Re: [Asrg] Adding a spam button to MUAs

Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> Wed, 27 January 2010 18:39 UTC

Return-Path: <vesely@tana.it>
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 B92773A68BD for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 10:39:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.875
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.875 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.312, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, 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 rH--lGH0rqjB for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 10:39:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wmail.tana.it (wmail.tana.it [62.94.243.226]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA1293A67E7 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 10:39:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [172.25.197.158] (pcale.tana [172.25.197.158]) (AUTH: CRAM-MD5 515, TLS: TLS1.0,256bits,RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1) by wmail.tana.it with ESMTPSA; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 19:39:42 +0100 id 00000000005DC03D.000000004B60886E.00007BEC
Message-ID: <4B60886E.8080709@tana.it>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 19:39:42 +0100
From: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090812 Thunderbird/2.0.0.23 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: asrg@irtf.org
References: <20091216145533.68982.qmail@simone.iecc.com> <20100127124727.GA17990@gsp.org> <38C1E43E-D62A-4E18-BBB1-9E71D2980910@blighty.com> <201001271548.21270.ar-asrg@acrconsulting.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <201001271548.21270.ar-asrg@acrconsulting.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
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, 27 Jan 2010 18:39:30 -0000

On 27/Jan/10 16:48, Andrew Richards wrote:
> Surely there's no real problem if someone mis-classifies a message as spam
> or non-spam:

However, the possibility of retracting a (mis-)classification may be 
useful in some cases.

> If I'm providing a mail service I would like to aggregate
> results so that when the same message is classified as spam several times by
> different users I'll start blocking similar messages

Hm... it is not straightforward to establish whether new messages are 
/similar/ to already received ones. Checking an authenticated id, e.g. 
for messages received "with ESMTP[S]A", would be easier.

> - either doing this aggregation myself if I'm a big ISP etc.,
> or using an external service providing this functionality.

I'd be interested in the external service, not only because I'm not a 
big ISP, but also for the sake of neutrality, transparency, etc.

Obviously, it has to receive abuse reports... Perhaps not all the 
world's ones, just some. Which ones, by sending domain?

Is this service a Mythical Global Reputation System (TMGRS)?