Slashdot Mirror

DSPAM is one of these statistical filters (like spamprobe and CRM114) that can perform virtually perfect filtering of spam/non-spam you receive.

Now that you are free of spam yourself, may I suggest that you take it one step further and share your data with the anti-spam community; the WPBL project [pc9.org] lets many users report the IPs sending them spam and non-spam in realtime using a couple simple scripts installed in procmail.

Our central database then publishes a real-time list of spam sources (the IP blocklist). Unlike spamcop, WPBL is entirely based upon automatic decisions made by statistical filters, 24/7. The resulting blocklist is already used by many ISPs; and you can also use it to block spamming IPs at your own server.

DSPAM is one of these statistical filters (like spamprobe and CRM114) that can perform virtually perfect filtering of spam/non-spam you receive.

Now that you are free of spam yourself, may I suggest that you take it one step further and share your data with the anti-spam community; the WPBL project [pc9.org] lets many users report the IPs sending them spam and non-spam in realtime using a couple simple scripts installed in procmail.

Our central database then publishes a real-time list of spam sources (the IP blocklist). Unlike spamcop, WPBL is entirely based upon automatic decisions made by statistical filters, 24/7. The resulting blocklist is already used by many ISPs; and you can also use it to block spamming IPs at your own server.

DSPAM is one of these statistical filters (like spamprobe and CRM114) that can perform virtually perfect filtering of spam/non-spam you receive.

Now that you are free of spam yourself, may I suggest that you take it one step further and share your data with the anti-spam community; the WPBL project [pc9.org] lets many users report the IPs sending them spam and non-spam in realtime using a couple simple scripts installed in procmail.

Our central database then publishes a real-time list of spam sources (the IP blocklist). Unlike spamcop, WPBL is entirely based upon automatic decisions made by statistical filters, 24/7. The resulting blocklist is already used by many ISPs; and you can also use it to block spamming IPs at your own server.

In a nutshell, it sets up spamtrap e-mail addresses

SpamAssassin, when properly configured, has spectacular spam detection accuracy. For your account or for a small domain, you should be able to see SA yield "near perfect" filtering (i.e., probably as good as a human could pull off).

That's the point at which we become interested in SpamAssassin users joining WPBL, an automated spam reporting system. Powered by scripts living in procmail and cron, participating systems send WPBL lists of IP addresses sending spam and ham. The central server crunches this data hourly to produce a list [rsync://rsync.pc9.org/wpbl/wpbl-blocks.cidr] of blocked IP addresses that are spam sources.

If your site uses SA and you have verified your spam detection accuracy as nearly-perfect, you might be interested in contributing your spam/ham sighting stats to WPBL. The resulting block list can be used by anyone (and is used by some ISPs for spam scoring). The way I think of it is, after you've taken care of the spam problem at your site why not help tell the rest of the world where spam is coming from.

Trying to download a 4.0 MB file after it's linked to on the front page of Slashdot is never an easy thing, dude.

• FirefoxSetup-0.9.3.exe
• firefox-0.9.3-i686-linux-gtk2+xft.tar.gz

Trying to download a 4.0 MB file after it's linked to on the front page of Slashdot is never an easy thing, dude.

• FirefoxSetup-0.9.3.exe
• firefox-0.9.3-i686-linux-gtk2+xft.tar.gz

A friend of mine is doing some geological work in Hawaii and he sent me these photos. Damn, there's an amazing place.

Here is a mirror. Wishing Michael a safe flight!

Sounds like a great plan to me! I don't like the idea of outright port blocking (customers are paying for IP access, right) but it's very easy to locate the suspicious hosts, which means that once the automated systems are in place they can easily add port restrictions.

We can watch to see how effective this is by seeing how many of comcast's IPs show up in real time spam blocklists. Take CBL and WPBL for instance, two of my favourite lists...

% grepcidr -c -e 68.80.0.0/13 1501

% grepcidr -c -e 68.80.0.0/13 351

Now we see if those numbers go down over time :) Easy.

So, does anyone have useful remarks on why this may succeed or fail?

but I hope people still realise that having a complex (and effective) spam filter does not take away the millions of megabits of traffic

Is this gent's dislike for the way records are presented the reason my email server can't send anything to AOL addresses?

BLARS is not one to take seriously, btw.
,br> Over the months I've compiled a list of domains that don't accept mail from dynamic/dialup/cable/DSL IPs. AOL is on that list, and some other big providers are too.

Exactly

The problem with blacklists is they are often administered by volunteers hapazardly. And, often the person using the blacklist (administrator) has little or no connection with the end user. So the end user has no control over the use of a blacklist. This then puts the responsibility for blocking communications with users (desired or not) firmly in the hands of the blacklist creator/maintainer and the administrator.

The WPBL is a slightly different kind of blocklist that attempts to track both spam and non-spam IP addresses. Plus, a blocklist is now available that only includes spammers IP addresses that have been reported by more than one volunteer, to minimise the risk of anomalies. More people to provide data are always welcome, so please consider helping out... (end plug)

What if you want to listen to classics like this? No, that's not meant to be funny, this 500K file demonstrates what you can do with MOD for sampling, loops, etc ;)

DSPAM is one of these statistical filters (like spamprobe and CRM114) that can perform virtually perfect filtering of spam/non-spam you receive.

Now that you are free of spam yourself, may I suggest that you take it one step further and share your data with the anti-spam community; the WPBL project lets many users report the IPs sending them spam and non-spam in realtime using a couple simple scripts installed in procmail.

Our central database then publishes a real-time list of spam sources (the IP blocklist). Unlike spamcop, WPBL is entirely based upon automatic decisions made by statistical filters, 24/7. The resulting blocklist is already used by many ISPs; and you can also use it to block spamming IPs at your own server.

DSPAM is one of these statistical filters (like spamprobe and CRM114) that can perform virtually perfect filtering of spam/non-spam you receive.

Now that you are free of spam yourself, may I suggest that you take it one step further and share your data with the anti-spam community; the WPBL project lets many users report the IPs sending them spam and non-spam in realtime using a couple simple scripts installed in procmail.

Our central database then publishes a real-time list of spam sources (the IP blocklist). Unlike spamcop, WPBL is entirely based upon automatic decisions made by statistical filters, 24/7. The resulting blocklist is already used by many ISPs; and you can also use it to block spamming IPs at your own server.

DSPAM is one of these statistical filters (like spamprobe and CRM114) that can perform virtually perfect filtering of spam/non-spam you receive.

Now that you are free of spam yourself, may I suggest that you take it one step further and share your data with the anti-spam community; the WPBL project lets many users report the IPs sending them spam and non-spam in realtime using a couple simple scripts installed in procmail.

Our central database then publishes a real-time list of spam sources (the IP blocklist). Unlike spamcop, WPBL is entirely based upon automatic decisions made by statistical filters, 24/7. The resulting blocklist is already used by many ISPs; and you can also use it to block spamming IPs at your own server.

DSPAM is one of these statistical filters (like spamprobe and CRM114) that can perform virtually perfect filtering of spam/non-spam you receive.

Now that you are free of spam yourself, may I suggest that you take it one step further and share your data with the anti-spam community; the WPBL project lets many users report the IPs sending them spam and non-spam in realtime using a couple simple scripts installed in procmail.

Our central database then publishes a real-time list of spam sources (the IP blocklist). Unlike spamcop, WPBL is entirely based upon automatic decisions made by statistical filters, 24/7. The resulting blocklist is already used by many ISPs; and you can also use it to block spamming IPs at your own server.

Having such a powerful statistical spam filter is definitely a luxury. I have no difficulty believing the accuracy values presented here. I have had experience with spamprobe, CRM114, bogofilter, spambayes, and spamassassin and all of these do an amazing job to the point where spam no longer exists (for you).

Which leads to me plug a little project called WPBL that uses exactly these types of statistical spam filters to spot spam sources in a distributed fashion. Each project member uploads hourly the IPs they see relaying spam and non-spam, where the 'decision' is made by these extremely reliable filters. This effectively converts your regular mail account into an intelligent spam-trap that feeds a central blocklist.

The more members we get, the better we can identify active spam sources around the world. This information is then used by some sites for quite large-scale blocking. Since you're doing all this filtering processing anyway, why not also share "what you learn" (the IPs that are spamming you)?

If this grabs your interest, read up on the reporting scripts or alternatively, the open WPBL data upload protocol if you want to code your own report generator. Bandwidth usage is minimal.

Having such a powerful statistical spam filter is definitely a luxury. I have no difficulty believing the accuracy values presented here. I have had experience with spamprobe, CRM114, bogofilter, spambayes, and spamassassin and all of these do an amazing job to the point where spam no longer exists (for you).

Which leads to me plug a little project called WPBL that uses exactly these types of statistical spam filters to spot spam sources in a distributed fashion. Each project member uploads hourly the IPs they see relaying spam and non-spam, where the 'decision' is made by these extremely reliable filters. This effectively converts your regular mail account into an intelligent spam-trap that feeds a central blocklist.

The more members we get, the better we can identify active spam sources around the world. This information is then used by some sites for quite large-scale blocking. Since you're doing all this filtering processing anyway, why not also share "what you learn" (the IPs that are spamming you)?

If this grabs your interest, read up on the reporting scripts or alternatively, the open WPBL data upload protocol if you want to code your own report generator. Bandwidth usage is minimal.

Having such a powerful statistical spam filter is definitely a luxury. I have no difficulty believing the accuracy values presented here. I have had experience with spamprobe, CRM114, bogofilter, spambayes, and spamassassin and all of these do an amazing job to the point where spam no longer exists (for you).

Which leads to me plug a little project called WPBL that uses exactly these types of statistical spam filters to spot spam sources in a distributed fashion. Each project member uploads hourly the IPs they see relaying spam and non-spam, where the 'decision' is made by these extremely reliable filters. This effectively converts your regular mail account into an intelligent spam-trap that feeds a central blocklist.

The more members we get, the better we can identify active spam sources around the world. This information is then used by some sites for quite large-scale blocking. Since you're doing all this filtering processing anyway, why not also share "what you learn" (the IPs that are spamming you)?

If this grabs your interest, read up on the reporting scripts or alternatively, the open WPBL data upload protocol if you want to code your own report generator. Bandwidth usage is minimal.

It seems to be working about as well as the War on Poverty and the War on Drugs.

Please do not subscribe me, noverify@users.pc9.org it's an abuse of my email address!

And while we're on the subject of IP address based block lists, I'll add a mandatory plug for the Weighted Private Block List project.

Check it out, it uses a different approach to any other block list I've seen thus far.

There's lots of great filtering technologies available out there, and the best ones are non-commercial in nature. Microsoft or Yahoo have not helped my spam situation; but spamprobe, bogofilter, spamassassin, and spambayes definitely have helped me, in very real terms: > 99% accuracy, with (generally) zero false positives depending on the quality of configuration.

Now an appeal to you folks out there who use these filters I've mentioned with similar good results (w.r.t. accuracy): we no longer see spam thanks to our filters. How about taking it one step further? Join the WPBL project and help us centrally collect IP addresses of spammers. It's an automated system to determine real-time spam sources using reliable, trusted data contributors. We are currently tracking over 15,000 IPs.

I've recently started submitting data to the Weighted Private Block List project.

Basically, it's an attempt to use statistical filters (eg Bayesian based ones) to identify what IP's are sending spam. I'm sure that they would love to have more people involved in the collection of data, particularly if they've already trained their client side filters to a high level of accuracy.

All icecast 2 betas I tried were missing a vital feature; the ability to flood audio data out at the start of the TCP connection (rather than deliver it at the stream bitrate) -- this is vital because when you take too long delivering the data your stream can die due to filled queues.

For example, there may be temporary packet loss on the network that results in TCP data queueing up at the sending side. Now unless icecast can correct for that rate mismatch, you're consistently behind and eventually the stream dies.

I think they might have now added the fix, which is to step up its send rate from the stream bitrate whenever it has to, i.e. whenever the client falls behind (temporary network glitch). The unfortunate result otherwise is that your streams can die on a flaky network connection, even if the average bandwidth over time is more than enough to handle the audio stream!

Or... let me know, try my stream
. Does it die on you quite quickly after connect?

If you know what you're doing with email, and use a statistical filter such as spamprobe (or SA/other bayesian) from procmail, consider joining the community wpbl experiment. This is essentially an IP blocklist built automatically, in real-time, from many statistical filters (no manual user action ). IPs from mail are automatically extracted, classified as spam or good by your bayesian filter, then reported to the central server 24 hours a day. This is not like spamcop.

If you prefer to run your own email server (for example, about half of all the Linux broadband users on Slashdot) then you cannot send to an AOL user... same goes for SWBell users too I think.

How is my older hardware (or even pretty recent hardware on a huge ISP, with lots of SMTP activity) supposed to be able to handle this? Bah. It seems to me that adding computational difficulty is not such a great way to combat spam. Do you have any idea how effective IP blocklists and statistical filters alone are? (Or, you could combine them as this project is doings).

Mirror here

Here's a short little guide to compiling and installing a new Linux kernel

The big move these days, spearheaded by content providers such as cable and telecom, is to clearly divide consumers and commercial service providers. This is a business thing, and it has nothing to do with technical matters.

For instance, many of us geeks have run our own web sites and mail servers for several years. Now we're running into increasing problems with ISPs that are blocking incoming and outgoing TCP ports, and entire netblocks getting tagged as consumer class (dynamic blocks) so that some domains can easily block our mail.

From a technical angle, there is no difference between the IP traffic coming from my server in the basement and the largest commercial servers on earth. We both send TCP/IP packets that adhere to an established, open specification. But the difference is that I shouldn't be providing web/mail services. Why? Because I'm competing with someone else, and at least someone could force me to buy a business hosting plan right?

This short guide walks you through the steps used to compile and install a new 2.4 kernel.

I've set up a mirror here, but decreased the quality on the images to hopefully prevent destruction of my site ;)

Yes. The war on terrorism is paying off, just like the war on drugs.

Well said.

Check out my home. "It's just temporary, I swear!"

Agreed, the Real products (Real One or whatever?) are absolutely terrible. I love listening to the BBC from here in Canada, so I installed the Real product but was too disgusted with it to keep it. I was hoping they'd bring back OGG at the BBC and now they're making it happen. Hooray for the BBC!

And if you still don't think ogg is that amazing, have you heard what it sounds like at low bitrates? Check out these 32 kbps mono ogg samples. Try to get that quality out of mp3, real, wma, or whatever! Ogg rocks at low bitrates... actually, it's fine at any bitrate. I only rip CDs to ogg these days.