Automating SPAM reporting

[Gerard]

I use both WinXP and FreeBSD-6.2 operating systems. On the FBSD system, I had a utility program called" spamcup' installed. It is a perl scri_pt that when it is run will access the SPAMCOP site and report any email that is waiting there to be reported automatically. Since I report a great deal of spam, it is a real time savings.

Unfortunately, the author is no longer updating this program. Therefore, it is not working with SPAMCOP any longer. I was wondering if there is a perl programmer who might be willing to look at the program. Either that, or perhaps someone can suggest a similar program that can get the job done.

Spamcup is available at: https://sourceforge.net/search/?type_of_sea...p;words=spamcup

Thanks!

--

Gerard

[StevenUnderwood]

I use both WinXP and FreeBSD-6.2 operating systems. On the FBSD system, I had a utility program called" spamcup' installed. It is a perl scri_pt that when it is run will access the SPAMCOP site and report any email that is waiting there to be reported automatically. Since I report a great deal of spam, it is a real time savings.

Are you aware that this is a dangerous piece of software and that you could report yourself or your ISP if changes are made there? Are you also aware that YOU have agreed to be responsible for every report you send using spamcop?

[Miss Betsy]

Sorry I can't help you with spamcup, but FYI spam is the Hormel meat product. spam or spam is unsolicited email. Please use them correctly. Hormel needs to protect their trademark and really has been a good sport about the use of spam to describe unsolicited email.

Miss Betsy

[Gerard]

Are you aware that this is a dangerous piece of software and that you could report yourself or your ISP if changes are made there? Are you also aware that YOU have agreed to be responsible for every report you send using spamcop?

Are you aware that I have already inspected the email prior to submitting it to SpamCop? I believe it is quite obvious that you failed to comprehend my original post.

The fallacy with SpamCop is that a user has to both submit an email to SpamCop and then visit the SpamCop site to facilitate the email's being processed. Double the work for zero gain. If I was using some automated spam detection program such as Amavised-new for example, that would be different. However, since I am not, having to go through the trouble of both sending and then authorizing the processing of each message is a real pain. It is for that very reason that I was using 'spamcup.pl' to automate the process. Unfortunately, it is presently broken and the author is not gong to fix it to the the low volume of users.

[Farelf]

You don't have to submit spam one at a time by email. If your email client supports forwarding of a batch of them you can do up to 20 at a time (forward "as attachment"). Still have to run them through the process to report them one by one as SC processes them but that is a considerable improvement. Or, you can configure your mailhosts and ask for quick reporting (talk to Don - SpamCop Admin <service[at]admin.spamcop.net>). You don't have to re-inspect and release each report that way. Some users say they submit hundreds at a time that way (forwarded as attachments) to the quick reporting address which replaces the existing submit address. That is probably why the automated program is not supported - the standard provisions are adequate. What do you need to know to get one or the other of the above working for you?

[StevenUnderwood]

Are you aware that I have already inspected the email prior to submitting it to SpamCop? I believe it is quite obvious that you failed to comprehend my original post.

I conpletely understood your original post... you are not obeying the rules you agreed to when you signed up with spamcop. You may be putting your reporting account in jeopardy.

Inspecting prior to submitting would be to determine whether it is spam or not.

After submitting, you are supposed to be inspecting WHERE you are sending YOUR reports after spamcop does it's best to determine that. While spamcop is usually very good, it is quite possible for spamcop to mistakenly report the wroing address, sometimes your own ISP. ISP's don't like to be added to spamcop's list because their customers are not reporting correctly.

[Wazoo]

The offered https: link brings up a bit of an interesting issue for me .... ad.doubleclick.net garbage galore ....

Using the http: link doesn't seem to call out those link .. very odd ....

Runnung through the provided code, I'm wondering what doen't work at present, actually.

The biggest issue I see would be allowing the -s (stupid) mode to remain. And running with the oft-repeated request for a "fully automatic" thing, this is the item that would cause problems for the user. Even Toni points this out ... kind of hard to ignore some of the words of wisdom offered up within the code;

# *** W A R N I N G ! ***

#

# The scri_pt does NOT know where the spam report will be sent so

# IT'S YOUR RESPONSIBILITY!

#

# If the scri_pt asks spamcop to send reports to wrong places

# IT'S YOUR FAULT!

#

# If the scri_pt has a bug that causes same report being sent thousand times

# IT'S YOUR MAIL ADDRESSES!

#

# DO NOT USE THIS scri_pt IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT IT DOES!

# IT'S YOUR SHAME!

I'm wondering where the actual "time-savings" actually ccomes from, in reality (ignoring the use of the -s switch) .. you're still left doing exactly what you would do by "visiting the web-site" ... looking at the parse results (if 'show technical details' is turned on) and reviewing/selecting the targets of the outgong reports.

Any time-savings work would seem to be if one was to use the -s switch, which brings one right back to all the warnings offered, in the code, in the posts thus far, and the 'agreement' one clicks by when Registering a SpamCip.net Reporting Account ..... one would not be performing the "requested/required" review of the targets.