Monday, January 12. 2004
Spamassassin
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
Most likely this person is not whitelisted by Habeas. In theory (and to my knowledge, in practice as well), they have a good track record of affiliating themselves with reputable folks. Or at least more reputable than the trash you said you were getting.
You should send the message w/headers to Habeas. They have successfully prosecuted people in the past for misuing their marks. Habeas is generally considered to be one of the good guys in the War on Spam.
You should send the message w/headers to Habeas. They have successfully prosecuted people in the past for misuing their marks. Habeas is generally considered to be one of the good guys in the War on Spam.
It was a faked Habeas signature. This has been discussed on the SA lists recently. I'm tempted to also remove or neutralize that rule in my SA setup too.
The whole point of the Habeas signatures is that they can't be faked. They are copyrighted works, so inclusion is copyright infirngement, and the abuser can (and has been) sued.
Not that neutralizing the rule isn't a good idea, just onfo on how Habeas is designed to work.
Not that neutralizing the rule isn't a good idea, just onfo on how Habeas is designed to work.
I don't think that most spammers really care. I suspect the rate of successful lawsuits is pretty low--but I haven't really looked.
If the threat of a lawsuit is the only deterrant here, then I am even more amazed that this rule is in the default SA config. Assuming first that we can even identify a spammer, how many spammers operating out of Russia or China do you think we would be able to prosecute?
Yep, I'm sure the threat of a copyright lawsuit hardly gives spammers a second thought. It'd likely require considerable effort to even track down their identities, then there's the time and expense of a lawsuit.
FWIW, when i reported a few of them on their web site, their auto-response says they're under a particular attacker from a spammer they're still trying to track down shrug Here's the paste I did into irc earlier:
09:43 [ Flav] Habeas has recently come under attack from an as yet unidentified
09:43 [ Flav] spammer. The spammer is illegally utilizing the Habeas Warrant Mark in
09:43 [ Flav] emails which are promoting several pharmacy websites. The attack began
09:43 [ Flav] on Sunday January 11, 2004 at about 11am PT.
09:43 [ Flav] Habeas has recently come under attack from an as yet unidentified
09:43 [ Flav] spammer. The spammer is illegally utilizing the Habeas Warrant Mark in
09:43 [ Flav] emails which are promoting several pharmacy websites. The attack began
09:43 [ Flav] on Sunday January 11, 2004 at about 11am PT.
The same thing happened to me. I set HABEAS_SWE to zero as well.
I have never received real email with the habeas headers, and lots of spam with them.
I think if Habeas wants to have a successful business, they should change to operating a paid whitelist that could be queried by DNS, or some kind of RSA signature that can't be faked.
As it stands, it is so trivial to fake the headers that the system is useless.
I have never received real email with the habeas headers, and lots of spam with them.
I think if Habeas wants to have a successful business, they should change to operating a paid whitelist that could be queried by DNS, or some kind of RSA signature that can't be faked.
As it stands, it is so trivial to fake the headers that the system is useless.
somebody is using Habeas's copyrighted material to send spam vis-a-vie The register http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/55/34969.html
It seems that what ever method we use to iidentify spam can be worked around. It would seem that some of us are in fact the enemy who spams. Is there some way to identify who has faciliated spammers ability avoid detection?
It seems that what ever method we use to iidentify spam can be worked around. It would seem that some of us are in fact the enemy who spams. Is there some way to identify who has faciliated spammers ability avoid detection?
Yup - had a flood of those Habeas emails as well about a week or two ago. I also ramped the Habeas score in SA up to 0.0 and that killed this stone dead. I know of nobody who actually uses Habeas to email me, so i'm not bothered by it.
I got exactly the same problem, only spam with habeas are received, it is really mandatory to remove the negative score, or maybe to make it positif instead...
Habeas Responds to Spammer Violation of Habeas Warrant Mark.
PALO ALTO, CA - January 12, 2004 - Habeas, the leading provider of emailer reputation services, has recently come under attack from an as yet unidentified spammer. The spammer is illegally utilizing the Habeas Warrant Mark in emails which are promoting websites such as pharmawharehouse.biz, pharmacourt.biz and valuepointmeds.biz which are sites promoting or selling prescription drugs. The attack began on Sunday January 11, 2004 at about 11am PT.
More details: http://www.habeas.com/companyPressPR.html#violation
PALO ALTO, CA - January 12, 2004 - Habeas, the leading provider of emailer reputation services, has recently come under attack from an as yet unidentified spammer. The spammer is illegally utilizing the Habeas Warrant Mark in emails which are promoting websites such as pharmawharehouse.biz, pharmacourt.biz and valuepointmeds.biz which are sites promoting or selling prescription drugs. The attack began on Sunday January 11, 2004 at about 11am PT.
More details: http://www.habeas.com/companyPressPR.html#violation
I had never received an email with the word 'habeas' in it until Monday 8th March, but since then I've received 8 of them.
It turned out that I didn't have Net::DNS installed, and so SpamAssassin was unable to check with Habeas whether the warrant mark was invalid. I've since installed Net::DNS (just run "perl -MCPAN -e shell" and type "install Net::DNS" at the cpan> prompt) and re-checked the spam it previously missed, and now 2 of the 8 spams are caught. It has made SpamAssassin a lot slower, as it now connects to a bunch of sites.
It turned out that I didn't have Net::DNS installed, and so SpamAssassin was unable to check with Habeas whether the warrant mark was invalid. I've since installed Net::DNS (just run "perl -MCPAN -e shell" and type "install Net::DNS" at the cpan> prompt) and re-checked the spam it previously missed, and now 2 of the 8 spams are caught. It has made SpamAssassin a lot slower, as it now connects to a bunch of sites.
Why a toys page?
I love geeky toys and people are always asking me about them. So this page is where I keep track of the gadgets that interest me.
What if AOL Yahoo and Microsoft allowed us to add to the web-based mail headers? Don't think so.The folks at Habeus who are supposed to be ?? good spam ?? want those three, that
Tracked: Jan 12, 16:40