Parser information confusing

[maxwolf]

Please see the case http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z766592096z3b...b99cebdc0e3a4fz

When this repost had not been canceled the section "Please make sure this email IS spam: " erroneously reported "From" field content as "GL Adapter date increment" whereas that was a subject line. Please, pay attention to this case because wrong "From" evaluation occured rather often

[StevenUnderwood]

When this repost had not been canceled the section "Please make sure this email IS spam: " erroneously reported "From" field content as "GL Adapter date increment" whereas that was a subject line. Please, pay attention to this case because wrong "From" evaluation occured rather often

28357[/snapback]

Right now, it is showing 82.178.85.76 as the source which a quick scan looks correct. Since this appears not to be an account with mailhosts configured, the parser needs to do more lookups to determine the source, and if things time out, problems can result. It is possible it simply took the Subject to fill in the problem report because there was no From field to use.

What was the problem reported when doing the parse previously that caused the error report?

PS. Post moved to the reporting forum where it belongs.

[Wazoo]

I believe the "issue" is the snippet of stuff pulled from the e-mail to serve as a reminder/pointer to the particular item submitted ... in my parse of the same spam, this is what appears to tbe the complaint ... specific data won't appear outside the actual parse result page (si Tracking URL for the following is pretty useless)

Please make sure this email IS spam:

From: (GL Adapter date increment)0JzQsNC60YEg0L/RgNC40LLQtdGCICENCg0K0KHQtNC10LvQsNC5INC/0L7QttCw0L

vRg9C50YHRgtCwINC/0LDRgNCw0LzQtdGC0YAgRGF0ZUluY3JlbWVudCDQuCDQv9

GA0LjQsdCw0LLQu9GP0Lkg

View full message

Report spam to:

Re: 82.178.85.76 (Administrator of network where email originates)

To: postmaster[at]omantel.co.om (Notes)

The display isn't really representing the problem that is described, again, this is just a snippet/sample of the specific e-mail ....

[maxwolf]

Let me give another example (which is not reported yet):

http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z766797620zb0...ad7f78390dbee9z

Here in headers we may see:

Return-Path: <varydyn[at]tamil.com>

and

Subject: Привет!

whereas in the section "Please make sure this email IS spam: " SpamCop reports:

Please make sure this email IS spam:

From: (Привет! )

------------GI1IDWI65UU19XEA

Content-Type: text/plain;

which in fact misleading and quite non-informative.

I would be very happy if I get here correct "Return-Path:" (or "From" if it exists), full "To:" (to see if this letter is to me (Name Surname, personally), to my e-mail (many spams) or to somebody unexisted (most spams)), "Subject:" and a first few lines of message body (with mime tags removed (at least for text/plain and text/html contents), and quoted printables decoded).

[Lking]

If the snipit of the email does not provide enough information to insure that the message is spam, try the <view full message> link.

[StevenUnderwood]

Please make sure this email IS spam:

From: (Привет! )

------------GI1IDWI65UU19XEA

Content-Type: text/plain;

which in fact misleading and quite non-informative.

28369[/snapback]

That error message is giving exactly what is is programmed to do, provide the From: field from the headers (none exists so it is blank) and the subject of the message in parentheses. It is only a reminder placed in every parse to be sure the message is spam. Most valid messages will have a From: entry and a subject that makes sense. I don't know why you feel this is such a big problem.

And again, the parse is working fine for me...

Report spam to:
Re: 80.233.142.173 (Administrator of network where email originates)
   To: postmaster<at>telia.lv (Notes)
   To: abuse<at>telia.lv (Notes)

Re: 80.233.142.173 (Third party interested in email source)
   To: Cyveillance spam collection (Notes)

Re: http://pokupki.net/index.php?gid=77 (Administrator of network hosting website referenced in spam)
   To: abuse<at>telecore.net.ru (Notes)
   To: postmaster#telecore.net.ru<at>devnull.spamcop.net (Notes)

Also, why did you not simply post the link into the page rather than fiddle with it and make it no longer a link?

P.S. I guess the act of bolding a link makes it no longer a link.

[maxwolf]

If the snipit of the email does not provide enough information to insure that the message is spam, try the <view full message> link.

28370[/snapback]

I definitely know about this featue. My only intent is to give my own opinion on how to improve usability of the existing interface.

[maxwolf]

That error message is giving exactly what is is programmed to do, provide the From: field from the headers (none exists so it is blank) and the subject of the message in parentheses.  It is only a reminder placed in every parse to be sure the message is spam.  Most valid messages will have a From: entry and a subject that makes sense.  I don't know why you feel this is such a big problem.

It is not a big problem though... I just want to show that existing reminder format is a bit confusing to play the role it was intended to - give quick summary about suspicious message to decide is it spam or not at first sight.

And again, the parse is working fine for me...

Report spam to:
Re: 80.233.142.173 (Administrator of network where email originates)
   To: postmaster<at>telia.lv (Notes)
   To: abuse<at>telia.lv (Notes)
Re: 80.233.142.173 (Third party interested in email source)
   To: Cyveillance spam collection (Notes)
Re: http://pokupki.net/index.php?gid=77 (Administrator of network hosting website referenced in spam)
   To: abuse<at>telecore.net.ru (Notes)
   To: postmaster#telecore.net.ru<at>devnull.spamcop.net (Notes)

I have no complaint to header parsing itself. Just to "Please make sure this email IS spam: " section.

Also, why did you not simply post the link into the page rather than fiddle with it and make it no longer a link?

P.S. I guess the act of bolding a link makes it no longer a link.

28373[/snapback]

Sorry for that. I am not so expirienced with these formatting tricks...

[StevenUnderwood]

It is not a big problem though... I just want to show that existing reminder format is a bit confusing to play the role it was intended to - give quick summary about suspicious message to decide is it spam or not at first sight.

I have no complaint to header parsing itself. Just to "Please make sure this email IS spam: " section.

Sorry for that. I am not so expirienced with these formatting tricks...

28375[/snapback]

OK, I have renamed this thread to "Parser information confusing" rather than seeming to indicate the parser was coming back with wrong information, which more than one of us did think was your problem.

Almost want to move this to the New Features forum as a possible improvement to the parser, but am hesitating (and can not explain the hesitation). If another moderator agrees, please make it so.

[Wazoo]

Original post had the wrappings of a serious complaint, when adding in the specific issue with the "I cancelled the report" in the same post. Seems to have wound down a bit to a request for a suggested enhancement ... not sure what to call the end decision.

I fixed the Tracking URL link .. noting that http: ends up being parsed by this app as something different than

http: (and the decision should be made as to whether to send or cancel that parse result)

[Jeff G.]

I would be very happy if I get here correct "Return-Path:" (or "From" if it exists), full "To:" (to see if this letter is to me (Name Surname, personally), to my e-mail (many spams) or to somebody unexisted (most spams)), "Subject:" and a first few lines of message body (with mime tags removed (at least for text/plain and text/html contents), and quoted printables decoded).

28369[/snapback]

So, to summarize, I think you would prefer that the summary read as follows:

Please make sure this email IS spam:

From: [missing from Header]

To: x <-- I'm not sure this one is practical given munging

Subject: Привет!

Body Preview: Twis=-A-Braid.

Twist-A-Braid - это оригинальный и =EEчень удобный прибор для за=E2ивания косичек.