Mail bomb

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As mail bomb , or e-mail bomb is called organized sending a plurality of e-mails to block, with or without attachments, to the mailbox or the communication devices of the recipient.


Mail bombs were in the 1990s -Jahren, during periods of low bandwidth and small Email Exchange Online mailboxes, a means to violations of the Netiquette punish. Either many individual users sent mails to the person in question or an administrator , for example at a university that already had powerful computers and Internet access at that time, sent a mail with an attachment of several megabytes . As a result, the mailbox concerned exceeded the maximum size and the person concerned could no longer receive any further mails. If the person concerned called his mail via modem via POP3 , it could take several hours to receive the mail bomb.

A popular attachment was the complete distribution of the X Window System , as this was often the largest file on Unix systems and could also be sent freely , i.e. without license infringement.

An archive bomb can also be used as a mail bomb, since it is also sent via e-mail and even "explodes" in terms of size when it is unpacked, ie it is expanded to a file size that overloads the system.


In a protest action, 235,000 people refused to receive a free edition of the Bild newspaper , which was to be distributed to all German households on June 23, 2012. Linus Neumann , author at , provided his objection with a request for information in accordance with the Federal Data Protection Act and sent it to different addresses of the Axel Springer Verlag . As part of this data protection request by e-mail, Neumann also objected to the sending of an Infopost in a red envelope, which the publisher sent to all refusers. After receiving a positive response from Springer-Verlag, he reported about it at

Several thousand readers followed his example, which at times led to overcrowding in inboxes. Axel Springer Verlag responded with a two-page response from its data protection department, accusing Neumann and his imitators of email bombing and computer sabotage. The publisher also refused to grant the opponents the right to self- disclosure unless they submitted a copy of their identity card.

In the same letter it was alleged that the procedure had been discussed with the Berlin Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information . A request showed that this allegation was incorrect and led to a regulatory review of the publisher's actions by the Berlin Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information. The publisher immediately began to carry out the tests requested by the opponents and to send out relevant information.

Also, no complaints were made against Neumann or those involved because of computer sabotage, as such would have had little chance of success.

Individual evidence