At 08:29 2003-04-11 -0700, procmail(_at_)deliberate(_dot_)net did say:
[big snip from 3 months ago]
I was saddened to see "mailcast" in your list. A couple
I'm saddened that spammers choose to send me spam, regardless of what tools
they choose to do so with. If the mailers they choose to use are a viable
method to identify them with, then that's the way it is.
of my clients have used this program as an easy and inexpensive
Windoze based mailer for their legitimate newsletter mail lists.
I'm of the opinion that "legitimate" mail lists should be managed on a
server, not from someone's windoze box.
When the day comes that a secure SMTP protocol is put into place - wherein
an SMTP originator needs to securely and uniquely identify itself to the
host it is passing mail to, such programs will be a liability for the users
who rely on them. A server-based solution however would simply need the
MTA to be upgraded (which is separate from the mail list package, and
chances are, something the non-technical marketoid doesn't need to contend
with since the admins at the hosting service would be dealing with the
software updates).
Currently, one may also contend with the fact that messages originating
from a non-server windoze box (say, via dialup or broadband), the messages
might also be rejected due to the IP appearing in DNSBLs, including the DUL
(Dial-Up List).
My guess is that many/most of the spammers have gone to using mailers
which don't ID themselves or masquerade as something else. My guess is
that all mailing list programs which ID themselves have been observed in
use by spammers. <sigh>
Let's face it - the people _selling_ these direct mailing programs are
selling them to spammers. There may be legitimate use of the programs, but
the largest market potential rests with people who want to send a message
from a throwaway dialup account instead of having to manage a legitimate
mail list on a server.
Can I ask how you assembled this list of mailers?
This matters how?
It was collected from some posted about here over the years, some which are
known to be checked for by other spam filters, and many others from having
personally received nothing but spam through those mailers - some more than
others.
I've made a particular point of noting in the past that some mailers do
have legitimate users (FoxMail for instance, which isn't listed).
Question: I note that Aristotle is duplicated.
Yes, though one has a text which follows it. Sometimes it appears as just
Aristotle, sometimes as Aristotle Mail. Yes, the simple form captures
both. But the second form also makes it clear to a human reader that there
is another form, and that it is just as spammy. If you'd prefer:
Aristotle(\ Mail)?
It simply makes the mailer id a bit more self-explanitory.
Keep in mind that if you use additive scoring, you could simply assign a
different weight to each of the known mailers - if a certain mailer is
always used for spam, crank it way up, otherwise, assign it a lower score.
FTR, when *I* subscribe to a list (that is, *I* choose to add myself to
something - not when some marketing freak gets their hands on an email
address and decides that I should receive promos from them), I deal with
adding a rule to file that list appropriatley. Outbound-only lists (lists
which are announcements, not discussion) tend to be filtered BEFORE spam,
because they're not abused in the fashion which discussion lists are. So,
while my spam filters may include mailers which have legitimate use, *IF* I
were to actually receive legitimate email from a service using one of them,
it would be a trivial matter to resolve.
Is this:
\\Arclab Maillist Controller
intentional?
Apparent typo from a condensed line contunuation ('|\' are on the same key
on most/all western keyboards - lack of a shift = '\\').
Also, ho you have an updated list that you'd be sood good as to post?
I haven't had an urgent need to update it, so no, there'd be nothing notable.
Keep in mind, I _do_not_ publish a package of spam filters - I have quite a
few which I use and which work well for me, but I don't publish a
package. IIRC, the above information was provided in response to someone's
query about a filter for known mailers. Take it at face value.
nb - one of the clients is the MS client used for some Microsoft marketing
junk.
---
Sean B. Straw / Professional Software Engineering
Procmail disclaimer: <http://www.professional.org/procmail/disclaimer.html>
Please DO NOT carbon me on list replies. I'll get my copy from the list.
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail