Double Irony! (was Re: [linux-elitists] ruben's stupid filter)

Dan Wilder
Sun Mar 10 15:49:37 PST 2002

On the other hand, autoreporting can (and does) get out of hand.

Autoreporting is much more likely to affect stable organizations,
where it troubles honest postmasters with false positives,
than it is the throwaway accounts spammers commonly use.  By
the time the autoreport reaches anybody the spammer is long gone,
or has signed up under a different false identity.

I have in the past blacklisted sites which originate excessive 
false or frivolous autoreports.  I will do so in the future.
Such nuisance mail is itself little better than spam.  

I pray that carelessly administered reportbots, or even carefully 
administered ones that originate more than a tiny handful of
false postitives, do not become common.

Unfortunately if reportbots become common, carelessly administered
ones will be common.  We have already seen that much of the Internet
is carelessly administered.

This could inspire yet another mailbot genre: reportbot-reportbots!
Oh boy!  Bandwidth gobbling robot wars!

On Sat, Mar 09, 2002 at 11:58:18PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> on Sat, Mar 09, 2002, Steve Beattie ( wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 11:57:36PM -0800, Don Marti wrote:
> > > Irony is dead.  It's kind of too bad that irony left and stupidity
> > > stayed, but what can you do?   
> > > 
> > > I have spamassassin running here and it works well.  If you, like
> > > most other people, have been flooded with spam this year, install
> > > it and try it out.  (sudo apt-get install  spamassassin razor will
> > > pull in Vipul's Razor too.)
> > > 
> > > You can set spamassassin up to just apply headers so you can see
> > > how much of your spam it would be catching, and set your tolerance
> > > level based on that.
> > 
> > The recent spamassassin install here has settings low enough that Nick's
> > original message in this thread was tagged as spam -- it was tripped by
> > the WHOLE LINE OF YELLING DETECTED in Nick's signature.
> The auto-whitelisting feature of SA should prevent this from happening
> on a long-term basis for regular correspondents.  The fact that most
> spammers use one-time accounts means that this is a feature unlikely to
> be abused (use throwaway accounts, don't get whitelisted, use
> repeat-offense accounts, get blacklisted).
> My irony moment for the month:  a good friend sent a mail quoting
> content I'd requested he send me.  It had spammy stuff in it (banners,
> ads, etc., being an HTML-based email distribution), and was sent to my
> work account, which he'd not posted to much.  SA tagged the message as
> spam and my procmail autoreporting rules (set to trigger at a threshold
> of 10, not SA's default "5 and you're spam" threshold) sent the mail to
> his employer's NOC.
> The chaps there were sufficiently impressed with how SA'd treated his
> post (the categorization was understandable) that they requested he
> install a test instance there ;-)
> Peace.
> -- 
> Karsten M. Self <>
>  What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?       There is no K5 cabal

 Dan Wilder <>   Technical Manager & Editor
 SSC, Inc. P.O. Box 55549   Phone:  206-782-8808
 Seattle, WA  98155-0549    URL

More information about the linux-elitists mailing list