In addition to cancelling articles with perl-nocem, I'd like to repost
them to a private, unfeeded group, so they still could be accessed by
local users who would want to dig there. Of course some headers (like Message-ID or Newsgroups) would have to be rewritten, but it seems
possible.
Adam W. wrote:
In addition to cancelling articles with perl-nocem, I'd like to repost
them to a private, unfeeded group, so they still could be accessed by
local users who would want to dig there. Of course some headers (like >>Message-ID or Newsgroups) would have to be rewritten, but it seems >>possible.
Rewriting Message-ID is always a great idea.
Adam W. wrote:
In addition to cancelling articles with perl-nocem, I'd like to
repost them to a private, unfeeded group, so they still could be
accessed by local users who would want to dig there. Of course some
headers (like Message-ID or Newsgroups) would have to be rewritten,
but it seems possible.
Rewriting Message-ID is always a great idea.
Is Adam W. actually planning on eyeballing these articles for false
positives caught by SpamAssasin?
Message-ID: <bcc98944-4e92-45b2-aef2-38998ef41dfan@googlegroups.com>
This was posted by a known troll, but it wasn't part of this spam attack. Ray, is it possible to check what triggered this hit? It was found in this notice:
Message-ID: <20231017131504$9237@news.eternal-september.org>
But, what's interesting, it was also in i2pn2 notice (I don't process these... yet):
Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
Is Adam W. actually planning on eyeballing these articles for false
positives caught by SpamAssasin?
Yes, if it's not too much work. I'd also like to give users the
opportunity to view these posts. But I abandoned the idea for now.
I noticed one false positive on one group I read (I came across the reply
to this msgid, but the post was not found on my server, and I found it in NoCeM logs):
Message-ID: <bcc98944-4e92-45b2-aef2-38998ef41dfan@googlegroups.com>
This was posted by a known troll, but it wasn't part of this spam attack.
Ray, is it possible to check what triggered this hit? It was found in this notice:
Message-ID: <20231017131504$9237@news.eternal-september.org>
But, what's interesting, it was also in i2pn2 notice (I don't process these... yet):
Message-ID: <bot-spam-c4719d9951807e31@i2pn2.org>
Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
Is Adam W. actually planning on eyeballing these articles for false
positives caught by SpamAssasin?
Yes, if it's not too much work. I'd also like to give users the
opportunity to view these posts. But I abandoned the idea for now.
Le 17/10/2023 à 17:42, gof-cut-this-news@cut-this-chmurka.net.invalid
(Adam W.) a écrit :
Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
Is Adam W. actually planning on eyeballing these articles for false
positives caught by SpamAssasin?
Yes, if it's not too much work. I'd also like to give users the
opportunity to view these posts. But I abandoned the idea for now.
Alphanet did this, it worked fine, there was a configuration page and you could check or uncheck what you wanted to see. Unfortunately it's lost.
Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
Is Adam W. actually planning on eyeballing these articles for false
positives caught by SpamAssasin?
Yes, if it's not too much work. I'd also like to give users the
opportunity to view these posts. But I abandoned the idea for now.
I noticed one false positive on one group I read (I came across the reply
to this msgid, but the post was not found on my server, and I found it in >NoCeM logs):
Message-ID: <bcc98944-4e92-45b2-aef2-38998ef41dfan@googlegroups.com>
This was posted by a known troll, but it wasn't part of this spam attack.
Ray, is it possible to check what triggered this hit? It was found in this >notice:
Message-ID: <20231017131504$9237@news.eternal-september.org>
But, what's interesting, it was also in i2pn2 notice (I don't process >these... yet):
Message-ID: <bot-spam-c4719d9951807e31@i2pn2.org>
Do you think that one (sort of) false positive is worse than all the
false positives you'd get blocking all GG posts at the server level?
If you want to do that in a client, do whatever you want, it's your client, but a server has somewhat of a responsibility to at least try to serve legitimate messages.
Blockking Google seems to be the only way to go!
Do you think that one (sort of) false positive is worse than all the
false positives you'd get blocking all GG posts at the server level?
If you want to do that in a client, do whatever you want, it's your client, but a server has somewhat of a responsibility to at least try to serve legitimate messages.
In article <ugma0r$6af$1$arnold@news.chmurka.net>,
Adam W. <gof-cut-this-news@cut-this-chmurka.net.invalid> wrote:
Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
Is Adam W. actually planning on eyeballing these articles for false
positives caught by SpamAssasin?
Yes, if it's not too much work. I'd also like to give users the
opportunity to view these posts. But I abandoned the idea for now.
I noticed one false positive on one group I read (I came across the reply >>to this msgid, but the post was not found on my server, and I found it in >>NoCeM logs):
Message-ID: <bcc98944-4e92-45b2-aef2-38998ef41dfan@googlegroups.com>
This was posted by a known troll, but it wasn't part of this spam attack.
Ray, is it possible to check what triggered this hit? It was found in this >>notice:
Message-ID: <20231017131504$9237@news.eternal-september.org>
But, what's interesting, it was also in i2pn2 notice (I don't process >>these... yet):
Message-ID: <bot-spam-c4719d9951807e31@i2pn2.org>
Blockking Google seems to be the only way to go!
The Doctor wrote:
Adam W. <gof-cut-this-news@cut-this-chmurka.net.invalid> wrote:
Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
Is Adam W. actually planning on eyeballing these articles for false >>>>positives caught by SpamAssasin?
Yes, if it's not too much work. I'd also like to give users the >>>opportunity to view these posts. But I abandoned the idea for now.
I noticed one false positive on one group I read (I came across the reply >>>to this msgid, but the post was not found on my server, and I found it in >>>NoCeM logs):
Message-ID: <bcc98944-4e92-45b2-aef2-38998ef41dfan@googlegroups.com>
This was posted by a known troll, but it wasn't part of this spam attack.
Ray, is it possible to check what triggered this hit? It was found in this >>>notice:
Message-ID: <20231017131504$9237@news.eternal-september.org>
But, what's interesting, it was also in i2pn2 notice (I don't process >>>these... yet):
Message-ID: <bot-spam-c4719d9951807e31@i2pn2.org>
Blockking Google seems to be the only way to go!
Do you think that one (sort of) false positive is worse than all the
false positives you'd get blocking all GG posts at the server level?
If you want to do that in a client, do whatever you want, it's your client, >but a server has somewhat of a responsibility to at least try to serve >legitimate messages.
The Doctor wrote:snip
Blockking Google seems to be the only way to go!
Do you think that one (sort of) false positive is worse than all the
false positives you'd get blocking all GG posts at the server level?
If you want to do that in a client, do whatever you want, it's your client, >but a server has somewhat of a responsibility to at least try to serve >legitimate messages.
Retro Guy <retro.guy@rocksolidbbs.com> wrote:
Blockking Google seems to be the only way to go!
Do you think that one (sort of) false positive is worse than all the
false positives you'd get blocking all GG posts at the server level?
If you want to do that in a client, do whatever you want, it's your client, >> but a server has somewhat of a responsibility to at least try to serve
legitimate messages.
Yes, precisely that's why I don't block Google. Legitimate posters still
for some reasons use it and I want to have a complete feed (minus obvious >spam), so my users don't wonder why they can't see some posts.
Retro Guy <retro.guy@rocksolidbbs.com> wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
Adam W. <gof-cut-this-news@cut-this-chmurka.net.invalid> wrote:
Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
Is Adam W. actually planning on eyeballing these articles for false >>>>>positives caught by SpamAssasin?
Yes, if it's not too much work. I'd also like to give users the >>>>opportunity to view these posts. But I abandoned the idea for now.
I noticed one false positive on one group I read (I came across the reply >>>>to this msgid, but the post was not found on my server, and I found it in >>>>NoCeM logs):
Message-ID: <bcc98944-4e92-45b2-aef2-38998ef41dfan@googlegroups.com>
This was posted by a known troll, but it wasn't part of this spam attack.
Ray, is it possible to check what triggered this hit? It was found in this >>>>notice:
Message-ID: <20231017131504$9237@news.eternal-september.org>
But, what's interesting, it was also in i2pn2 notice (I don't process >>>>these... yet):
Message-ID: <bot-spam-c4719d9951807e31@i2pn2.org>
Blockking Google seems to be the only way to go!
Do you think that one (sort of) false positive is worse than all the
false positives you'd get blocking all GG posts at the server level?
If you want to do that in a client, do whatever you want, it's your client, >>but a server has somewhat of a responsibility to at least try to serve >>legitimate messages.
Please don't make me agree with Yads. That's cruel.
The server Yads runs serves one user: himself.
Even if Yads served dozens or hundreds of users, he can peer with
whomever he chooses to and can junk all articles from a particular
server. His server, his rules. As long as Yads isn't taking actions that
harm the network, no one other than Yads gets to object to how he wishes
to present Usenet to his own users.
Maybe I need to feed it more ham.
FWIW: The overall percentage of false positives here is below 0.1%
-------- Original Message --------
From: Ray Banana <rayban@raybanana.net>
Date: mar, ott 17 2023 04:33:48PM GMT+00:00
Subject: NoCeM and reposting cancelled articles to another group
Maybe I need to feed it more ham.
FWIW: The overall percentage of false positives here is below 0.1%
Hi Ray, RetroGuy,
please check my "junk" group on my server, we have a loot of flood and
spam. Maybe you can set better your filters.
the universal invasion by the shameless googlegroups admins has absolutely eliminated any possibility of "legitimate messages" originating from their diabolical weapon of mass destruction . . . udp would only be just deserts
As for i2pn2 notice, it's automated to add specific users to a rule (to be filtered) based on previous spamassassin scores. This article appears to have made it into that list previously, so was automatically filtered.
i2pn2 doesn't really differentiate between "this spam attack" and stuff to filter,
so a user can get caught in the filter after several (what appear to be junk to spamassassin) posts.
No specific rule was triggered, just the assessment of the Bayes filter:[...]
* 10 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 99 to 100%[...]
Maybe I need to feed it more ham.
Retro Guy <retro.guy@rocksolidbbs.com> wrote:
As for i2pn2 notice, it's automated to add specific users to a rule (to be >> filtered) based on previous spamassassin scores. This article appears to have
made it into that list previously, so was automatically filtered.
i2pn2 doesn't really differentiate between "this spam attack" and stuff to filter,
so a user can get caught in the filter after several (what appear to be junk >> to spamassassin) posts.
So, to clarify: once a user gets caught, all his future posts will be filtered?
D <J@m> wrote:
the universal invasion by the shameless googlegroups admins has absolutely >> eliminated any possibility of "legitimate messages" originating from their >> diabolical weapon of mass destruction . . . udp would only be just deserts
This is wishful thinking.
I agree that it would be best if Usenet was separated from Google Groups,
but the current reality is that normal, valid users still post from
Google, at least to pl.* groups.
Maybe they couldn't find a server to use, maybe they didn't want to
register on mine (but I don't want to monopolize Usenet in pl.*, so it's >better if users use different services), maybe they prefer the web
interface over a dedicated reader. I don't know what their reasons are.
I make daily statistics of pl.* and alt.pl.* activity, counting posts from >different servers and grouping them by From (to count unique users, not >individual posts) and the picture is clear: most users post using Google >Groups and my server.
Statistics are here (look for "Serwery"):
http://news.chmurka.net/stats.php
They're also available in JSON format: >http://news.chmurka.net/stats.php?all_json
Of course it also counts spam, but even after removing the spamming Froms, >the picture is similar.
My priority is to provide a complete feed to my users, not to fight Google >(at the expense of my users). They probably wouldn't want to use my server
if I launched an anti-Google campaign at their expense (and I couldn't
blame them for it). I'll happily remove obvious spam and floods, but I
don't want to remove valid posters in the process.
No, not specifically. I use a higher score to permanently list a user as filtered.
For example, if 5.0 is the trigger for spam, you need to actually hit 10.0 to get
permanently filtered. That usually works fine, but it is possible for someone to
trigger this by maybe replying to a very spammy message (and leaving the content in).
I can easily remove someone from this permanent block, which I did for the user
above. I just need to be aware of it, so I'm glad it was mentioned here.
This is wishful thinking.
I agree that it would be best if Usenet was separated from Google Groups,
but the current reality is that normal, valid users still post from
Google, at least to pl.* groups.
Maybe they couldn't find a server to use, maybe they didn't want to
register on mine (but I don't want to monopolize Usenet in pl.*, so it's better if users use different services), maybe they prefer the web
interface over a dedicated reader. I don't know what their reasons are.
I make daily statistics of pl.* and alt.pl.* activity, counting posts from different servers and grouping them by From (to count unique users, not individual posts) and the picture is clear: most users post using Google Groups and my server.
I agree that it would be best if Usenet was separated from Google Groups,
but the current reality is that normal, valid users still post from
Google, at least to pl.* groups.
Maybe they couldn't find a server to use, maybe they didn't want to
register on mine (but I don't want to monopolize Usenet in pl.*, so it's better if users use different services), maybe they prefer the web
interface over a dedicated reader. I don't know what their reasons are.
One reason I've seen is that they post from their workplace and the firewall blocks the usual usenet ports. Another is that they use (at home) a work provided computer , they don't have room for an additional computer and they are reluctant to install on the work computer additional software like a newsreader.
Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> wrote:
One reason I've seen is that they post from their workplace and the firewall >> blocks the usual usenet ports. Another is that they use (at home) a work
provided computer , they don't have room for an additional computer and they >> are reluctant to install on the work computer additional software like a
newsreader.
It makes perfect sense. They filter virtually everything at my workplace
with DPI (deep packet inspection) firewall too. There are ways around
that, but it's not the point.
In the past there was a thing called newsportal. One Polish guy ("TRanx") made a Polish version (TR Newsportal). Maybe it would be good to install
it. On the other hand, installing an unmaintained software...
On Wed, 18 Oct 2023 14:44:07 -0000 (UTC) >gof-cut-this-news@cut-this-chmurka.net.invalid (Adam W.) wrote:
I agree that it would be best if Usenet was separated from Google Groups,
but the current reality is that normal, valid users still post from
Google, at least to pl.* groups.
Maybe they couldn't find a server to use, maybe they didn't want to
register on mine (but I don't want to monopolize Usenet in pl.*, so it's
better if users use different services), maybe they prefer the web
interface over a dedicated reader. I don't know what their reasons are.
One reason I've seen is that they post from their workplace and the firewall >blocks the usual usenet ports. Another is that they use (at home) a work >provided computer , they don't have room for an additional computer and they >are reluctant to install on the work computer additional software like a >newsreader.
-------- Original Message --------
From: Ray Banana <rayban@raybanana.net>
Date: mar, ott 17 2023 04:33:48PM GMT+00:00
Subject: NoCeM and reposting cancelled articles to another group
Maybe I need to feed it more ham.
FWIW: The overall percentage of false positives here is below 0.1%
Hi Ray, RetroGuy,
please check my "junk" group on my server, we have a loot of flood and
spam. Maybe you can set better your filters.
Sincerely
. . .
I've just gone there, and <4f086a8f-8@999-47ab-9654-0bce5e9b918f> (along
with the replies) looks to be genuine. It's a complaint that the newest >Windows Update is causing major instability, the replies are from people >confirming this behaviour.
Have you modified the messages in some way? The special German
characters ä, ö, ü are being misrepresented there.
. . .
Andrew <Doug@hyperspace.vogon.gov> wrote:
. . .
I've just gone there, and <4f086a8f-8@999-47ab-9654-0bce5e9b918f> (along
with the replies) looks to be genuine. It's a complaint that the newest
Windows Update is causing major instability, the replies are from people
confirming this behaviour.
Have you modified the messages in some way? The special German
characters ä, ö, ü are being misrepresented there.
"Modified the message"? Usenet servers don't do that with regard to characters being displayed.
The MIME Content-Type header states "charset=UTF-8". The required MIME-Version header is missing.
Do you see UTF-8 characters? I don't.
http://al.howardknight.net/?ID=169875817000
You'll have to play around with which Latin-X character set you display to see what the author intended to use. You know the character set declaration and the character set being used have to match, yes?
Do you think there's a possibility that the article as sent was in bad
syntax and you should withdraw your false accusation?
. . .
-------- Original Message --------
From: Ray Banana <rayban@raybanana.net>
Date: mar, ott 17 2023 04:33:48PM GMT+00:00
Subject: NoCeM and reposting cancelled articles to another group
Maybe I need to feed it more ham.
FWIW: The overall percentage of false positives here is below 0.1%
Hi Ray, RetroGuy,
please check my "junk" group on my server, we have a loot of flood and
spam. Maybe you can set better your filters.
Sincerely
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
Andrew <Doug@hyperspace.vogon.gov> wrote:
. . .
I've just gone there, and <4f086a8f-8@999-47ab-9654-0bce5e9b918f>(along >>>with the replies) looks to be genuine. It's a complaint that the newest >>>Windows Update is causing major instability, the replies are from people >>>confirming this behaviour.
Have you modified the messages in some way? The special German >>>characters ä, ö, ü are being misrepresented there.
"Modified the message"? Usenet servers don't do that with regard to >>characters being displayed.
The MIME Content-Type header states "charset=UTF-8". The required >>MIME-Version header is missing.
Do you see UTF-8 characters? I don't.
http://al.howardknight.net/?ID=169875817000
You'll have to play around with which Latin-X character set you display to >>see what the author intended to use. You know the character set declaration >>and the character set being used have to match, yes?
Do you think there's a possibility that the article as sent was in bad >>syntax and you should withdraw your false accusation?
. . .
Maybe I should have included the information that the problem extended
to all postings in the entire thread. Your accusation is false.
I was wondering if the process of moving posts to "junk" did something
to the headers.
-------- Original Message --------
From: Ray Banana <rayban@raybanana.net>
Date: mar, ott 17 2023 04:33:48PM GMT+00:00
Subject: NoCeM and reposting cancelled articles to another group
Maybe I need to feed it more ham.
FWIW: The overall percentage of false positives here is below 0.1%
Hi Ray, RetroGuy,
please check my "junk" group on my server, we have a loot of flood and
spam. Maybe you can set better your filters.
Sincerely
Ivo Gandolfo wrote:
-------- Original Message --------
From: Ray Banana <rayban@raybanana.net>
Date: mar, ott 17 2023 04:33:48PM GMT+00:00
Subject: NoCeM and reposting cancelled articles to another group
Maybe I need to feed it more ham.
FWIW: The overall percentage of false positives here is below 0.1%
Hi Ray, RetroGuy,
please check my "junk" group on my server, we have a loot of flood and
spam. Maybe you can set better your filters.
Sincerely
I had thought some of the stuff in "junk" was ham, that appears to have
been a mistake. It could conceivably be AI generated - in that the
posts and threads make some kind of sense - but that's far as it goes.
In article <uhrlfb$3fjpb$2@paganini.bofh.team>,
Andrew <Doug@hyperspace.vogon.gov> wrote:
Ivo Gandolfo wrote:
-------- Original Message --------I had thought some of the stuff in "junk" was ham, that appears to have >>been a mistake. It could conceivably be AI generated - in that the
From: Ray Banana <rayban@raybanana.net>
Date: mar, ott 17 2023 04:33:48PM GMT+00:00
Subject: NoCeM and reposting cancelled articles to another group
Maybe I need to feed it more ham.Hi Ray, RetroGuy,
FWIW: The overall percentage of false positives here is below 0.1%
please check my "junk" group on my server, we have a loot of flood and
spam. Maybe you can set better your filters.
Sincerely
posts and threads make some kind of sense - but that's far as it goes.
AI - Artificial Idiot?
On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 23:44:40 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The >Doctor) wrote:
In article <uhrlfb$3fjpb$2@paganini.bofh.team>,
Andrew <Doug@hyperspace.vogon.gov> wrote:
Ivo Gandolfo wrote:
-------- Original Message --------I had thought some of the stuff in "junk" was ham, that appears to have >>>been a mistake. It could conceivably be AI generated - in that the
From: Ray Banana <rayban@raybanana.net>
Date: mar, ott 17 2023 04:33:48PM GMT+00:00
Subject: NoCeM and reposting cancelled articles to another group
Maybe I need to feed it more ham.Hi Ray, RetroGuy,
FWIW: The overall percentage of false positives here is below 0.1%
please check my "junk" group on my server, we have a loot of flood and >>>> spam. Maybe you can set better your filters.
Sincerely
posts and threads make some kind of sense - but that's far as it goes.
AI - Artificial Idiot?
garbage in garbage out . . . might explain googlespam?
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 299 |
| Nodes: | 16 (3 / 13) |
| Uptime: | 64:39:44 |
| Calls: | 6,691 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 12,228 |
| Messages: | 5,345,756 |
| Posted today: | 1 |