FC: SpamCop reportedly backs down, removes Politech from blacklist?

From: Declan McCullagh (declanat_private)
Date: Wed Nov 06 2002 - 22:35:01 PST

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "FC: Nathan Cochrane on BMG and crippled music CDs"

    I thank Duncan for his note, and invite SpamCop to confirm. If SpamCop has 
    reverted back to its original policy of blacklisting only spammers at the 
    lowest level of reasonable granularity -- an IP address -- that seems 
    encouraging. But SpamCop's FAQ still says it blacklists entire /24 networks 
    merely to punish a few miscreants, so it's unclear what's going on:
    Also, thanks to Ed Felten's blog (freedom-to-tinker.com), here's an item 
    about Amy Wohl's Opinions newsletter being blacklisted because it's (gasp!) 
    hosted at Verio:
    BTW I've been asked what Internet providers offer SpamAssassin filtering 
    with a POP account. I don't know of a comprehensive list, but I do know the 
    Well does.
    From: Duncan Murdoch
    To: declanat_private
    Subject: More on SpamCop
    Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2002 14:08:45 -0500
    Declan, feel free to post this to the list.  Please don't include my
    email address.
    SpamCop has come under a lot of fire here lately because your server
    got blacklisted.  It was blacklisted because of a recent change to the
    SpamCop listing rules that attempted to stop spammers from round-robin
    spamming:  send from a whole block of IPs, with none of them sending
    quite enough spam to get listed.
    As you know, SpamCop's first goal is to "provide a system which will
    flag the most spam with the least 'collateral damage' (flagging of
    wanted email)."  The rule change that got your server listed was
    attempting to address the "flag most spam" part of this goal, but it
    violated the "least collateral damage part".
    Guess what? The rule was changed last night.  Politechbot.com is no
    longer listed, and it seems pretty unlikely that it will be
    incorrectly listed again.  Of course, it's always possible:  people
    make mistaken reports sometimes, algorithms don't act as intended, and
    so on.
    In an earlier thread, jhhat_private said that the reason some
    netblocks aren't listed is because of payoffs to SpamCop.  He gave
    this as gossip, but offered as proof.  That net block
    looks to me like one of the round-robin spammers I mentioned above
    (though I don't know this for sure; maybe everyone there opted-in, and
    forgot).  They have been caught by the new rules, and I think it's a
    good thing.
    The rules that SpamCop uses will always have loopholes that spammers
    will try to exploit, and will never be able to be 100% accurate at
    letting non-spam pass through.  But give them a break: they're trying.
    Duncan Murdoch
    A satisfied SpamCop user
    POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
    You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
    To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
    This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
    Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
    Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/
    Recent CNET News.com articles: http://news.search.com/search?q=declan

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Nov 06 2002 - 23:13:40 PST