Opera's news server and spam
John H Meyers
indicate to have been posted from Opera's own news server (news.opera.com);
also regularly see the following header in each item:
X-Complaints-To: use...@news.opera.com
But all that ever happens when I try to report the info is:
<use...@news.opera.com>... Deferred: Connection refused by news.opera.com
(until our SMTP server gives up, after a few days).
So please add to the "wishlist" a wish that the news server operator
provide a functioning mail address for reporting spam, thanks.
--
FV
01:39:46 +0200:
If the purpose of reporting spam is only to get it canceled, I think a
'report spam' feature is not really necessary. In fact I believe most spam
is periodically removed from Opera's servers. (Try a fresh install and see
if those spam messages reappear.)
What would be nice is if Opera could cancel more often. At the moment I
still see a lot of spam messages getting through. Obviously cancelling one
or two times a day will still get these messages in many people's mail
boxes.
(What I would also like to add to the wishlist is that Opera's built-in
spam filter actually worked. At the moment the most obvious spam in
newsgroups and feeds is not caught and marked, which leads me to believe
spam filtering only works for mail. Incidentally only newsgroups and feeds
are mediums that deliver me spam.)
--
Fabian
John H Meyers
> If the purpose of reporting spam is only to get it canceled, I think a
> 'report spam' feature is not really necessary. In fact I believe most spam
> is periodically removed from Opera's servers. (Try a fresh install and see
> if those spam messages reappear.)
A fresh install of what? Throw out all my archives and setup Opera anew every day,
as a practical method for cleaning up each prior day's spam?
Cancels are largely ignored elsewhere, so the moment a spam is posted,
it propagates and goes elsewhere (such as to my news provider, which isn't Opera),
and it's too late for any later removal at Opera to have any effect.
Thus, the purpose is to identify the source
and prevent it from getting posted in the first place
(this spam was injected into the distribution system at Opera,
so that would be the logically best place to stop it,
and thus the most important place to report it,
as is the general principle about all spam reporting).
By the way, my own provider got a copy of my message that Opera bounced
back to me, and since the moment it was acknowledged by my server operator,
no more of that long series of spams have been accepted there; thus there
was either an accidental coincidence, or someone running my server
can manage it better than Opera does its own.
It's also a bit impolite to publish an address and invite reports
and then bounce any that users take the trouble to make.
--
John H Meyers
> no more of that long series of spams have been accepted [by my news provider]
Spoken too soon; three more now appear,
all of which, per several different headers,
look as if originally posted on Opera's own news server --
or can this _all_ be faked?
Path: uni-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news.opera.com!news.opera.no!not-for-mail
From: "Sharla Marsh" <dc...@ymiffpu.jo>
Newsgroups: opera.wishlist
Subject: Whitney Thornton
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 09:04:55 +0800
Organization: Opera Software Net News
Lines: 102
Sender: WWW-...@alankwok.com (http://www.nntp.hk/web/)
Message-ID: <fue4rl$vo$1...@news.opera.com>
References: <op.ttxf0i1h1j29hn@messa>
Reply-To: "Sharla Marsh" <dc...@ymiffpu.jo>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 202.67.153.252
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Big5"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: news.opera.com 1208653494 1016 202.67.153.252 (20 Apr 2008 01:04:54 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: use...@news.opera.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 01:04:54 +0000 (UTC)
X-Newsreader: (^(oo)^) WWW-NNTP 0.0.0.1
X-HTTP-Posting-Host: 67.182.67.228
Xref: uni-berlin.de opera.wishlist:25709
slavophobe panneuritis rypeck unpaid prosogaster allegedly jacob inventable
a href= http://0.sqevsrm.com/1y >Www Peeps Com Britney /a <== altered to remove tags
[remainder of body deleted]
If that _was_ originally posted on Opera's own news server
(and then propagated to all the rest of the world from there),
and has always had the same common elements in every post,
consider this as my report (note that the "X-Complaints-To:"
address always "bounces," which was my initial observation),
and let me know, if you would, whether or not
this does come through that server, so I'll know
whether or not to bother sending further reports
to Opera at other addresses, thanks.
--
Steven Saunderson
<jhme...@nomail.invalid> wrote:
> If that _was_ originally posted on Opera's own news server
> (and then propagated to all the rest of the world from there),
> and has always had the same common elements in every post,
> consider this as my report (note that the "X-Complaints-To:"
> address always "bounces," which was my initial observation),
> and let me know, if you would, whether or not
> this does come through that server, so I'll know
> whether or not to bother sending further reports
> to Opera at other addresses, thanks.
I'm surprised that Opera Software hasn't responded here. The posts look
like they do enter the system via news.opera.no and it does seem silly
that Opera is spreading the trash. Perhaps the powers that be believe
strongly that Usenet should not be censored.
I agree that the complaints e-mail address should be valid. Maybe it
was a spam magnet.
--
Steven
John H Meyers
> I agree that the complaints e-mail address should be valid.
> Maybe it was a spam magnet.
Well, that brings to mind some recent reports I had just read
last week, where users obligingly reported spam to their own ISP,
as requested, for helping the ISP to improve service,
only to be notified that it was blocked -- for being spam!
"To operate laundry machine safely, insert only clean clothes" :)
--
Tim Altman
I've forwarded your request to the news server admins.
We do have several individuals that routinely clean spam originating
from news.opera.com, but spam can sometimes linger for several days
before it's cancelled.
--
Tim Altman
Desktop QA
Opera Software
Remove NO SPAM from e-mail address to reply
John H Meyers
> I've forwarded your request to the news server admins.
Thank you for having given it your attention.
> We do have several individuals that routinely clean spam
> originating from news.opera.com, but spam can sometimes
> linger for several days before it's cancelled.
Although that is of some use for those who read it directly
from Opera's own server,
The issue remains one of recognizing (and blocking) the spam[mer]
before it's posted, because once it propagates elsewhere
(which is almost instantly), it's now everywhere, on all servers,
and too late to cancel there (because most now ignore cancels,
due to past "cancel wars"), in addition to having been also
already downloaded to everyone who uses an NNTP client.
This particular ongoing series of regular spam
would not seem hard to recognize (and block).
Thanks again.
--
FV
02:26:56 +0200:
> The issue remains one of recognizing (and blocking) the spam[mer]
> before it's posted, because once it propagates elsewhere
> (which is almost instantly), it's now everywhere, on all servers,
> and too late to cancel there (because most now ignore cancels,
> due to past "cancel wars")
Interesting that news servers apparently ignore cancels because of abuse,
but they don't do spam blocking (which is per definition abuse). If, as
you say, spammers can be blocked at the source, I'd say so can malicious
cancellers.
> This particular ongoing series of regular spam
> would not seem hard to recognize (and block).
I fully agree on that one.
--
Fabian
John H Meyers
> Interesting that news servers apparently ignore cancels because of abuse,
> but they don't do spam blocking (which is per definition abuse).
"Rogue canceling" is fundamentally different than spamming, because
it is destructive of (denies access to) existing legitimate material,
attacks free speech, and can not be undone or neutralized by subscribers
(even though there once were "bots" made to keep reposting canceled articles,
eventually obviated by ignoring the cancels),
whereas spam does not destroy or replace anything else,
and can ultimately be deleted, even by end users, to simply ignore it.
It's clear that some NNTP server operators are blocking a lot of spam
(a lot that's submitted via Google never makes it through my server),
but a lot (even Google, which has resources) don't seem motivated
to invest much in that direction -- perhaps they feel that Usenet
is "a vast wasteland" anyway, even though there are "a few planets
bearing intelligent life forms" scattered among the barren rocks :)
[the "vast wasteland" reference is explained below]
> If, as you say, spammers can be blocked at the source,
> I'd say so can malicious cancellers.
Spammers who continually create new identities can not so readily
be stopped, but if they are not using automation (or are sufficiently
slowed down by "captchas" and other such devices), they may get tired
of having to keep creating identities, and may move on -- the nature
of the content can also be subject to screening methods
which have some ability to automatically spot it
and block a substantial percentage of it.
The nature of cancels, however, does not provide these mechanisms;
secure methods (among major peers) might be created,
but I'm not aware that they universally exist
in standards which all servers would have implemented.
>> This particular ongoing series of regular spam
>> would not seem hard to recognize (and block).
> I fully agree on that one.
Even in politics, two parties occasionally agree on something;
why, however, is that so rare? ;-)
---
The original "vast wasteland" speech:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton_Minow [author]
http://janda.org/b20/news%20articles/vastwastland.htm [edited version]
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/newtonminow.htm [complete, with audio]
Three paragraphs:
Your license lets you use the public's airwaves as trustees
for 180 million Americans. The public is your beneficiary.
If you want to stay on as trustees, you must deliver a decent return
to the public -- not only to your stockholders...
I am here to uphold and protect the public interest.
What do we mean by "the public interest?" Some say the public interest
is merely what interests the public. I disagree...
When television is good, nothing -- not the theater,
not the magazines or newspapers -- nothing is better.
But when television is bad, nothing is worse.
I invite each of you to sit down in front of your television set
when your station goes on the air and stay there, for a day,
without a book, without a magazine, without a newspaper,
without a profit and loss sheet or a rating book to distract you.
Keep your eyes glued to that set until the station signs off.
I can assure you that what you will observe is a vast wasteland...
Newton Minow, Chairman of U.S. Federal Communications Commission,
to the National Association of Broadcasters, May 9, 1961
--
Tim Altman
<do....@spam.me.invalid> wrote:
>On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 18:39:46 -0500, "John H Meyers"
><jhme...@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>
>>I've seen spam in this newsgroup, which full headers (including "Path:")
>>indicate to have been posted from Opera's own news server (news.opera.com);
>>also regularly see the following header in each item:
>>
>>X-Complaints-To: use...@news.opera.com
>>
>>But all that ever happens when I try to report the info is:
>>
>><use...@news.opera.com>... Deferred: Connection refused by news.opera.com
>>
>>(until our SMTP server gives up, after a few days).
>>
>>So please add to the "wishlist" a wish that the news server operator
>>provide a functioning mail address for reporting spam, thanks.
>
>I've forwarded your request to the news server admins.
The address has now been corrected to a working address, which I
(along with Rijk, I hope ;)) will monitor.
John H Meyers
> The address [to report spam inserted via Opera's own NNTP server,
> which is still the same email address as before]
> has now been corrected to a working address
> which I (along with Rijk, I hope ;)) will monitor.
That's great, but since spam with some identical characteristics
keeps being posted every day, apparently through that same server,
from where, even if later removed at Opera, it has still already
propagated everywhere else and will download to subscribers everywhere else,
it does not appear that any blocking of original postings
has been found feasible, which is the only way that reports
can manifest into an end of the spam, world-wide.
Since its frequency is merely a handful per day,
individual deletion by all recipients is not burdensome,
but there doesn't seem to be any practical use for reporting spam at all,
unless it can lead to blocking from being posted at the original source.
Even Google doesn't manage to block huge waves
of recognizable spam that drowns out some other newsgroups,
vs. which this is pretty insignificant anyway, by comparison.
I think I'll just unsubscribe from this group -- that will also end it,
even if only just for me :)
Thanks again, and best wishes.
--