CITP Blog - Formerly Freedom to Tinker

Tag: Spam

  • Finkelstein on Spam-Blocking vs. Censorware

    – by

    Comments

    Seth Finkelstein offers interesting comments on my previous post about the spam-blocking of Schneier’s CryptoGram. I wrote I’m amazed at the number of people who scoff at the feasibility of automated Web-porn filtering, while simultaneously putting their faith in automated spam filtering. Seth replies (in part): The distinction between keeping people from something they want…

  • Schneier's CryptoGram Misclassified as Spam

    – by

    Comments

    Seth Schoen reports that Bruce Schneier’s CryptoGram email newsletter is misclassified as spam by SpamAssassin and Razor. Seth Finkelstein explains why SpamAssassin gets it wrong. Schneier’s worst offense, according to SpamAssassin, is using the phrase “100% free”. Second worst: using the same all-caps word twice on the same line. (The offending word is “BES,” which…

  • Etzioni: Reply to Spammers

    – by

    Comments

    Oren Etzioni has an op-ed in today’s New York Times about spam. His proposal: Though spammers hope to lure us with their dubious propositions (“URGENT AND CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS PROPOSAL”), they rely on those of us who don’t want to participate to delete their messages quietly and go about our daily business. What would happen if…

  • John Gilmore on Spam and Censorship

    – by

    Comments

    Politech has an interesting message from John Gilmore about the effect of anti-spam measures.

  • SpamCop Responses

    – by

    Comments

    I received 59 responses to my SpamCop narrative. Because there are so many, I cannot respond individually to each one. Instead, I summarize below the major arguments raised by the messages. I give sample text from messages that asserted each argument, and I respond. This posting is rather long, and some readers may not be…

  • SpamCop Responses

    – by

    Comments

    I have gotten plenty of email from SpamCop advocates in response to my previous posts. Due to a work-related deadline, it will take me several days to sort through them and post a response. I hope to have my response up here by the end of Monday.

  • Keystone SpamKops (cont. 3)

    – by

    Comments

    Several people have asked me to expand upon a semi-cryptic comment I made in a previous post, saying that SpamCop’s system allows denial-of-service attacks. What I mean is that it appears that a malicious person could easily put you, or me, or anybody else on SpamCop’s block-list. There are at least three ways somebody could…

  • Keystone SpamKops (cont. 2)

    – by

    Comments

    Thomas Roessler is the person who sent the innocent email message that the Keystone SpamKops incorrectly characterized as spam, leading to my summary ejection from the net. He did nothing wrong, and once he heard about the problem he did his best to rectify it – but the SpamKops apparently ignored his messages as they…

  • Keystone SpamKops (cont.)

    – by

    Comments

    A reader, Florian Weimer, points out that there has already been at least one apparently successful lawsuit against spam blacklisters.

  • Keystone SpamKops

    – by

    Comments

    Earlier this week, my ISP shut off this site, because the site had appeared on a list of “spammers” published by an outfit called SpamCop. Apparently, this happened because one person, whose identity I was not allowed to learn, had sent SpamCop an accusation saying that he had received an unwanted email message, which I…