Excedrin Posted September 23, 2004 Share Posted September 23, 2004 I was just wondering, when you submit a spam report via email, if SpamCop’s system can handle Digital Signatures? Does it ignore them? Or do they cause some sort of problem? Any comments? Good Idea/Bad Idea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted September 23, 2004 Share Posted September 23, 2004 Bad idea. Whether it works or not, you're just adding another level of complexity for no valid reason. As far as working, you're also asking for sight unseen blanket responses to something unknown ... you've not mentioned applications involved, what standards have been invoked, which digital signature is involved, on and on ... If you are presently using a Digital Signature / service ... stick it out there, see what happens ... though still wondering exactly why you'd feel the need to "sign" a spam submittal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Excedrin Posted September 23, 2004 Author Share Posted September 23, 2004 Now that is a whole new can of worms to think about! I’m just now investigating this digital signature stuff so I’m not by any way an x-pert. But it does open up some possibilities for (maybe) more reliable reporting of spam. Right now, I’m only curious about the possibilities available. My first thought about it was that it might help prevent some (possible) abuse of the system by spammers that might be trying to mess the system up by making false/bad reports pretending to be valid users of the system. One reason (I think) to use a digital signature would be that a report with a digital signature could be able to carry a little more weight than one without. Granted that the digital certificate checks out with information that the SpamCop user has supplied to SpamCop. It could reinforce SpamCop’s confidence in the reporter that they are not a spammer in disguise. Thus reducing the probability of blacklisting innocent IPS’s and websites. Like I said, I’m just now starting to investigate the possibilities of digital signatures and so far for the past 24 years, I have yet to receive an email that has been digitally signed that has not come from me. But I do have a (GUT) instinct that it will not be very long before everybody is using it and nobody will accept an email that has not been verified as being from the sender and unmodified in route. The second thought is that, like me, (probably) most people that are reporting spam through SpamCop would be willing to go to court (on most cases) to put the offender away to put a stop to this constant CRAP!!!. Now here is MY OPINION. You can take it with a grain of salt (as usual). You get a lot of junk mail in your mailbox (in front of your house) and you can throw it into the trashcan at your discretion. But you can’t stop it from coming in. You can’t tell the POST OFFICE that you don’t like this junk and to stop delivering it to your mailbox. On the computer side you do have some options. You can choose to receive everything that is sent to you unfiltered or you can filter it. If you try filtering it, you run the risk that the filter that you are using will filter out something you really want to receive. This is where the dilemma comes in. You filter and loose legitimate stuff or you don’t filter and get lots of junk stuff. So what do you do? You can probably tell that I have not spent a lot of time thinking about this (YET). But anyway, If you were willing to appear in court to provide evidence of being spammed by someone or some company, provided that there was legal recourse, then I would think that digitally signed correspondence with SpamCop would be a plus on your side. Just think about it for a little while. What spammer would DARE get a certificate proving WHO they are to send you spam? If everybody had and used a digital signature (by a reputable service), and everybody filtered for VALID SIGNATURES, the SPAMMERS wouldn’t have a chance of getting through to you. But then that begs for a lot more detail…..Huh? OK,OK off of the soap box!!!! But Really Now, Let’s hear from other users about what they think about using “Digital Signatures” submitting spam reports via email. I’m really curious how they feel about the subject. I would have posted this somewhere else, but the lounge is for anything but SpamCop Issues….<Grin> _________________________________ Bad idea. Whether it works or not, you're just adding another level of complexity for no valid reason. As far as working, you're also asking for sight unseen blanket responses to something unknown ... you've not mentioned applications involved, what standards have been invoked, which digital signature is involved, on and on ... If you are presently using a Digital Signature / service ... stick it out there, see what happens ... though still wondering exactly why you'd feel the need to "sign" a spam submittal. 17596[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenUnderwood Posted September 23, 2004 Share Posted September 23, 2004 by making false/bad reports pretending to be valid users of the system. Well, since acounts are available for free, they can be valid users of the system just by signing up. There are other checks in place to limit abuse of the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dra007 Posted September 23, 2004 Share Posted September 23, 2004 I wouldn't belittle the idea, at least superficially it sounds thoughtful and reasonable. The bottom line though, is that spammers react to change almost as fast or even pre-emptively faster than changes take place, and since they are criminally inclined, they will forge and spoof anything they get their hands on. So I am skeptical anything that is piecemeal and not globally implemented will ever work with them. Afterall, they are resourceful enough to even defeat the laws that are supposed to protect US, at the recieving end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Excedrin Posted September 23, 2004 Author Share Posted September 23, 2004 I noticed that somebody has moved this topic from help to lounge…. The reason I posted it under help was the fact that I felt that the topic was more orientated towards informing the users of SpamCop about the subject of using digital signatures when submitting spam reports via email…It was my understanding (from reading the FAQ’s and descriptions of the “LOUNGE” that the “LOUNGE” was for anything but SpamCop Issues….. I guess my question could be, are “digital signatures related to SpamCop” really related to the help section of the forum? FORUM DESCRIPTION:.... ""This forum is for discussion of pretty much anything except SpamCop and spam fighting."" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted September 23, 2004 Share Posted September 23, 2004 At present, there is only one "somebody" moving things around. It shouldn't take but a few seconds to figure who to point your anger at <g> Why the Lounge? At present, I do not see a connection between reporting issues, problems, situations and digital signatures. Things could change tomorrow,, but as of today, I stand with the thought "not a good idea" .. too many things can go wrong the way things are ... Definition of the Forum areas ... perhaps I'll just point you to http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1672 and let you make your own conclusions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turetzsr Posted September 23, 2004 Share Posted September 23, 2004 I noticed that somebody has moved this topic from help to lounge…. The reason I posted it under help was the fact that I felt that the topic was more orientated towards informing the users of SpamCop about the subject of using digital signatures when submitting spam reports via email…It was my understanding (from reading the FAQ’s and descriptions of the “LOUNGE” that the “LOUNGE” was for anything but SpamCop Issues….. I guess my question could be, are “digital signatures related to SpamCop” really related to the help section of the forum? FORUM DESCRIPTION:.... ""This forum is for discussion of pretty much anything except SpamCop and spam fighting."" 17654[/snapback] ...By common consent of the users of these fora (as opposed to the person who set it all up but then left support in the hands of the moderator(s) who don't have the power to change the wording on the forum page) the Lounge forum is used for everything that doesn't belong in any of the other fora. Since your question does not relate to the SpamCop reporting system, I (humbly) concur with Wazoo in his decision to move it here. <g> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidT Posted September 23, 2004 Share Posted September 23, 2004 ...as opposed to the person who set it all up but then left support in the hands of the moderator(s) who don't have the power to change the wording on the forum page... Well, for goodness' sake, let's raise a ruckus and get JT to make the necessary changes! It's absolutley silly for this to be the official support venue for reporting and SC email, and to have the forum descriptions screwed up when someone arrives looking for help. DT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenUnderwood Posted September 23, 2004 Share Posted September 23, 2004 David, How many of your issues has been fixed by "raising a ruckus"? We have been trying to get them changed almost since the forum was created and we get "put something together and I will look at it (that is where the FAQ+ came from) but no actual change to the forum. If you can get the change, perhaps you can become moderator of the forum (sorry for throwing your job into the mix Wazoo ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidT Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 David, How many of your issues has been fixed by "raising a ruckus"? At least half of them (without doing a careful analysis). That's not bad. I got resolution on the "Held Mail" stuff, I was able to get some things changed in the FAQ, and some more changes are pending in the "Help" section at "www.spamcop.net" partly because of my communications with the Ironport person who is working on that. We have been trying to get them changed almost since the forum was created and we get "put something together and I will look at it (that is where the FAQ+ came from) but no actual change to the forum. I'm an assertive (stubborn) optimist, so I wouldn't have been quite as passive if the descriptions or the organization of the forums are/is really that screwed up. If you can get the change, perhaps you can become moderator of the forum No thanks! Wazoo does a wonderful job. DT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Excedrin Posted September 25, 2004 Author Share Posted September 25, 2004 I wasn’t angry…Just confused… I didn’t mean to gripe about being moved just wanted to know why. After reading your reply ad going to the link in your message I can see that there seems to be some confusion over the wording in the description of “THE LOUNGE”. I have to admit that I had felt (from reading the description) that anything even remotely related to SpamCop would not be tolerated.. ie..(spam being reported via email submission by a SpamCop user.) If I had only wanted to talk JUST about digital signing emails, I most likely would have gone straight to the lounge. So I put it under HELP because it didn’t seem to fit anywhere else. I might suggest the description of the LOUNGE might be changed to somehow reflect that it’s not EXCLUDING non-urgent conversations or postings that might involve SpamCop and/or it’s users..that are not already covered in other places on the forum. The wording of the description does SEEM to SUGGEST that ANY talk about ANYTHING that remotely mentions or refers to SpamCop is forbidden. (My mistake I guess)<Grin> At present, there is only one "somebody" moving things around. It shouldn't take but a few seconds to figure who to point your anger at <g> Why the Lounge? At present, I do not see a connection between reporting issues, problems, situations and digital signatures. Things could change tomorrow,, but as of today, I stand with the thought "not a good idea" .. too many things can go wrong the way things are ... Definition of the Forum areas ... perhaps I'll just point you to http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1672 and let you make your own conclusions. 17658[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted September 25, 2004 Share Posted September 25, 2004 The wording of the description does SEEM to SUGGEST that ANY talk about ANYTHING that remotely mentions or refers to SpamCop is forbidden. (My mistake I guess)<Grin> No, you read exactly what was typed ... it's just that it was typed in by the one person that can also change it ... and it wasn't JeffG or myself. "Everyone" would like to see that text changed, most of "us" would like to see something done with the rest of the requested / suggested Forum configuration, others would like to see this thing go boom and march all the traffic right back over to the newsgroups <g> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Excedrin Posted September 25, 2004 Author Share Posted September 25, 2004 OK, Well I'm not one to beat a dead horse. No, you read exactly what was typed ... it's just that it was typed in by the one person that can also change it ... and it wasn't JeffG or myself. "Everyone" would like to see that text changed, most of "us" would like to see something done with the rest of the requested / suggested Forum configuration, others would like to see this thing go boom and march all the traffic right back over to the newsgroups <g> 17788[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.