URL whitelist

[dmgibbs]

Not sure if this has been requested before ... but I would like to see a URL whitelist option for accounts ... so that specific URL's are listed in messages (such as those that I own) are not considered spam report worthy.

On occasion I've actually reported spam against myself because I didn't notice that my own URL was being detected in a real spam message.

[Farelf]

...On occasion I've actually reported spam against myself because I didn't notice that my own URL was being detected in a real spam message.

How is that happening? You forward the spam by email? And your email 'signature' is being parsed? Or something else? It's just that this could be symptomatic of some unintended behavior which might need some attention - the SC/parser processing is supposed to strip out the envelope in its entirety. A tracking URL of a case where this happened would be good, if that's what it is. And nomination of the user agent/tools used in submission (Thunder Bird, whatever).

[StevenUnderwood]

On occasion I've actually reported spam against myself because I didn't notice that my own URL was being detected in a real spam message.

Please be more careful in your reporting. You should be monitoring the list of where the reports are going and unchecking any that you do not want to send. Measure twice, cut once.

[petzl]

Please be more careful in your reporting. You should be monitoring the list of where the reports are going and unchecking any that you do not want to send. Measure twice, cut once.

Don't know what's involved to set-up a URL whitelist. The request seems resonable

[Wazoo]

First of all, question, suggestion, whatever is missing all kinds of context. Not sure why, but I recall when I started reading that Post, I was trying to sort out just why one couldn't build a fiter for this in the e-mail application. However, I caught on that the real issue was the lack of oversight just after the Parsing provess and immediately prior to the Reporting action. One could suggest Quick Reporting which would remove the URL mistakes out of the scenario, and yet, this lacl of oversight has caused some folks to run into problems with Quick Reporting, as they did not notice changes in their upstream hosting, and also then ended up Reporting themselves ... in this case, full circle.

Don't know what's involved to set-up a URL whitelist. The request seems resonable

Whn looking at the graphic up at the top right of this page, this would be quite a chore, especially when trying to keep up with that flow. This suggestion would apparently need yet another set of database fields/tables to keep track of wgich URLs for jist which user .... and that's even reaching out for the URL resolving issues in the first place. Amyway, additional diskspace for the data, more machine time for yet even more lookups, possible tweaking involved in the templates used for generating the outgoing Reports .... on and on .... All this in contrast to at least a few seconds to review the list of outgoing targets to check if the user is Reporting themselves????? Takes one back to the initial "agreement" made when electing to sign up and decide to actually use the Parsing & Reporting System.

[dmgibbs]

How is that happening? You forward the spam by email? And your email 'signature' is being parsed? Or something else?

It's simple ... I was reporting a phishing email that references my own domain in some fashion, but I didn't notice it.

[Farelf]

It's simple ... I was reporting a phishing email that references my own domain in some fashion, but I didn't notice it.

Thanks - nothing complicated then.

As several others have said, vigilance is necessary with present report generation/processing. But you know that.

[petzl]

Whn looking at the graphic up at the top right of this page, this would be quite a chore, especially when trying to keep up with that flow. This suggestion would apparently need yet another set of database fields/tables to keep track of wgich URLs for jist which user .... and that's even reaching out for the URL resolving issues in the first place. Amyway, additional diskspace for the data, mode machine time for yet even more lookups, possible tweaking involved in the templates used for generating the outgoing Reports .... on and on .... All this in contrast to at least a few seconds to review the list of outgoing targets to check if the user is Reporting themselves????? Takes one back to the initial "agreement" made when electing to sign up and decide to actually use the Parsing & Reporting System.

Thanks Wazoo.

I note "whitelisting" is already done for URL's though?

Often when reporting one get words to the effect/similar

"ISP is not interested in receiving reports"

[Wazoo]

I note "whitelisting" is already done for URL's though?

Often when reporting one get words to the effect/similar

"ISP is not interested in receiving reports"

Not quite the same as the original suggestion/request. In the situation you cite, this is a 'universal' flag (see ISP Abuse Report Center ... something a bit akin to the manually-entered-Report-redirects .... the key is that these settings are for "all" Reports/users, no attempt is made to try to do a 'by individual user' mode.

[matthew1471]

Not sure if this has been requested before ... but I would like to see a URL whitelist option for accounts ... so that specific URL's are listed in messages (such as those that I own) are not considered spam report worthy.

On occasion I've actually reported spam against myself because I didn't notice that my own URL was being detected in a real spam message.

I agree with the original poster that this would be a useful feature. All I want to do is add my 2 or 3 domains just so I can stop even seeing them in the list.

Fortunately I have not self reported myself for spam yet as I always check what I click (and my ISP stands out in the list quite clearly)

but it's still silly that my domain appears in spamcop as a spammed domain.

I mostly see my address in spam e-mails for link exchanging and SEO improvements.