Feeds

Outlook.com launch a gold rush for jokers, spammers

'One million people' could be wrong

Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops

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. ®

Security for virtualized datacentres

More from The Register

next story
UNIX greybeards threaten Debian fork over systemd plan
'Veteran Unix Admins' fear desktop emphasis is betraying open source
Netscape Navigator - the browser that started it all - turns 20
It was 20 years ago today, Marc Andreeesen taught the band to play
Redmond top man Satya Nadella: 'Microsoft LOVES Linux'
Open-source 'love' fairly runneth over at cloud event
Return of the Jedi – Apache reclaims web server crown
.london, .hamburg and .公司 - that's .com in Chinese - storm the web server charts
Chrome 38's new HTML tag support makes fatties FIT and SKINNIER
First browser to protect networks' bandwith using official spec
Admins! Never mind POODLE, there're NEW OpenSSL bugs to splat
Four new patches for open-source crypto libraries
prev story

Whitepapers

Forging a new future with identity relationship management
Learn about ForgeRock's next generation IRM platform and how it is designed to empower CEOS's and enterprises to engage with consumers.
Cloud and hybrid-cloud data protection for VMware
Learn how quick and easy it is to configure backups and perform restores for VMware environments.
Three 1TB solid state scorchers up for grabs
Big SSDs can be expensive but think big and think free because you could be the lucky winner of one of three 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO drives that we’re giving away worth over £300 apiece.
Reg Reader Research: SaaS based Email and Office Productivity Tools
Read this Reg reader report which provides advice and guidance for SMBs towards the use of SaaS based email and Office productivity tools.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.