Re: [Asrg] Adding a spam button to MUAs

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Thu, 10 December 2009 00:24 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 90C583A68DD for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Dec 2009 16:24:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -18.981
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-18.981 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.062, BAYES_00=-2.599, HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI=-4.3, RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED=-4.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, 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 L0q61-mSNsoE for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Dec 2009 16:24:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [208.31.42.53]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AEBB3A684C for <asrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 9 Dec 2009 16:24:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 37219 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2009 00:23:54 -0000
Received: from mail1.iecc.com (208.31.42.56) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 10 Dec 2009 00:23:54 -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=QmchuV3ZDZnLtYY2aoT4/rQJSHMCUnM76FOBjU91G+k=; b=MBV/H1PHOhDKPIHoC2Ulm1o29VXDKqECnythQ/UYsRqmXx/5znCniMC1hW+HNoWHGtqLMrNnzc+67yLf85xOIfHUpD6OTxNagGBlhfpYN9Dklb8+na52QS7Ymnt6tWP9T3UU70Q8b6c0clqJHqy0l853B88H4+ehI+uQIQfPsWs=
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=QmchuV3ZDZnLtYY2aoT4/rQJSHMCUnM76FOBjU91G+k=; b=rXnKcS6r1dq29ZO0ngIs9YC7A13mShUqoLNbnwuepFVaMnVndFs2l/az08aSn4WReLOxHPw7f9MtSGRe149aQTlf0IokvpsjdODjVeRxFX81KNg/FzDxPehiz2HkBoOD+9jciXIhjsmGFy2sxOnLfCBzXCgrnRpSSA2cQG+fEYM=
Date: 10 Dec 2009 00:23:53 -0000
Message-ID: <20091210002353.38429.qmail@simone.iecc.com>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: asrg@irtf.org
In-Reply-To: <A1AF1DFB-40D4-4E7D-AA3C-3F865CBF14C6@blighty.com>
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: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 00:24:08 -0000

>>> Short of a mythical global reputation system, I don't see how one could
>>> divert reports to forwarders without also diverting them to spammers who
>>> pretend to be forwarders.
>> 
>> Easy: as the end user, I _know_ which sites I _told_ to forward for
>> me.

Indeed, but explaning that to your spam button seems unlikely to be
something that a normal mail user could reasonably configure.  One
could propose some auto-configure thing, but now we're back to how to
tell who's lying when they offer auto-configure stuff.

>That's beside the point, though. What is the disadvantage of sending
>reports to spammers? If there is a disadvantage, how is that different
>to the current FBL state of the art?

I took Seth's suggestion to be to report to the forwarder rather than
directly to the ISP.  Sending it to both would be fine, give or take
issues of malicious misconfigurations mailbombing innocents.

R's,
John