You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by Michael Scheidell <sc...@secnap.net> on 2009/03/02 02:55:59 UTC
Re: ReturnPath, Habeas, BondedSender
> We have created an entry on the Spamassassin wiki
> http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/ReportingSpam
Thanks.. Last time I tried via your web site, I had a salesperson call me
trying to convince me I should pay return path to 'bless' my marketing
emails.
Good first step, how, about an RFC complaint abuse@ address?
--
Michael Scheidell, CTO
>|SECNAP Network Security
Finalist 2009 Network Products Guide Hot Companies
FreeBSD SpamAssassin Ports maintainer
_________________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned and certified safe by SpammerTrap(r).
For Information please see http://www.secnap.com/products/spammertrap/
_________________________________________________________________________
Re: ReturnPath, Habeas, BondedSender
Posted by Karsten Bräckelmann <gu...@rudersport.de>.
On Sun, 2009-03-01 at 20:55 -0500, Michael Scheidell wrote:
> > We have created an entry on the Spamassassin wiki
> > http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/ReportingSpam
>
> Thanks.. Last time I tried via your web site, I had a salesperson call me
> trying to convince me I should pay return path to 'bless' my marketing
> emails.
>
> Good first step, how, about an RFC complaint abuse@ address?
Yup, good first step. We've been discussing this recently on the dev
list.
We all agree there's a need for a straight way to report abusers. Neil
even advocated having a mailto link on all their pages. Meanwhile,
there's an address for SA users, and it's being pushed on the wiki. If I
get some cycles, I'll try to enhance visibility and google buzz-words on
that page.
Guys, please tell them about any abuse! That way, the SA rules can
become more worthwhile. I did, and the offender has been removed from
all lists.
guenther
--
char *t="\10pse\0r\0dtu\0.@ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i<l;i++){ i%8? c<<=1:
(c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
Re: ReturnPath, Habeas, BondedSender
Posted by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>.
> That being said, maybe the rule description should include the reporting
> addresses. Why would I look on the SA wiki for a place to report
> ReturnPath, Habeas, and BondedSender complaints?
actually, the wiki is the right place -- the idea for rule documentation is that
the detailed doc for each rule lives on the wiki. e.g.:
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/Rules/ALL_TRUSTED
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/Rules/RCVD_IN_XBL
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/Rules/RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED
--j.
Re: ReturnPath, Habeas, BondedSender
Posted by SM <sm...@resistor.net>.
At 17:20 02-03-2009, J.D. Falk wrote:
>(BTW, a quick visit to your favorite search engine should alleviate
>any fears that either Neil or I are marketers.)
I can confirm that J.D. is not in marketing.
He did not "top-post" or send his message in HTML format. :-)
Regards,
-sm
Re: ReturnPath, Habeas, BondedSender
Posted by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org>.
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 01:20, J.D. Falk <jd...@cybernothing.org> wrote:
> Jason Bertoch wrote:
>
>> That being said, maybe the rule description should include the reporting
>> addresses. Why would I look on the SA wiki for a place to report
>> ReturnPath, Habeas, and BondedSender complaints?
>
> What's the process for updating rule descriptions?
>
> (BTW, a quick visit to your favorite search engine should alleviate any
> fears that either Neil or I are marketers.)
hi JD -- open a bug on the SA bugzilla , and attach a patch against
the 3.2.x rules
dir. we'll probably apply it ;)
--j.
Re: ReturnPath, Habeas, BondedSender
Posted by "J.D. Falk" <jd...@cybernothing.org>.
Jason Bertoch wrote:
> That being said, maybe the rule description should include the reporting
> addresses. Why would I look on the SA wiki for a place to report
> ReturnPath, Habeas, and BondedSender complaints?
What's the process for updating rule descriptions?
(BTW, a quick visit to your favorite search engine should alleviate any
fears that either Neil or I are marketers.)
--
J.D. Falk
Return Path Inc
http://www.returnpath.net/
RE: ReturnPath, Habeas, BondedSender
Posted by Jason Bertoch <ja...@electronet.net>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Neil Schwartzman [mailto:neil.schwartzman@returnpath.net]
> Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 12:22 AM
> To: Spamassassin
> Subject: Re: ReturnPath, Habeas, BondedSender
>
>
> > Good first step, now how about an RFC complaint abuse@ address?
>
> So you can complain about any errant returnpath.net emails? That has
> always been in place. It would be inappropriate to complain about
certified
> client emails to our role accounts, ergo the specific addresses for such
> purposes.
> --
I think it's inappropriate to ask someone who received spam accredited by
these organizations to also help sort their abuse mail by having to track
down some non-standard address. If the abuse@ address is too busy, then the
accreditation process needs more work.
That being said, maybe the rule description should include the reporting
addresses. Why would I look on the SA wiki for a place to report
ReturnPath, Habeas, and BondedSender complaints?
Jason A. Bertoch
Network Administrator
jason@electronet.net
Electronet Broadband Communications
3411 Capital Medical Blvd.
Tallahassee, FL 32308
(V) 850.222.0229 (F) 850.222.8771
Re: ReturnPath, Habeas, BondedSender
Posted by Neil Schwartzman <ne...@returnpath.net>.
On 01/03/09 7:55 PM, "Michael Scheidell" <sc...@secnap.net> wrote:
> Last time I tried via your web site, I had a salesperson call me
> trying to convince me I should pay return path to 'bless' my marketing
> emails.
BTW: I trust your pointed out the error of his ways. If this ever happens
again, get the person's name and write to me directly. Using the
purpose-built addresses will go direct to our compliance queue and avoid any
possibility of such nonsense.
--
Neil Schwartzman
Director, Accreditation Standards & Security
Sender Score Certified | Sender Score Safelist
Return Path Inc.
0142002038
Re: ReturnPath, Habeas, BondedSender
Posted by Neil Schwartzman <ne...@returnpath.net>.
I wanted to follow up on this thread with a word of thanks to both the
Spamassassin developer and user communities for the input, and for their
years of hard work into SA.
I'm hopefully not being obsequious here, what many of you may not know is
that I wrote and helped publish the first spam filtering procmail recipes on
the net, back in my days at Concordia University, and have been fighting
spam since 94-95. And so, when it came time to take on the task of Habeas
Safelist compliance the very first problem I had to contend with was spam,
inbound to our ticketing system, rendering the email stream almost
illegible. It was perhaps extra-offensive given my long years in this
business.
Happily, a deployment of, you guessed it, Spamassassin has attenuated 500
spam/day down to 10. So thanks to all of you for making my next daunting
task a whole lot easier. We are now receiving complaints, both loud AND
clear.
--
Neil Schwartzman
Director, Accreditation Standards & Security
Sender Score Certified | Sender Score Safelist
Return Path Inc.
0142002038
Re: ReturnPath, Habeas, BondedSender
Posted by Neil Schwartzman <ne...@returnpath.net>.
On 01/03/09 7:55 PM, "Michael Scheidell" <sc...@secnap.net> wrote:
> Good first step, how, about an RFC complaint abuse@ address?
So you can complain about any errant returnpath.net emails? That has always
been in place. It would be inappropriate to complain about certified client
emails to our role accounts, ergo the specific addresses for such purposes.
--
Neil Schwartzman
Director, Accreditation Standards & Security
Sender Score Certified | Sender Score Safelist
Return Path Inc.
0142002038