Re: [Asrg] Adding a spam button to MUAs

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Wed, 16 December 2009 14:55 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCD4B3A68BD for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 06:55:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -18.849
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-18.849 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.121, BAYES_00=-2.599, HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI=-4.3, RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED=-4.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, SARE_MILLIONSOF=0.315, SUBJECT_FUZZY_TION=0.156]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WjvweAHAKrhq for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 06:55:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [208.31.42.53]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9DF83A6863 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 06:55:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 96851 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2009 14:55:34 -0000
Received: from mail1.iecc.com (208.31.42.56) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 16 Dec 2009 14:55:34 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:cc:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=k0912; olt=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=a1RpzTdZthW68cGcTo5q60ALt7bJRzOAZ/AF7n9aKos=; b=VynLASwYc+DCeiP+4K7KK2S/c5tS+zPSzxuhpBIlS5AAIG3T1doJiBltWgzhv8P8L2u06qL3gklLFdn1Al5NXOOxxP1USVo8zR/8HW1OMHNDq/DoyDSJAA7QxA+8EPTtvbgZjHb6KFiLN3ueq0scnaiOIRqk3unMxapuaa8nE1w=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:cc:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=k0912; bh=a1RpzTdZthW68cGcTo5q60ALt7bJRzOAZ/AF7n9aKos=; b=iL8FSRR8WjZVX0DxBYMhr6lIn6BtK9rIzuBdBjCZVJCy88/CGo94whkiG1Kth2RY4ZK0y95uNupJsGRyjbm9GvUBFiGHdARC6eHev+djtHR/P3l0aR1YduMCl0zPzqbCcSm/7bgm0RKY9mDxahy3egzUOT5vv7R9TzXfAmsZbHU=
Date: 16 Dec 2009 14:55:33 -0000
Message-ID: <20091216145533.68982.qmail@simone.iecc.com>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: asrg@irtf.org
In-Reply-To: <20091216120742.GA28622@gsp.org>
Organization:
Cc:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Asrg] Adding a spam button to MUAs
X-BeenThere: asrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/asrg>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:55:51 -0000

In article <20091216120742.GA28622@gsp.org> you write:
>On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 05:50:24PM -0800, Steve Atkins wrote:
>> > I think allowing end users access to such a button is a terrible idea.
>> 
>> Data from actual reality contradicts your (otherwise plausible) reasoning.
>
>Not my data.  I have a rather large collection of incidents involving
>message recipients who have marked as spam:

Unless your collection is at least tens of millions of messages, I don't
think it counts as large.

More to the point, your collection has severe sample bias.  If you're
looking at incoming reports on a network that doesn't have bulk
senders and doesn't have a lot of consumer PCs that get botted, you're
not going to see many real complaints.  On my tiny network, 100% of
the feedback reports are either about COI lists to which the recipient
subscribed, or personal mail, since that's all it sends.  The reports
are still useful, both to prune out subscribers who aren't interested
any more, and these days, to identify spam sent from freemail accounts
that have gotten phished to lists to which the accounts are subscribed.

Large networks find user spam reports very useful, both on the reporting
network to tune their own sender reputation data, and on the receiving
networks to identify misbehaving senders.  This is reality, Steve and
I talk to people who manage the networks and this is what they tell us.

R's,
John