more questions about Yahoo feedback loop and abuse complaints
We received 23 Yahoo feedback loop notices this morning from one user. Supposedly these are abuse or complaint notices. The person joined us in Sept of last year. After we received these notices from Yahoo today, we contacted the member. She did not remember reporting us as spam. She didn't offer us any useful feedback because she didn't remember any details. However, she *does* wish to continue receiving emails from our list. So it seems clear this was not an actual case of abuse. Unfortunately, Yahoo will not deliver our messages to this address any longer, as far as I know. And the person did not want to get a new email address.
As mentioned previously, we try to follow all best practices. Emails from our list are DKIM signed, we have valid SPF records, rDNS is set up, our IP address is dedicated to this mailing list. The content is purely from members of the list, and every single message is moderated by a human so almost nothing ever slips by that would be a marketing-type message. (For example, if a member sends info about some product they have personally benefited from, we review those carefully to be sure the message is appropriate and informative, and is coming directly from a well-known and trusted member of our list.)
The only info we received from Yahoo about this incident is the original message we sent and a line like this:
This is an email abuse report for an email message received from example.com on Thu, 07 Jun 2012 03:32:29 PDT
My questions are:
Why are we just receiving a feedback on 13 June 2012 for a message we sent out on 07 June 2012? With this kind of delay, it apparently leads to more abuse reports (23 in this case) because we can't remove that address until we are notified. (Again, in this case, the person actually wished to continue receiving emails.)
Does an incident like this count 23 times against our Yahoo reputation?
Is anyone else seeing notification delays coupled with multiple notices like this?
Thanks.
Hello David
On 2012-06-13 17:16, David wrote:
We received 23 Yahoo feedback loop notices this morning from one user. Supposedly these are abuse or complaint notices. The person joined us in Sept of last year. After we received these notices from Yahoo today, we contacted the member. She did not remember reporting us as spam. She didn't offer us any useful feedback because she didn't remember any details. However, she *does* wish to continue receiving emails from our list. So it seems clear this was not an actual case of abuse. Unfortunately, Yahoo will not deliver our messages to this address any longer, as far as I know. And the person did not want to get a new email address.
As mentioned previously, we try to follow all best practices. Emails from our list are DKIM signed, we have valid SPF records, rDNS is set up, our IP address is dedicated to this mailing list. The content is purely from members of the list, and every single message is moderated by a human so almost nothing ever slips by that would be a marketing-type message. (For example, if a member sends info about some product they have personally benefited from, we review those carefully to be sure the message is appropriate and informative, and is coming directly from a well-known and trusted member of our list.)
The only info we received from Yahoo about this incident is the original message we sent and a line like this:
This is an email abuse report for an email message received from example.com on Thu, 07 Jun 2012 03:32:29 PDT
My questions are:
- Why are we just receiving a feedback on 13 June 2012 for a message we sent out on 07 June 2012? With this kind of delay, it apparently leads to more abuse reports (23 in this case) because we can't remove that address until we are notified. (Again, in this case, the person actually wished to continue receiving emails.)
You get it, when the Yahoo user is pressing the "this is SPAM/Junk"-Button. This can take some time. I once got one 14 Months after sending the actual message ;-)
- Does an incident like this count 23 times against our Yahoo reputation?
AFAIK this counts as one, because it was on one day and one recipient only.
- Is anyone else seeing notification delays coupled with multiple notices like this?
I never got multiple ones on the same message from one user, but from multiple users and on multiple messages from one user.
Kind regards, Christian Mack
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Mailman Admin < mailman-admin@uni-konstanz.de> wrote:
- Is anyone else seeing notification delays coupled with multiple notices like this?
I never got multiple ones on the same message from one user, but from multiple users and on multiple messages from one user.
Thanks for sharing your experiences. If nothing else, this may increase awareness of Yahoo's "issues".
These 23 notices from Yahoo were from the same user, but for 23 different messages from our list over the time period from 07 June 2012 to 13 June 2012.
- Why are we just receiving a feedback on 13 June 2012 for a message we
sent out on 07 June 2012?
You get it when the Yahoo user is pressing the "this is SPAM/Junk"-Button.
We received these today. But the user did not remember marking us as spam and she said today that she wanted to continue receiving emails from us. If she pressed the "this is SPAM/Junk"-Button 23 times today, you would think she would remember doing it when we asked her today.
For someone new to Mailman, this is confusing. But it only seems to happen with Yahoo.
Thanks again for the info.
- David <dave@fiteyes.com>:
These 23 notices from Yahoo were from the same user, but for 23 different messages from our list over the time period from 07 June 2012 to 13 June 2012.
This is the usual "I mistook the spam button for the delete button"
We received these today. But the user did not remember marking us as spam and she said today that she wanted to continue receiving emails from us. If she pressed the "this is SPAM/Junk"-Button 23 times today, you would think she would remember doing it when we asked her today.
Yahoo! users are truly special.
-- Ralf Hildebrandt Charite Universitätsmedizin Berlin ralf.hildebrandt@charite.de Campus Benjamin Franklin http://www.charite.de Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin Geschäftsbereich IT, Abt. Netzwerk fon: +49-30-450.570.155
- Ralf Hildebrandt <Ralf.Hildebrandt@charite.de>:
- David <dave@fiteyes.com>:
These 23 notices from Yahoo were from the same user, but for 23 different messages from our list over the time period from 07 June 2012 to 13 June 2012.
This is the usual "I mistook the spam button for the delete button"
We received these today. But the user did not remember marking us as spam
Please ask here if she still sees those mails. If not, and they're NOT in the Trash, she used the Spam button!
-- Ralf Hildebrandt Charite Universitätsmedizin Berlin ralf.hildebrandt@charite.de Campus Benjamin Franklin http://www.charite.de Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin Geschäftsbereich IT, Abt. Netzwerk fon: +49-30-450.570.155
- Thomas Hochstein <mailman-users@ml.th-h.de>:
Ralf Hildebrandt schrieb:
Yahoo! users are truly special.
AOL users are, too. (They also have a feedback loop.)
Yeah, and it's even worse, since it tries to weed out all info one needs to identify the user :(
-- Ralf Hildebrandt Charite Universitätsmedizin Berlin ralf.hildebrandt@charite.de Campus Benjamin Franklin http://www.charite.de Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin Geschäftsbereich IT, Abt. Netzwerk fon: +49-30-450.570.155
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:04 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt < Ralf.Hildebrandt@charite.de> wrote:
- Thomas Hochstein <mailman-users@ml.th-h.de>:
Ralf Hildebrandt schrieb:
Yahoo! users are truly special.
AOL users are, too. (They also have a feedback loop.)
Yeah, and it's even worse, since it tries to weed out all info one needs to identify the user :(
Is there any method to identify the user from the AOL feedback loop? If not, how does AOL expect us to unsubscribe the user who complained?
Maybe VERP is the best solution for AOL and her evil step-sisters if you can stand the overhead?
Terry Earley
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 6:51 PM, David <dave@fiteyes.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:04 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt < Ralf.Hildebrandt@charite.de> wrote:
- Thomas Hochstein <mailman-users@ml.th-h.de>:
Ralf Hildebrandt schrieb:
Yahoo! users are truly special.
AOL users are, too. (They also have a feedback loop.)
Yeah, and it's even worse, since it tries to weed out all info one needs to identify the user :(
Is there any method to identify the user from the AOL feedback loop? If not, how does AOL expect us to unsubscribe the user who complained?
- Terry Earley <terry@fiteyes.com>:
Maybe VERP is the best solution for AOL and her evil step-sisters if you can stand the overhead?
Yep.
-- Ralf Hildebrandt Charite Universitätsmedizin Berlin ralf.hildebrandt@charite.de Campus Benjamin Franklin http://www.charite.de Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin Geschäftsbereich IT, Abt. Netzwerk fon: +49-30-450.570.155
On 2012-06-16 3:54 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt <Ralf.Hildebrandt@charite.de> wrote:
- Terry Earley<terry@fiteyes.com>:
Maybe VERP is the best solution for AOL and her evil step-sisters if you can stand the overhead?
Yep.
Is it possible to enable VERP *only* for certain domains (like AOL, Yahoo, etc)?
Tanstaafl wrote:
Is it possible to enable VERP *only* for certain domains (like AOL, Yahoo, etc)?
It would be a somewhat messy hack to Mailman/Handlers/SMTPDirect.py to do it in Mailman. Depending on your MTA, you might be able to do it there if you have the MTA do the VERPing.
See <https://bugs.launchpad.net/mailman/+bug/558067> for Postfix and <https://bugs.launchpad.net/mailman/+bug/558002> for qmail. Note that these only address enabling VERPing in the MTA, not limiting the domains to which it applies.
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
Is it possible to enable VERP *only* for certain domains (like AOL, Yahoo, etc)?
Now that AOL also redacts return path, VERPing alone will not help much for them.
Return-Path: <redacted-bounces@discuss.fiteyes.com>
Full Personalization could give you more to trace, since each post is send individually.
Terry Earley FitEyes
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> wrote:
Tanstaafl wrote:
Is it possible to enable VERP *only* for certain domains (like AOL, Yahoo, etc)?
It would be a somewhat messy hack to Mailman/Handlers/SMTPDirect.py to do it in Mailman. Depending on your MTA, you might be able to do it there if you have the MTA do the VERPing.
See <https://bugs.launchpad.net/mailman/+bug/558067> for Postfix and <https://bugs.launchpad.net/mailman/+bug/558002> for qmail. Note that these only address enabling VERPing in the MTA, not limiting the domains to which it applies.
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/terry%40fiteyes.com
Terry Earley wrote:
Is it possible to enable VERP *only* for certain domains (like AOL, Yahoo, etc)?
Now that AOL also redacts return path, VERPing alone will not help much for them.
Return-Path: <redacted-bounces@discuss.fiteyes.com>
Is that a redact of a VERPed Return-Path:? It doesn't look like it. It looks like
Return-Path: <listname-bounces@discuss.fiteyes.com>
was changed to
Return-Path: <redacted-bounces@discuss.fiteyes.com>
and doesn't answer the question of what
Return-Path: <listname-bounces+aol_user=aol.com@discuss.fiteyes.com>
would be changed to.
Full Personalization could give you more to trace, since each post is send individually.
And if Mailman does VERP, messages are sent individually too, and all personalized messages are sent individually, not just "fully personalized" ones.
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 7:13 PM, Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> wrote:
Terry Earley wrote:
Is it possible to enable VERP *only* for certain domains (like AOL, Yahoo, etc)?
Now that AOL also redacts return path, VERPing alone will not help much for them.
Return-Path: <redacted-bounces@discuss.fiteyes.com>
Is that a redact of a VERPed Return-Path:? It doesn't look like it. It looks like
Return-Path: <listname-bounces@discuss.fiteyes.com>
was changed to
Return-Path: <redacted-bounces@discuss.fiteyes.com>
and doesn't answer the question of what
Return-Path: <listname-bounces+aol_user=aol.com@discuss.fiteyes.com>
would be changed to.
Here are some example headers. The first is from a message from the list sent to me, as a subscriber to the list. (I could post the entire headers if it would be of interest.)
Return-Path: <all-bounces+dave=fiteyes.com@discuss.fiteyes.com> Subject: [FitEyes Discussion 715] Re: First self IOP measurement done
An AOL member complained about this same message today.
The return path in the report from the AOL Feedback Loop gets redacted to:
Return-Path: <all-bounces+redacted=aol.com@discuss.fiteyes.com>
I can paste the entire report from the AOL Feedback Loop if that would be of interest. But they redact everything now, including even items without the receiver's address such as:
List-Unsubscribe: <http://discuss.fiteyes.com/m/options/all>, <mailto:all-request@discuss.fiteyes.com?subject=unsubscribe>
which gets changed to:
List-Unsubscribe: <http://discuss.fiteyes.com/m/options/all>, redacted@discuss.fiteyes.com
On 6/17/2012 4:44 PM, David wrote:
An AOL member complained about this same message today.
The return path in the report from the AOL Feedback Loop gets redacted to:
Return-Path: <all-bounces+redacted=aol.com@discuss.fiteyes.com>
OK, that answers that question, so it would seem that Lindsay Haisley's suggestion of hacking in a custom header with a hash of the user's address that doesn't look like an email address would work, but it would be a violation of the terms of service for the feedback loop according to Brad Knowles:
In fact, when you sign up for the AOL Feedback Loop (as I did years ago for the lists hosted at python.org), the instructions explicitly state that you may not use any information they give you to determine who the affected user is ...
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
Is there any method to identify the user from the AOL feedback loop? If not, how does AOL expect us to unsubscribe the user who complained?
I set personalization to yes and have something like the following in the non-digest footers:
Unsubscribe: %(web_page_url)soptions%(cgiext)s/%(_internal_name)s/%(user_address)s
Now if only there was a way to figure out who the braindead, clueless mouse pilots are who flag digests as spam.
mjb.
David writes:
Is there any method to identify the user from the AOL feedback loop?
Not for sure. Over time, they seem redact ever more information from the report.
If not, how does AOL expect us to unsubscribe the user who complained?
Why would they care? Customers rarely remember accidently hitting the spam button (or rarely admit it -- even your user who wants your mail doesn't remember doing so), although *we* can be pretty sure they do so frequently. So it's easy for them to blame the lists, saying that the lists have passed spam, and the lists are just trying to shift blame to the users. So the big ISPs for "nontechnical users" maintain a position of "fix your spam problem and you'll be OK" to some degree. And the complaining user doesn't have a problem any more (not with your list) since it's blocked. Few non-technical users consider such severe reaction to spam inappropriate, as far as I can tell. And blocking mail costs them nothing in terms of real resources, since there's so much genuine spam out there.
OTOH, as far as I can tell, the big ISPs consider lists competition, not complements (and I think they're correct[1] -- they want users using their web fora). So they have little incentive to allocate resources to making lists work smoothly.
Footnotes: [1] Barry is only half-joking when he says he hopes Mailman 3 will kill web fora. That's not going to happen, for a variety of reasons, but Mailman 3 will put lists on a much more even footing with the web fora.
On 6/15/12 8:51 PM, David wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:04 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt < Ralf.Hildebrandt@charite.de> wrote:
- Thomas Hochstein <mailman-users@ml.th-h.de>:
Ralf Hildebrandt schrieb:
Yahoo! users are truly special. AOL users are, too. (They also have a feedback loop.) Yeah, and it's even worse, since it tries to weed out all info one needs to identify the user :(
Is there any method to identify the user from the AOL feedback loop? If not, how does AOL expect us to unsubscribe the user who complained?
They DON'T expect you to unsubscribe the user who marked you as spam, but to stop the "spammer" who is sending out the email marked as spam. The whole system is based on the premise that the recipient (their customer) is totally innocent, and the send (your list) is the guilty party. They are telling you, as an ISP, to stop your customer (your list) from sending "SPAM". They are totally missing that their customer at a previous point ASKED for the email (at least I am presuming you haven't bypassed the safeguards built into Mailman to avoid abuse) and now has used the "Mark as spam" button as a attempt to unsubscribe because they can't (or won't) figure out the proper way to do it.
-- Richard Damon
On Jun 16, 2012, at 11:02 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 6/15/12 8:51 PM, David wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:04 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt < Ralf.Hildebrandt@charite.de> wrote:
- Thomas Hochstein <mailman-users@ml.th-h.de>:
Ralf Hildebrandt schrieb:
Yahoo! users are truly special. AOL users are, too. (They also have a feedback loop.) Yeah, and it's even worse, since it tries to weed out all info one needs to identify the user :(
Is there any method to identify the user from the AOL feedback loop? If not, how does AOL expect us to unsubscribe the user who complained?
They DON'T expect you to unsubscribe the user who marked you as spam, but to stop the "spammer" who is sending out the email marked as spam. The whole system is based on the premise that the recipient (their customer) is totally innocent, and the send (your list) is the guilty party. They are telling you, as an ISP, to stop your customer (your list) from sending "SPAM". They are totally missing that their customer at a previous point ASKED for the email (at least I am presuming you haven't bypassed the safeguards built into Mailman to avoid abuse) and now has used the "Mark as spam" button as a attempt to unsubscribe because they can't (or won't) figure out the proper way to do it.
Sad to say, that does appear to be how AOL thinks. Their customers never make mistakes, etc. If a customer clicked "Mark as spam", then it's spam and that point is not open to discussion.
It's been a long while since I've received an AOL spam report but despite their redacting, I can usually figure out who did it my some sleuthing through the mail server logs. My policy for AOL users is straightforward and ruthless: do it once and you get banned from my lists and my server. I banned my cousin once (and in typical AOLuser fashion, denied clicking the button - and he used to work for AOL!).
-- Larry Stone lstone19@stonejongleux.com http://www.stonejongleux.com/
I can usually figure out who did it my some sleuthing through the mail server logs.
I would be very interested to know how you track these down from the logs. Have you or anyone used VERP so AOL cannot mung that email address?
Terry
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Larry Stone <lstone19@stonejongleux.com>wrote:
On Jun 16, 2012, at 11:02 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 6/15/12 8:51 PM, David wrote:
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:04 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt < Ralf.Hildebrandt@charite.de> wrote:
- Thomas Hochstein <mailman-users@ml.th-h.de>:
Ralf Hildebrandt schrieb:
Yahoo! users are truly special. AOL users are, too. (They also have a feedback loop.) Yeah, and it's even worse, since it tries to weed out all info one needs to identify the user :(
Is there any method to identify the user from the AOL feedback loop? If not, how does AOL expect us to unsubscribe the user who complained?
They DON'T expect you to unsubscribe the user who marked you as spam, but to stop the "spammer" who is sending out the email marked as spam. The whole system is based on the premise that the recipient (their customer) is totally innocent, and the send (your list) is the guilty party. They are telling you, as an ISP, to stop your customer (your list) from sending "SPAM". They are totally missing that their customer at a previous point ASKED for the email (at least I am presuming you haven't bypassed the safeguards built into Mailman to avoid abuse) and now has used the "Mark as spam" button as a attempt to unsubscribe because they can't (or won't) figure out the proper way to do it.
Sad to say, that does appear to be how AOL thinks. Their customers never make mistakes, etc. If a customer clicked "Mark as spam", then it's spam and that point is not open to discussion.
It's been a long while since I've received an AOL spam report but despite their redacting, I can usually figure out who did it my some sleuthing through the mail server logs. My policy for AOL users is straightforward and ruthless: do it once and you get banned from my lists and my server. I banned my cousin once (and in typical AOLuser fashion, denied clicking the button - and he used to work for AOL!).
-- Larry Stone lstone19@stonejongleux.com http://www.stonejongleux.com/
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/terry%40fiteyes.com
On Sat, 16 Jun 2012, Larry Stone wrote:
Sad to say, that does appear to be how AOL thinks. Their customers never make mistakes, etc. If a customer clicked "Mark as spam", then it's spam and that point is not open to discussion.
They're not the only one. Roadrunner blocked all the mail from the server I used to administer because of one user on one list.
Fortunately, subscribing to their feedback loop fixed that. But they weren't willing to give the user's address either. I managed to figure it out but that's not the point.
Geoff.
- David <dave@fiteyes.com>:
Is there any method to identify the user from the AOL feedback loop?
Of course, just use verp :)
Ralf Hildebrandt Charite Universitätsmedizin Berlin ralf.hildebrandt@charite.de Campus Benjamin Franklin http://www.charite.de Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin Geschäftsbereich IT, Abt. Netzwerk fon: +49-30-450.570.155
On Jun 16, 2012, at 3:15 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt <Ralf.Hildebrandt@charite.de> wrote:
- David <dave@fiteyes.com>:
Is there any method to identify the user from the AOL feedback loop?
Of course, just use verp :)
The last I knew, AOL redacts the user name in their notice. In other words, a something sent to this list marked as spam will show it as sent from mailman-users+redacted@python.org.
I trace then from message ID and matching to my Postfix logs.
-- Larry Stone lstone19@stonejongleux.com
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Larry Stone <lstone19@stonejongleux.com>wrote:
On Jun 16, 2012, at 3:15 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt <Ralf.Hildebrandt@charite.de> wrote:
- David <dave@fiteyes.com>:
Is there any method to identify the user from the AOL feedback loop?
I trace from message ID and matching to my Postfix logs.
Thanks, but I'm not sure how to do that. The message ID we get from AOL is something like "snt0-p5-eas297E02BC8F051EF1AAB0BFD3FA0@phx.gbl" and it is related to the sender. This same ID will show up in the postfix log for every outgoing copy of that message from that sender.
Could you explain how you trace from the message ID to your Postfix logs? (Maybe you use a different message ID?)
On Jun 16, 2012, at 5:20 PM, David <dave@fiteyes.com> wrote:
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Larry Stone <lstone19@stonejongleux.com> wrote:
On Jun 16, 2012, at 3:15 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt <Ralf.Hildebrandt@charite.de> wrote:
- David <dave@fiteyes.com>:
Is there any method to identify the user from the AOL feedback loop?
I trace from message ID and matching to my Postfix logs.
Thanks, but I'm not sure how to do that. The message ID we get from AOL is something like "snt0-p5-eas297E02BC8F051EF1AAB0BFD3FA0@phx.gbl" and it is related to the sender. This same ID will show up in the postfix log for every outgoing copy of that message from that sender.
Could you explain how you trace from the message ID to your Postfix logs? (Maybe you use a different message ID?)-
It's been a while so I must be misremembering. If not the message ID, then the postfix queue ID which IIRC is in the Received headers sent back by AOL. But looking back at my saved AOL spam reports, it's been over three years since a list subscriber did that to me so things may well have changed.
Larry Stone larry@stonejongleux.com (and others) Sent from my iPad
On Jun 16, 2012, at 3:20 PM, David wrote:
Thanks, but I'm not sure how to do that. The message ID we get from AOL is something like "snt0-p5-eas297E02BC8F051EF1AAB0BFD3FA0@phx.gbl" and it is related to the sender. This same ID will show up in the postfix log for every outgoing copy of that message from that sender.
Could you explain how you trace from the message ID to your Postfix logs? (Maybe you use a different message ID?)
When you enable Full Personalization on Mailman, it will generate a unique message for each and every recipient, with a unique message-id. If that message-id is not obscured by the Feedback Loop, then you can tell which user is at fault. For a while, they did not redact the footers that were included in the message sent back, so you could personalize the footers and that would give you an alternate place to look.
I was the first Internet Mail Operations person ever hired by AOL and I was responsible for implementing the anti-spam measures that we had in place to prevent spam from getting onto the system, but regretfully the group that handles spam reports from AOL users is done by a different department. Back when David O'Donnell was running that shop, they did a really good job. But things have gone way down hill ever since.
I have long since gone past the point where I consider them to be a complete write-off, despite the fact that even my own wife still uses AOL.
-- Brad Knowles <brad@shub-internet.org> LinkedIn Profile: <http://tinyurl.com/y8kpxu>
If you look carefully at the full headers in the AOL notice you'll see that not all the VERP addresses are redacted. I believe the Sender header isn't redacted. I haven't visited the issue recently since I have a script on my servers which extracts the subscriber address from these AOL notices and automatically unsubscribes it.
Lindsay Haisley (512) 259-1190 (land line) (512) 496-7118 (mobile) Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 16, 2012, at 4:00 PM, Larry Stone <lstone19@stonejongleux.com> wrote:
On Jun 16, 2012, at 3:15 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt <Ralf.Hildebrandt@charite.de> wrote:
- David <dave@fiteyes.com>:
Is there any method to identify the user from the AOL feedback loop?
Of course, just use verp :)
The last I knew, AOL redacts the user name in their notice. In other words, a something sent to this list marked as spam will show it as sent from mailman-users+redacted@python.org.
I trace then from message ID and matching to my Postfix logs.
-- Larry Stone lstone19@stonejongleux.com
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/fmouse-mailman%40fmp.co...
David writes:
If she pressed the "this is SPAM/Junk"-Button 23 times today, you would think she would remember doing it when we asked her today.
It could be "fat finger" syndrome: Gmail, for example, puts the Report Spam button next the Delete Message button. I wouldn't be surprised if Yahoo! does the same thing.
Why 23 times and not remember? I would guess that she marked all the messages from your list for deletion, and missed the Delete button just this one time.
If she says she never makes mistakes like that, *shrug*, go ahead and believe her and write it off as gremlins.
For someone new to Mailman, this is confusing. But it only seems to happen with Yahoo.
Well, if it seems to be specific to any of the major services, you're stuck, because they only tell us what they want us to hear.
It could be "fat finger" syndrome: Gmail, for example, puts the Report Spam button next the Delete Message button. I wouldn't be surprised if Yahoo! does the same thing.
Nope (at least not in the German Version) There are two buttons security clearance in-between.
-- Ralf Hildebrandt Charite Universitätsmedizin Berlin ralf.hildebrandt@charite.de Campus Benjamin Franklin http://www.charite.de Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin Geschäftsbereich IT, Abt. Netzwerk fon: +49-30-450.570.155
US upgraded version (yes I have an account!) its next to the Forward button and the 'move to selected folder'
On 2012-06-13 13:56, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
It could be "fat finger" syndrome: Gmail, for example, puts the Report Spam button next the Delete Message button. I wouldn't be surprised if Yahoo! does the same thing.
Nope (at least not in the German Version) There are two buttons security clearance in-between.
- David <dave@fiteyes.com>:
We received 23 Yahoo feedback loop notices this morning from one user. Supposedly these are abuse or complaint notices. The person joined us in Sept of last year. After we received these notices from Yahoo today, we contacted the member. She did not remember reporting us as spam. She didn't offer us any useful feedback because she didn't remember any details.
But didn't she just report the mails as spam? Anyway, here at python.org we just unsubscribe those members, no questions asked. No notifications either.
However, she *does* wish to continue receiving emails from our list. So it seems clear this was not an actual case of abuse. Unfortunately, Yahoo will not deliver our messages to this address any longer, as far as I know. And the person did not want to get a new email address.
Too bad. She should complain to yahoo!
As mentioned previously, we try to follow all best practices. Emails from our list are DKIM signed, we have valid SPF records, rDNS is set up, our IP address is dedicated to this mailing list.
Just like here at python.org :)
The only info we received from Yahoo about this incident is the original message we sent and a line like this:
This is an email abuse report for an email message received from example.com on Thu, 07 Jun 2012 03:32:29 PDT
Yes.
My questions are:
- Why are we just receiving a feedback on 13 June 2012 for a message we sent out on 07 June 2012?
Because the feedback is sent when the user klicks on the "Spam" button.
- Does an incident like this count 23 times against our Yahoo reputation?
Dunno.
- Is anyone else seeing notification delays coupled with multiple notices like this?
We sometimes get LOTS of consecutive complaints when a luser "deletes" his/her mail with the "spam" button :)
-- Ralf Hildebrandt Charite Universitätsmedizin Berlin ralf.hildebrandt@charite.de Campus Benjamin Franklin http://www.charite.de Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin Geschäftsbereich IT, Abt. Netzwerk fon: +49-30-450.570.155
participants (16)
-
Brad Knowles -
Brian McCarthy -
David -
Geoff Shang -
Larry Stone -
Lindsay Haisley -
Mailman Admin -
Mark J Bradakis -
Mark Sapiro -
Ralf Hildebrandt -
Richard Damon -
Stephen J. Turnbull -
Stephen J. Turnbull -
Tanstaafl -
Terry Earley -
Thomas Hochstein