Foiling automated subscriptions by spammers
Discussions on another list bring up something to consider:
---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 11:19:24 -0500 (EST) From: "George F. Nemeyer" <tigerwolf@tigerden.com> To: spam@zorch.sf-bay.org Subject: Re: bulk email explosion this spring?
On Sat, 5 Jan 2002, Tim Pierce wrote:
Has anyone heard rumors that big spamhauses are planning to deploy new technology to attack mailing lists, or for that matter are planning anything specific for this spring?
I've not heard rumors, but the way I read the ominous forecast was that spammers plan to automate the subscription/confirmation process to get into lists initially with the hope of getting at least one spam flood through.
If that's true, it seems the next logical step is to create lists that are 'semi-moderated'.
That is, for any new subscriber, a human reviews and manually approves the first N postings, until the user can be tagged as 'trusted' and their subsequent posts are then allowed onto the list automatically. If any early posts are spam, the user is summarily booted. N can even be zero if the list owner knows and trusts the user when they approve the subscription to the list initially.
I can't see large volume spam houses bothering to actually create on-topic posts long enough to become tagged trusted since doing so by automated means would be nearly impossible for large numbers of lists with widely varying subjects.
This scheme should work at least for lists where the rate of new subscriptions is managable.
Other schemes might involve requiring posting domain to be the same as subscription domain, or other 'source' comparisons which would flag suspicious posts for approval before letting them onto the list.
It will take some list server software changes, so I'm going to copy this to the Mailman developer's list for consideration.
George Nemeyer Tigerden Internet Services
"GFN" == George F Nemeyer <tigerwolf@tigerden.com> writes:
>> Has anyone heard rumors that big spamhauses are planning to
>> deploy new technology to attack mailing lists, or for that
>> matter are planning anything specific for this spring?
GFN> I've not heard rumors, but the way I read the ominous
GFN> forecast was that spammers plan to automate the
GFN> subscription/confirmation process to get into lists initially
GFN> with the hope of getting at least one spam flood through.
GFN> If that's true, it seems the next logical step is to create
GFN> lists that are 'semi-moderated'.
GFN> That is, for any new subscriber, a human reviews and manually
GFN> approves the first N postings, until the user can be tagged
GFN> as 'trusted' and their subsequent posts are then allowed onto
GFN> the list automatically. If any early posts are spam, the
GFN> user is summarily booted. N can even be zero if the list
GFN> owner knows and trusts the user when they approve the
GFN> subscription to the list initially.Mailman 2.1 will do this, although it will take manual intervention to remove a member from probation. It'll be easy though; on the same screen where a moderator approves messages, there'll be a checkbox to remove the moderate (i.e. probation) flag from a member.
One thing's missing currently though: the ability to flag a member as a spammer and thus move them from probation to a ban list. That ought to be easy to add, and I will for MM2.1beta1; the hard part will be working out the U/I so it doesn't further clutter an already busy screen.
-Barry
"BAW" == Barry A Warsaw <barry@zope.com> writes:
BAW> One thing's missing currently though: the ability to flag a
BAW> member as a spammer and thus move them from probation to a
BAW> ban list. That ought to be easy to add, and I will for
BAW> MM2.1beta1; the hard part will be working out the U/I so it
BAW> doesn't further clutter an already busy screen.Done in CVS now. :)
-Barry
participants (2)
-
barry＠zope.com -
George F. Nemeyer