Evaluation of the Possible Utilization of anti-spam Mechanisms Against spit

  • Christian Dietrich
  • Malte Hesse


Voice over IP can be compared to email in a number of different aspects. Both, email and VoIP are widespread communication technologies in the internet. First of all, basic usage scenarios are described, such as hosted VoIP solution, campus VoIP solution and the role of VoIP in core networks. These scenarios are then distinguished by how they are affected by spam over internet telephony (spit).

In a comparative analysis, we evaluate well-proven countermeasures for email spam in the context of VoIP. A three-year-covering survey about email security in Germany serves as an empirical basis in order to provide facts about distribution and effectiveness of antispam measures. Blacklisting of IP addresses turns out to be effective in order to prevent spam and could be as effective for spit. White- and Greylisting can be adapted to fit VoIP. Additional techniques such as CAPTCHAs are described as well. These measures could be used to feed reputation services.

Finally, a combination of mechanisms which might make up a spit prevention system is presented.


Session Initiation Protocol Core Network Incoming Call Email Spam Public Switch Telephone Network 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [00451/06]
    Working Party 29 Opinion 2/2006 on privacy issues related to the provision of email screening services, adopted on 21 February 2006. Available online: Last Access: July 8. 2007.Google Scholar
  2. [DiPo07]
    Christian Dietrich, Dr. Norbert Pohlmann: Knackpunkt Spam — Umfrage zur E-Mail-Verlässlichkeit (in German), heise, iX. June 2007, p. 113–115.Google Scholar
  3. [Foth01]
    Foth, Egmont: Handbuch IP-Telefonie.Fossil Verlag Köln, 2001.Google Scholar
  4. [Iron06]
    IronPort: “Spammers continue innovation: IronPort study shows imagebased spam, hit&run and increased volumes latest threat to your inbox”, June 28, 2006. Available online: company/ironport_pr_2006-06-28.html. Last Access: July8. 2007.Google Scholar
  5. [QNTS06]
    Quittek, Juergen, Niccolini, Saverio, Tartarelli, Sandra, Schlegel, Roman: Prevention of Spam over IP Telephony (SPIT). In: NEC Technical Journal Vol. 1 No. 2, 2006, p. 114–119.Google Scholar
  6. [Rade05]
    Radermacher, Till Andreas: Spam Prevention in Voice over IP Networks. In: Diploma Thesis, 2005.Google Scholar
  7. [RoJe07]
    Rosenberg, Jonathan, Jennings, Cullen: The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and Spam, draft-ietf-sippingspam-04.txt. Internet-Draft, February 2007. work in progress.Google Scholar
  8. [RTH+06]
    Rohwer, Thomas, Tolkmit, Carsten, Hansen, Marit, Hansen, Markus, Möller, Jan, Waack, Henning: White Paper: Abwehr von “Spam over Internet Telephony” (SPITAL), January2006.Google Scholar
  9. [WikiENa]
    Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia: Voice over IP. Available online: Last Access: June 28. 2007.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn Verlag | GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christian Dietrich
    • 1
  • Malte Hesse
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Internet SecurityUniversity of Applied Sciences GelsenkirchenGermany

Personalised recommendations