Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Wazoo

SpamCop Glossary Archive

181 posts in this topic

<a name="spamtrap"></a>

spam Trap or Spamtrap

An email address that is never used to send or receive email, created for the specific purpose of "trapping" spam.

Spammers can discover these addresses through various means - the same ways that they use to get your email address.

The SCBL (SpamCop Blocking List), uses Sspam Ttraps to identify the IP addresses from which unsolicited email comes, and is programmed to recognize and discard confirmation emails sent to a mistyped addresses. The SCBLSpamCop's algorithm for listing IP addresses applies a heavier weight to Sspam Ttrap hits than to Ruser reports and as a result spam Trapsand can cause an IP addresses to be listed much faster and for a longer time periods than Rreports from reporters. spam Trap hits do not generate Reports, and therefore do not show up in the Report HistoryUnlike reports generated by manual reporting, no reports are sent back to the source of the spam, the listing formula is simply updated automaticly.

[the same paragraph above, fully changed]

The SCBL (SpamCop Blocking List) uses spam Traps to identify the IP addresses from which unsolicited email comes, and is programmed to recognize and discard confirmation emails sent to mistyped addresses. The SCBL's algorithm for listing IP addresses applies a heavier weight to spam Trap hits than to Reports and as a result spam Traps can cause IP addresses to be listed much faster and for longer time periods than Reports. spam Trap hits do not generate Reports, and therefore do not show up in the Report History.

Based on original entry by turetzsr aka Steve T

Rewrite by Miss Betsy

Coments by Wazoo and Jeff G.

Edit by dbiel 2005/07/29 18:00 PDT 1st major rewrite also written from the view point of SpamCop (This Glossary is a SpamCop specific glossary, not a general usage glossary)

Edit by Jeff G. 2005/07/29 22:19 EDT Same as above, but with a few changes (bolded and in red)

Edited by Jeff G.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like the addition of the information that other blocklists besides spam cop use spam traps (general knowledge that newbies can use) and that an email address that has been abandoned for use because of the amount of spam it receives is not considered a spam trap (a frequently asked question).

An email address that is never used to send or receive email, created for the specific purpose of "trapping" spam. spam Traps are created by those who maintain blocklists to identify spamming sources.

Spammers can discover spam Trap addresses through various means - the same ways that they use to get your email address. An email address that has been abandoned because of the amount of spam it receives is not considered a true spam Trap and is never used by blocklists to trap spam.

Miss Betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
<snip>

Spammers can discover spam Trap addresses through various means - the same ways that they use to get your email address.  An email address that has been abandoned because of the amount of spam it receives is not considered a true spam Trap and is never used by blocklists to trap spam.

30968[/snapback]

I have changed "these" to spam Trap as you have suggested.

I am not confortable with the term "never" as we do not have working knowledge of exactly how every blocking list functions.

Also would like to here input from others as to the value of the adding the additional data.

spam Traps are created used by those who maintain blocklists to identify spamming sources. (red indicates alterate idea)
One goal is to keep entries as short as possible but still provide a usable definition (a difficult balance)

Thank you for your input.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the additions, but I share dbiel's concern over "never".

Regarding length of Glossary entries, how about a very simple entry like "An email address that is never used to send or receive email, created for the specific purpose of "trapping" spam. Please see What is a spam Trap? for more information."? Such simplification could be applied to other long entries, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Regarding length of Glossary entries, how about a very simple entry like "An email address that is never used to send or receive email, created for the specific purpose of "trapping" spam.  Please see What is a spam Trap? for more information."?  Such simplification could be applied to other long entries, too.

30976[/snapback]

I like your idea.

It would result in having Three Glossary Topics:

1) The current Glossary Archive - used to track the history of changes

2) The current Glossary (linked to the FAQ) would be condensed with links to a new topic.

3) A new expanded Glossary. which would be a copy of the current glossary without the index.

Note: the index could be maintained if desired but the tags would have to be altered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3) A new expanded Glossary. which would be a copy of the current glossary without the index.

30980[/snapback]

Why would that be necessary? I think it would be redundant and a pain to maintain. I was just writing about the possibility of transforming some of the long Glossary entries into their own Topics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why would that be necessary?  I think it would be redundant and a pain to maintain.  I was just writing about the possibility of transforming some of the long Glossary entries into their own Topics.

30983[/snapback]

That is one option but raises the question as to where those new topics should be stored.

1) mixed in the current fourm (I don't like that idea)

2) a new glossary forum

The problem with the forum structure is that threads can not be easily followed. so to maintain a usable expanded definition, each new topic would have to be maintained.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ideally, Forum Topics are analogs to Newsgroup Threads. I envision new Topics in this Forum containing and linked from Glossary entries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am not confortable with the term "never" as we do not have working knowledge of exactly how every blocking list functions.

Also would like to here input from others as to the value of the adding the additional data.One goal is to keep entries as short as possible but still provide a usable definition (a difficult balance)

Thank you for your input.

30971[/snapback]

The 'never' was an attempt to keep the entry short - which I agree is a difficult balance. Actually the information on how SpamCop uses spam traps is the extraneous material here and could be a link to a FAQ.

How about:

An email address that is never used to send or receive email, created for the specific purpose of "trapping" spam. spam Traps are used by those who maintain blocklists to identify spamming sources. (ok to have 'use' instead of 'create' - think originally it was to vary the wording, but the reason was edited out)

Spammers can discover spam Trap addresses through various means - the same ways that they use to get your email address. Email addresses that have been abandoned due to the amount of spam are not considered spam Traps, although some people may use them for identifying spam sources.

SpamCop's use of spam Traps

Miss Betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Merged SpamCop into master glossary

Note: Spamtraps is still under construction in the Glossary Thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note: SpamTrap posts from the Archive topic have been merged into this topic as we try to finalize the entry for inclusion into the main glossary.

The Archive Topic has been closed. All new posts should be made in the main glossary topic.

Thank you.

The following is a link to the current version of the entry for review purposes. SpamTrap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spamtrap has been merged into main glossary and orignal posts mergered into archive topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Updated VER to include a link to Jeff G.'s FAQ entry.

33389[/snapback]

Thanks! You might also want to change "amply" to "ample" and "on going" to "ongoing" in the last paragraph.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks!  You might also want to change "amply" to "ample" and "on going" to "ongoing" in the last paragraph.

33393[/snapback]

dbiel's thing <g> ... fixed those and also remembered to update the Last Modified date this time... thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...Good stuff! :) <g>

33426[/snapback]

Agreed.
...Add link FAQ Entry: What is Quick Reporting? to the Quick Reporting entry?

33426[/snapback]

I'd second if I didn't have to abstain. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Innocent Bystander (IB)

An Innocent Bystander (IB) is a URL or URI that is present in spam but is not taking part in the spamming process. Examples include the mandatory advertising placed at the bottom of email messages in footers by free webmail companies and by antivirus software. While we sympathize with free webmail companies' need to recoup their investments via such advertising, we don't sympathize with paid antivirus software companies' and paid ISPs' attempts to do the same, as they are already getting paid and are attempting to double-dip. An attempted Report of a URL or URI that is marked as an Innocent Bystander will be met with "ISP does not wish to receive report regarding [the Innocent Bystander]" and possibly "ISP does not wish to receive reports regarding [the Innocent Bystander] - no date available". Please see Once I close a spammer's account, how can I prevent others reporting it? for more info on how ISPs can mark their advertising as an "Innocent Bystander".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An Innocent Bystander (IB) is a URL or URI that is present in spam but is not placed there by the owner of the URL for spamming purposes.

Spammers will put 'innocent' URL's in their spam to make it look legitimate, for instance references to news articles or government web pages. Other examples include the mandatory advertising placed at the bottom of email messages in footers by free webmail companies and by antivirus software.

An attempted Report of a URL or URI that is marked as an Innocent Bystander will be met with "ISP does not wish to receive report regarding [the Innocent Bystander]" and possibly "ISP does not wish to receive reports regarding [the Innocent Bystander] - no date available".

Please see Once I close a spammer's account, how can I prevent others reporting it? for how an ISP can mark a URL as an Innocent Bystander.

Above is my edit. Although editorializing is sometimes interesting (or humorous), I think the opinion made it too long in this case. I added the original meaning of IB (although it is not as common now). The referenced page is primarily for ISPs not the reporter and made paragraphs of the different aspects (definition, examples, parser info, ISP info).

Miss Betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Miss Betsy, thanks for the work 34260[/snapback]. I reconsidered and approve your edit. The following is my opinion.

While I sympathize with free webmail companies' need to recoup their investments via footer advertising, I don't sympathize with paid antivirus software companies' and paid ISPs' attempts to do the same, as they are already getting paid and are attempting to double-dip (unless they make it very clear in advance to their customers that their prices are significantly lower due to their footer advertising schemes, and give their customers options to pay higher prices for advertising-free products).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The link works, but who wrote the underlying entry?  I have some issues with it that need some research.  Thanks!

34391[/snapback]

See Glossary Archive

Note: reply and quote split off test topic and moved to glossary topic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0