From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/44469 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Kirk Strauser Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Wanted: Gnus plugin to submit spam to ordb.org Date: 29 Apr 2002 11:10:13 -0500 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: <87lmb6jxju.fsf@strauser.com> References: <03662adav5.fsf@colargol.tihlde.org> <87pu0ijyrq.fsf@strauser.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1020096690 18078 127.0.0.1 (29 Apr 2002 16:11:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 16:11:30 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 172DkP-0004hT-00 for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2002 18:11:30 +0200 Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu ([129.7.128.10] ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 172DjV-0008Iw-00; Mon, 29 Apr 2002 11:10:33 -0500 Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Mon, 29 Apr 2002 11:10:45 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from kanga.honeypot.net (kanga.honeypot.net [208.162.254.122]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA25919 for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2002 11:10:35 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from pooh (mail@pooh.int [10.0.1.2]) by kanga.honeypot.net (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g3TGADp9021654 for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2002 11:10:17 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from kirk@strauser.com) Original-Received: from kirk by pooh with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 172DjB-0001Aj-00 for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2002 11:10:13 -0500 Original-To: ding@hpc.uh.edu In-Reply-To: Original-Lines: 25 X-Mailer: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:44469 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:44469 At 2002-04-29T16:05:12Z, Ted Zlatanov writes: > 2) user defines a rule in the split rules that will classify spam as > such using the spam catching methods. For instance, the ordb > method would do a DNS query, while the blacklist method would look > in the user's blacklist. I've already installed the dnsbl features on my mailserver, as have quite a few other people. I personally wouldn't be too interested in having Gnus perform the checks again, although I'm certain that others would love this. > 3) user marks spam with the "H" mark, which triggers the reporting > methods requested by the user. For instance, the ordb method would > send mail to ORDB, while the blacklist method would add the sender > to the user's blacklist. I particularly like this. Anything that makes widespread use of anti-spam tools trivially easy for end users can only be a good thing for all of us. > Does that make sense? Any comments from the list? Sounds good to me! -- Kirk Strauser