Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Spam Catchers Block Latest Crypto-Gram

Posted by timothy on from the unintentional dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Bruce Schneier sent out a note about SpamAssassin and possibly other spam filters blocking his excellent Crypto-Gram newsletter. Fortunately you can get it here (early no less!)." Schneier's email reads, in part "Tomorrow I will be sending out the February CRYPTO-GRAM, as I do on the 15th of every month. In the process of creating this month's Crypto-Gram, I discovered that SpamAssassin thinks that this issue is spam, probably because of certain links and descriptions of scams in the text. I have anecdotal evidence that other spam filters block Crypto-Gram as well. ... I'd apologize for the inconvenience, but I'm not sure what I could do to make it less so -- I don't intend to alter my content to accommodate spam filters."

15 of 238 comments (clear)

  1. Finally by neotrex · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Finally i get a chance to say this ...... FIRST POST

    1. Re:Finally by GMC-jimmy · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Why ?

      --
      __________________________________
      Free your mind - Flush your toilet
    2. Re:Finally by neotrex · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      I just needed to vent it. So long have I dreamed of having the first post. Besides it is 3:00 AM EST.

  2. fp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    FP

  3. FP! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    FP MUTHAFUCKA! K-Dawg in the Hizzouse!!!

    1. Re:FP! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      DEEPSIDE!

    2. Re:FP! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Fo Real, K-Dawg doesn't take any o dat shiznit.

      I sux0rs though, i only got 3rd post. 1 c@n b3 +0+@11y c001 +h0u6h, 1 w111 63+ +3h f1r$7 p057 50m3d@y. $ux0rs n0+ 70 637 73h f1r$7 p0$+. 1 w@n7 +3h f1r5+ p0$+!!!!!!11111

  4. First Post by eu_neke · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    WTF????

    This is unusual...

  5. Last Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    For now..

  6. Last post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Oh... damn! Too early!

  7. How many hot chicks have been emailing me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    How many real hot chicks have been emailing me?

    Damn, none of their emails can get through cause of Spam Assassin.

  8. First Posting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Why do you people who first post and complain about others first posting think first posting was invented with /. Whats the deal?

    It wasn't by a long shot. /. isn't that special.

  9. Why newsletters at all? by PenguinOpus · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    I realize its tradition and there's a certain extra bit of personal ownership involved in having a copy of the contents arrive entirely in my mailbox, but... Why do newsletters waste the bandwidth of sending out copies of the content to everyone on the list? A small email with a single link to the contents of the new newsletter would work just as well and only those people that read it would spend the bandwidth. In addition, the author could then scrutinize the logs and see what links and what sections generated interest and perhaps better serve the (sometimes not fully understood) audience.

  10. Re:In Soviet Russia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Moderation +1
    100% Underrated

    Now that's just mean.

    Also, cowardly and anonymous (using "underrated" to avoid metamoderation).

  11. Free Speech by Skapare · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Free speech isn't about simply being able to speak something. It's about being able to speak about any topic you choose to. If you want to speak about voting out the incumbent president, or recommending penis enlargers, that should be your right. Infringements on free speech are those that take into account what the speech subject is, to decide whether to suppress it or not. This is the kind of infringement that content filtering does. Perhaps the content filtering is simplistic and looks for "penis" in the message. Or perhaps it is very sophisticated and approaches a conceptual understanding of the message. But regardless of how good it is, by being based on the content, this is infringing against free speech.

    Of course for your own mail server, whatever you choose to use is up to you. The US First Amendment only applies to restrictions imposed by the government. But I happen to choose to not restrict based on content; I choose to restrict based on the behaviour of the sender who is sending unsolicited bulk email (UBE) regardless of the content.

    --
    now we need to go OSS in diesel cars