Google has most of my email because it has all of yours (2014) • Hacker News Board

Re: Google has most of my email because it has all of yours (2014)

#51

Post by irixusr » Thu, Sep 17, 2015, 1:10 PM UTC

kpcyrd wrote: post #19

irixusr wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few years (almost two decades!!!) when the filters weren't as good I read a proposal to make an email system that charges $0.01 to the sender. Spammers would be bankrupt. It was difficult to implement and up against an already entrenched tech. With Bitcoin I've been thinking of that idea again. Could a payment system on top of existing email be created? The receiver of the email could get the senders penny and Bitc…

Obligatory: http://craphound.com/spamsolutions.txt

Love it.

But seriously, does it still fail if I have a local filter were I strongly prioritize emails of ppl who show up on the BC ledger?

If ppl in high tech start doing this to lower their own email burden, I can envision normal business ppl copying the technique to lower their own.

Re: Google has most of my email because it has all of yours (2014)

#52

Post by ionised » Thu, Sep 17, 2015, 2:56 PM UTC

cbpy wrote: post #46

Animats wrote: post #29

My incoming mail goes through SpamAssassin at the IMAP server, which does a decent job. All my mail addresses are public on web sites, so there's a lot of junk filtered out. My phone also uses the IMAP server, so I don't need any Google services. It's an Android phone, but it's never been logged into Google, wasn't bought from a carrier, and many of the built-in Google apps have been removed. (Hint: when you start up…

Or you can also install Cyanogenmod without installing the Google-apps package.

This is what I do.

Re: Google has most of my email because it has all of yours (2014)

#53

Post by DanBC » Thu, Sep 17, 2015, 4:23 PM UTC

ryanlol wrote: post #44

DanBC wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any cites for this? Everything I've seen suggests that Zen has a very low false positive rate. That's the point of Zan - block a decent amount of spam and no real email so that your slower better filters can work.

Spamhaus has a history of extorting larger ISPs into dropping their customers instead of just blocking said customer. https://www.virusbtn.com/blog/2011/10_13.xml It's worth noting that spamhaus had no real reason to do this as they had already blocked the hosting company a2b was providing bandwidth to, so blocking all of a2b didn't actually stop any more spam. Zen is far far from not blocking any real email, they re…

From your link:

> Update: Spamhaus has now commented on the case in a blog post, explaining how Cyberbunker (also known as CB3ROB) has been involved in hosting malware and phishing sites. Ironically, this very week Spamhaus has been working with the Dutch hi-tech crime unit to investigate the criminal activity hosted by Cyberbunker and routed by A2B.

This is really your example of false positive blocking?

Re: Google has most of my email because it has all of yours (2014)

#54

Post by irixusr » Fri, Sep 18, 2015, 3:19 AM UTC

bad_user wrote: post #25

irixusr wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few years (almost two decades!!!) when the filters weren't as good I read a proposal to make an email system that charges $0.01 to the sender. Spammers would be bankrupt. It was difficult to implement and up against an already entrenched tech. With Bitcoin I've been thinking of that idea again. Could a payment system on top of existing email be created? The receiver of the email could get the senders penny and Bitc…

SMS messages are somewhere around $0.01 to $0.04 for sending in bulk, depending on region. Doesn't stop spammers. And a fee will also never, ever fly for email, being not a matter of entrenched tech, but rather one of artificial scarcity, being the reason for why SMS is dying.

The artificial scarcity argument is interesting, but I don't think it applies here.

I'm not proposing paying a third party to send me email. You'd be paying me for my scarse resource - my time and inbox space

Re: Google has most of my email because it has all of yours (2014)

#55

Post by ryanlol » Fri, Sep 18, 2015, 11:31 AM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #53

ryanlol wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spamhaus has a history of extorting larger ISPs into dropping their customers instead of just blocking said customer. https://www.virusbtn.com/blog/2011/10_13.xml It's worth noting that spamhaus had no real reason to do this as they had already blocked the hosting company a2b was providing bandwidth to, so blocking all of a2b didn't actually stop any more spam. Zen is far far from not blocking any real email, they re…

From your link: > Update: Spamhaus has now commented on the case in a blog post, explaining how Cyberbunker (also known as CB3ROB) has been involved in hosting malware and phishing sites. Ironically, this very week Spamhaus has been working with the Dutch hi-tech crime unit to investigate the criminal activity hosted by Cyberbunker and routed by A2B. This is really your example of false positive blocking?

A2B was routing CB, CB was not using A2Bs IP space. Spam was not coming from A2B. A2Bs IP space was blocked by Spamhaus to force them to drop CB.

What exactly justified blocking A2Bs IP space here?

Spamhaus is a really shady organization with a history of unethical behavior, look up the nic.at fiasco as another example... Or just ask anyone who works in hosting.

Re: Google has most of my email because it has all of yours (2014)

#56

Post by DanBC » Fri, Sep 18, 2015, 11:47 AM UTC

ryanlol wrote: post #55

DanBC wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From your link: > Update: Spamhaus has now commented on the case in a blog post, explaining how Cyberbunker (also known as CB3ROB) has been involved in hosting malware and phishing sites. Ironically, this very week Spamhaus has been working with the Dutch hi-tech crime unit to investigate the criminal activity hosted by Cyberbunker and routed by A2B. This is really your example of false positive blocking?

A2B was routing CB, CB was not using A2Bs IP space. Spam was not coming from A2B. A2Bs IP space was blocked by Spamhaus to force them to drop CB. What exactly justified blocking A2Bs IP space here? Spamhaus is a really shady organization with a history of unethical behavior, look up the nic.at fiasco as another example... Or just ask anyone who works in hosting.

> Per Spamhaus policy, on October 6th, after notifying A2B several times since June without results, an SBL listing which A2B had been ignoring was escalated to the SBL's "providing a spam support service" category and increased to include one of A2B's IP ranges. The escalated SBL record SBL112638 listed 178.249.152.0/21 for providing routing "knowingly and for profit" to a rogue host known as "CB3ROB" or "Cyberbunker", an outfit which Spamhaus has long seen involved in hosting cybercrime and spam outfits. SBL listings of CB3ROB had been mounting steadily during 2011 for hosting malware, phishing and websites selling fraudulent goods advertised via spam. CB3ROB had announced that it would not terminate customers due to spam listings - an announcement which sent a golden invitation to even more spam and crime customers to the point where all of CB3ROB was placed on the Spamhaus DROP ("Don't Route Or Peer") list at the beginning of October.

That's exactly what people want from something like the SBL, which is why it's used by so many people.

Your reference to nic.at is weird - again they were providing services to a bunch of criminals.

When complaining about false positives it'd be really helpful if you could point to people who aren't fucking scumbags who are getting blocked.