Jump to content

Idea for a new filtering option


Recommended Posts

Hi.

I have used the email system for over a year, and most of the time I am very pleased with it. Just not when my ISP gets listed. I understand how and why this has to be this way, but its still annoying, as all (not whitelisted) legitimate mail ends up in the held mail folder.

And then I have been thinking.....

What if the blacklist check ignores all the IP's that are verified in the mailhosts system? Legit mails will come through, and most spam will still be stopped based on their own IP address. The only downside will be that spam originating from my own ISP won't be stopped, but I would really prefer that if it means that legit emails can come through while my ISP is listed.

The ideal situation is of course that my ISP doesn't get listed in the first place, but this isn't the reality :(

So how about it? Is this a good idea, or haven't I got the slightest clue to what I'm talking about :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if the blacklist check ignores all the IP's that are verified in the mailhosts system?

That's not what the mail-host verification thing is all about. Although it's a combined database, it's primary function is in following the chain of servers tracking back from your e-mail server. That your incoming spam goes through Server-X may be absolutly normal for your e-mail, but is Server-X shows up in another user's e-mail, it may in fact be the spam spew source ... and this is even though Server-X is "good" and in "your" mail-hosts listing.

Just not when my ISP gets listed

and the reason your ISP gets listed is ..???

Maybe you need to play with some filters to whitelist your server if that's all you're trying to accomplish?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not what the mail-host verification thing is all about.    Although it's a combined database, it's primary function is in following the chain of servers tracking back from your e-mail server.

I know. I just thought it could be useful also to use it to get a more accurate spam detection. As a bonus. It only involves data already present in the spamcop system.

That your incoming spam goes through Server-X may be absolutly normal for your e-mail, but is Server-X shows up in another user's e-mail, it may in fact be the spam spew source ... and this is even though Server-X is "good" and in "your" mail-hosts listing.

That is exactly my point. Mails coming through the temporary blocked Server-X will, for my part, not be blocked, but for others it will still be blocked as Server-X isn't in their mailhost list. spam to me (not originating from my own ISP) will still be blocked on its originating IP as if Server-X wasn't listed.

(I find it difficult to explain exactly what I'm trying to say here. I hope you understand the idea).

and the reason your ISP gets listed is ..???

Well, someone reports my ISP's mailserver as being a spamsource, I guess??

BTW, the mailserver in question is 212.54.64.159.

I have personally never seen a spam from my own ISP.

Maybe you need to play with some filters to whitelist your server if that's all you're trying to accomplish?

I don't think so. As every single mail I receive goes through 212.54.64.159, wouldn't that whitelist every single mail including whatever spam I receive?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ouch! http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?action=checkblo...p=212.54.64.159 says

this system has been reported about 4620 times by about 20 users

In the past 816.0 days, it has been listed 9 times for a total of 25.9 days

In the past week, this system has:

Been reported as a source of spam less than 10 times

Been detected sending mail to spam traps

Here's hoping that some of those numbers are skewed by a database hosing a couple of months back, but still ....

I find it difficult to explain exactly what I'm trying to say here. I hope you understand the idea

I was having the same problem in trying to come up with a response <g> .. I could picture it, but words just didn't seem all that clear ...

I think what you are fighting is that any address in the header chain that's on the BL will cause the e-mail to be moed to the Held Folder, and you're asking for the SpamCop tool set to make note that if the 'only' IP that causes this handling is "your" ISP's server, then don't tag and move that e-mail...?? I can see where this could be a mail-host function, but the overhead .. I'll kick a note elsewhere to see if I can get the powers that be to weigh in on this, but I'm sure that this will be a Julian thing ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this system has been reported about 4620 times by about 20 users

Yeah, it isn't pretty. Unfortunately I can't just switch ISP, at least not easily.

I think what you are fighting is that any address in the header chain that's on the BL will cause the e-mail to be moed to the Held Folder, and you're asking for the SpamCop tool set to make note that if the 'only' IP that causes this handling is "your" ISP's server, then don't tag and move that e-mail...??

Yes that is exactly what I was trying to get out. Or it could check each IP up against the mailhosts data first, and if it's in there then just skip the BL check, if that is easier / less resource-demanding.

I can see where this could be a mail-host function, but the overhead ..

I was wondering about the same. Spamcop must be chewing its way through massive amounts of data every day already as it is now. But if it is possible to implement, then I think it would be a great feature that could avoid a lot of false positives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And then I have been thinking.....

What if the blacklist check ignores all the IP's that are verified in the mailhosts system? Legit mails will come through, and most spam will still be stopped based on their own IP address. The only downside will be that spam originating from my own ISP won't be stopped, but I would really prefer that if it means that legit emails can come through while my ISP is listed.

The mailhosts is a function of the Reporting system, while the mail is held by the mail system. The mail system can't see your settings in the reporting system, so this isn't possible and vice versa (other than you can import your held mail into the reporting system).

I'm not sure if what you want to do is available through whitelisting, but I don't think so.

Richard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mailhosts is a function of the Reporting system, while the mail is held by the mail system.  The mail system can't see your settings in the reporting system, so this isn't possible and vice versa

Oh well, then I guess there isn't anything that can be done about it. That's a shame :rolleyes:

I'm not sure if what you want to do is available through whitelisting, but I don't think so.

But then this comment gave me another idea. Whitelisting won't do it. Then every single spam would just be whitelisted and get through. But would it be possible to make a new user configurable list? A "don't check" list? Then the user could manually add the server(s) in question (like I would add 212.54.64.159), and everything in this list would be skipped in the BL check.

This could be done without interfering with the mailhosts system. And I would guess that a small check in a new list, won't take a lot of resources. In fact it may be able to free up some resources. If this new list was available, I could add one server to it, but on the other hand remove a LOT of entries in my whitelist.

Is this a more realistic idea?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mailhosts is a function of the Reporting system, while the mail is held by the mail system.  The mail system can't see your settings in the reporting system, so this isn't possible and vice versa

Oh well, then I guess there isn't anything that can be done about it. That's a shame :rolleyes:

why not. - It could also be a personal option in the mail system.

A list of IP's of my own ISP that should not be the reason to mark my emails as spam.

Something like a Non-Blacklist. Would be easy...

(I'm having the same problem. My ISP was only listed 2 times by accident (6-12 hours each time). But still all my Emails being held was a nuissance...)

Lukas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...