Feeds

Outlook.com launch a gold rush for jokers, spammers

'One million people' could be wrong

High performance access to file storage

Analysis Microsoft's servers have been going bonkers processing account requests for its newly launched Outlook.com webmail service, but there's plenty of evidence to suggest that Redmond's Gmail competitor may be less of a breakout success than it would have us believe.

On Tuesday, just six hours after the service launched, the Outlook team took to Twitter to thank its many new subscribers, saying, "One million people have signed up for a new, modern email experience at Outlook.com. Thanks!"

Whether you accept that figure, however, seems to depend largely on how you define "people." If we assume it means "active users," it would be wise to take Microsoft's claims with a grain of salt.

For starters, at least some of those who signed up for Outlook.com accounts say they did so not because they wanted a new experience, but because it just seemed like the thing to do.

"Whenever a new major email service comes out (such as Yahoo, Hotmail, Gmail) I usually sign up to try it out," a reader who goes by "MrP-" tells El Reg in an email. "Also being a Microsoft service and being named Outlook.com it seems like an important address to have."

Chart showing rapid first-day growth of Outlook.com

Could anything with a growth rate like that possibly be human? (Source: Microsoft)

Whether he will use it regularly is another matter. For starters, MrP- says that when he saw his first name was taken, he picked something silly.

"I may use it occasionally, probably just when signing up for sites that I worry may start spamming me," he writes. "That said if I ever were to switch to Outlook.com I'd probably create a legitimate account based on my real name and wouldn't be using satan@outlook.com."

That would leave MrP- with two Outlook.com accounts just for himself, but he says a coworker is already way ahead of him, having signed up for five separate accounts in a single day.

"My coworker set up his accounts to forward to his primary Gmail account. He mainly just wanted them because they're his names on other sites and his first name is usually impossible to get on any site/service," MrP- writes.

Microsoft is clearly already aware of such practices. Kenneth Paul, a consultant cloud architect at EMC, posted to Twitter that he was having trouble signing up:

The error message may have been displayed because of a system glitch, but the fact that it's there at all implies that Microsoft was well aware that individuals would sign up for multiple accounts. How, then, does it justify its "one million people" claim?

Phishers and spammers welcome?

Somewhat more worrying, Microsoft seems to have been particularly lax about withholding certain addresses from circulation. One PC Pro staffer managed to grab steveballmer@outlook.com, but that's not the worst of it.

"I'm now the 'proud' owner of post.master@outlook.com," writes Reg reader "graeme_from_it". And he's not alone. There's also Ross Duggan, owner of no-reply@outlook.com; Ryan Hoffman, who nabbed donotreply@outlook.com; and who knows how many more.

Doubtless none of these three grabbed their addresses with ill intentions, but the fact that they were able to claim them suggests that Outlook.com may be a wide-open market for spammers, cybersquatters, phishers, and anyone else who wants to send deceptive emails.

When contacted for clarification regarding its policies on Outlook.com names, Microsoft responded with a statement, saying:

We appreciate the significant interest (and creativity) Outlook.com has received. Before launching, we reserved a number of addresses for support and administrative purposes, and have a significant number of security tools in place to combat malicious behavior.

Whichever way you slice it, though, at 1 million accounts and counting, Outlook.com still has a long way to go before it can match Gmail's reported 420 million accounts. But if the email address land grab bonanza continues, it may well reach a similar figure sooner than anyone expects.

Let's just be clear, though: We're talking about accounts. Not people. ®

High performance access to file storage

More from The Register

next story
Windows 8.1, which you probably haven't upgraded to yet, ALREADY OBSOLETE
Pre-Update versions of new Windows version will no longer support patches
Android engineer: We DIDN'T copy Apple OR follow Samsung's orders
Veep testifies for Samsung during Apple patent trial
OpenSSL Heartbleed: Bloody nose for open-source bleeding hearts
Bloke behind the cockup says not enough people are helping crucial crypto project
Microsoft lobs pre-release Windows Phone 8.1 at devs who dare
App makers can load it before anyone else, but if they do they're stuck with it
Half of Twitter's 'active users' are SILENT STALKERS
Nearly 50% have NEVER tweeted a word
Windows XP still has 27 per cent market share on its deathbed
Windows 7 making some gains on XP Death Day
Internet-of-stuff startup dumps NoSQL for ... SQL?
NoSQL taste great at first but lacks proper nutrients, says startup cloud whiz
US taxman blows Win XP deadline, must now spend millions on custom support
Gov't IT likened to 'a Model T with a lot of things on top of it'
Microsoft TIER SMEAR changes app prices whether devs ask or not
Some go up, some go down, Redmond goes silent
prev story

Whitepapers

Securing web applications made simple and scalable
In this whitepaper learn how automated security testing can provide a simple and scalable way to protect your web applications.
Five 3D headsets to be won!
We were so impressed by the Durovis Dive headset we’ve asked the company to give some away to Reg readers.
HP ArcSight ESM solution helps Finansbank
Based on their experience using HP ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager for IT security operations, Finansbank moved to HP ArcSight ESM for fraud management.
The benefits of software based PBX
Why you should break free from your proprietary PBX and how to leverage your existing server hardware.
Mobile application security study
Download this report to see the alarming realities regarding the sheer number of applications vulnerable to attack, as well as the most common and easily addressable vulnerability errors.