 224 participants completed a range of cognitive tasks. In addition, we manipulated time pressure for email legitimacy judgments. We identify cognitive reflection and sensation seeking as significant, albeit modest, predictors of susceptibility. Further to this, participants asked to make quicker responses made more judgment errors. We conclude there are cognitive signatures that partially contribute to email fraud susceptibility, with implications for efforts to limit online security breaches and train secure behaviors.
This column highlights recently published articles that are of interest to the readership of this publication. We encourage ABRF members to forward information on articles they feel are important and ...useful to Clive Slaughter, AU-UGA Medical Partnership, 1425 Prince Avenue, Athens GA 30606. Tel; (706) 713-2216: Fax; (706) 713-2221: Email; cslaught@uga.edu or to any member of the editorial board. Article summaries reflect the reviewer's opinions and not necessarily those of the Association.
All papers published in this volume of Journal of Physics: Conference Series have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the ...professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. Type of peer review: Double-blind • Conference submission management system: Firstly, authors send their papers to the email address of the conference. Secondly, all submissions go through a preliminary review to check the length, scope and plagiarism. Thirdly, all problematic papers rejected outright. Finally, the rest papers assigned to relevant reviewers. • Number of submissions received: 453 • Number of submissions sent for review: 383 • Number of submissions accepted: 349 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 77.04% • Average number of reviews per paper: 2 • Total number of reviewers involved: 31 • Any additional info on review process: Firstly, papers divided into several sections according to the scopes, and authors’ names, affiliations and emails removed from papers. Secondly, papers assigned to relevant reviewers for peer review, papers rejected if two reviewers give a poor rating to the same paper, papers sent for publication if two reviewers accept the same paper, papers sent to editors for final decision if two reviewers disagree on the same paper. Finally, authors revise papers according to the reviewers’ comments. • Contact person for queries (please include: name, affiliation, institutional email address) Caroline Chen Association for Computer, Electronics and Education caroline.chen@canada-acee.org
All papers published in this volume of Journal of Physics: Conference Series have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the ...professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. • Type of peer review: Single-blind / Double-blind / Triple-blind / Open / Other (please describe) ICoMPAC 2020 uses single-blind for the peer review process. The ICoMPAC 2020 Committee choose the reviewers for each submission. The reviewers know the identity of the authors but the authors do not know the identity of the reviewers. The final decision of each submission is made by the ICoMPAC 2020 Committee according to the suggestions and comments from the reviewers. • Conference submission management system: EasyChair • Number of submissions received: 81 • Number of submissions sent for review: 81 • Number of submissions accepted: 58 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 71.60% • Average number of reviews per paper: 1.47 • Total number of reviewers involved: 31 • Any additional info on review process: No • Contact person for queries (please include: name, affiliation, institutional email address) Name: Muhammad Luthfi Shahab Affiliation: Department of Mathematics, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya, Indonesia Institutional email address: luthfishahab@matematika.its.ac.id
PDF
