Editing Spamming (section)

==Cost–benefit analyses==
The [[European Union]]'s Internal Market Commission estimated in 2001 that "junk email" cost Internet users €10 billion per year worldwide.<ref>{{cite web |url= http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/01/154&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en |title= Data protection: "Junk" email costs internet users 10 billion a year worldwide – Commission study |publisher= Europa |access-date= 2013-09-03 |archive-date= 2009-01-15 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20090115231554/http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/01/154&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en |url-status= live }}</ref> The California legislature found that spam cost United States organizations alone more than $13 billion in 2007, including lost productivity and the additional equipment, software, and manpower needed to combat the problem.<ref>{{cite web | url =http://www.spamlaws.com/state/ca.shtml | title =California business and professions code | publisher =Spamlaws | access-date =2013-09-03 | archive-date =2013-08-28 | archive-url =https://web.archive.org/web/20130828222934/http://www.spamlaws.com/state/ca.shtml | url-status =live }}</ref> Spam's direct effects include the consumption of computer and network resources, and the cost in human time and attention of dismissing unwanted messages.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.commtouch.com/spam-cost-calculator |title=Spam Cost Calculator: Calculate enterprise spam cost? |publisher=Commtouch |access-date=2013-09-03 |archive-date=2013-07-24 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130724093655/http://www2.commtouch.com/spam-cost-calculator |url-status=live }}</ref> Large companies who are frequent spam targets utilize numerous techniques to detect and prevent spam.<ref>{{cite web | first = Shuman | last = Ghosemajumder | url = http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/03/using-data-to-help-prevent-fraud.html | title = Using data to help prevent fraud | author-link = Shuman Ghosemajumder | publisher = [[Google Blog]] | access-date = 12 August 2011 | date = 18 March 2008 | archive-date = 28 January 2011 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20110128181717/http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/03/using-data-to-help-prevent-fraud.html | url-status = live }}</ref>

The cost to providers of [[Web search engine|search engines]] is significant: "The secondary consequence of spamming is that search engine indexes are inundated with useless pages, increasing the cost of each processed query".<ref name=Gyongyi/> The costs of spam also include the collateral costs of the struggle between spammers and the administrators and users of the media threatened by spamming.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20051220115414/http://linxnet.com/misc/spam/thank_spammers.html Thank the Spammers] - ''William R. James''
2003-03-10</ref>

Email spam exemplifies a [[tragedy of the commons]]: spammers use resources (both physical and human), without bearing the entire cost of those resources. In fact, spammers commonly do not bear the cost at all. This raises the costs for everyone.<ref>{{citation|title=Economics of Spam|journal=Journal of Economic Perspectives|volume=26|issue=3|pages=87–110|doi=10.1257/jep.26.3.87|year=2012|last1=Rao|first1=Justin M.|last2=Reiley|first2=David H.|doi-access=free}}</ref> In some ways spam is even a potential [[threat (computer)|threat]] to the entire email system, as operated in the past. Since email is so cheap to send, a tiny number of spammers can saturate the Internet with junk mail. Although only a tiny percentage of their targets are motivated to purchase their products (or fall victim to their scams), the low cost may provide a sufficient conversion rate to keep the spamming alive. Furthermore, even though spam appears not to be economically viable as a way for a reputable company to do business, it suffices for professional spammers to convince a tiny proportion of gullible advertisers that it is viable for those spammers to stay in business. Finally, new spammers go into business every day, and the low costs allow a single spammer to do a lot of harm before finally realizing that the business is not profitable.{{citation needed|date=May 2021}}

Some companies and groups "rank" spammers; spammers who make the news are sometimes referred to by these rankings.<ref>Spamhaus' [http://www.spamhaus.org/statistics/networks.lasso "TOP 10 spam service ISPs"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051204044515/http://www.spamhaus.org/statistics/networks.lasso |date=2005-12-04 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url = http://www.spamhaus.org/statistics/spammers.lasso |title = The 10 Worst ROKSO Spammers |publisher = Spamhaus |access-date = 2013-09-03 |archive-date = 2012-01-12 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20120112022532/http://www.spamhaus.org/statistics/spammers.lasso |url-status = live }}</ref>

===General costs===
In all cases listed above, including both commercial and non-commercial, "spam happens" because of a positive [[cost–benefit analysis]] result; if the cost to recipients is excluded as an [[externality]] the spammer can avoid paying.{{citation needed|date=May 2021}}

'''Cost''' is the combination of:
* Overhead: The costs and overhead of electronic spamming include bandwidth, developing or acquiring an email/wiki/blog spam tool, taking over or acquiring a host or zombie, etc.
* [[Transaction cost]]: The incremental cost of contacting each additional recipient once a method of spamming is constructed, multiplied by the number of recipients (see [[CAPTCHA]] as a method of increasing transaction costs).
* Risks: Chance and severity of legal or public reactions including [[damages]] and [[punitive damages]].
* Damage: Impact on the community or communication channels being spammed (see [[Newsgroup spam]]).

'''Benefit''' is the total expected profit from spam, which may include any combination of the commercial and non-commercial reasons listed above. It is normally linear, based on the incremental benefit of reaching each additional spam recipient, combined with the [[conversion rate]]. The conversion rate for [[botnet]]-generated spam has recently been measured to be around one in 12,000,000 for pharmaceutical spam and one in 200,000 for infection sites as used by the [[Storm botnet]].<ref>{{cite conference| last = Kanich | first = C. |author2=C. Kreibich |author3=K. Levchenko |author4=B. Enright |author5=G. Voelker |author6=V. Paxson |author7=S. Savage | title = Spamalytics: An Empirical Analysis of Spam Marketing Conversion | book-title = Proceedings of Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS)| place = Alexandria, VA, USA | date = 2008-10-28 | url = http://www.icsi.berkeley.edu/pubs/networking/2008-ccs-spamalytics.pdf | access-date = 2008-11-05}}</ref> The authors of the study calculating those conversion rates noted, "After 26 days, and almost 350 million e-mail messages, only 28 sales resulted."