Conversation

Replying to

@munin

it seems moderately likely that this is misbehaving antispam (e.g. what happened to

@allgebrah

). also likely that they hide...

Replying to

and

politically motivated bans under the guise of antispam. or that their antispam filter learned itself to be p. motivated.

Replying to

and

really, shadowbanning as an antispam measure is indefensible; spamassassin is almost entirely transparent and it works excellent

Replying to

and

it really depends on the adversary - when spammers evolve instead of moving on, you'll want to keep your methods secret

Replying to

and

spammers evolve and yet spamassassin has survived

Replying to

and

now I can't cite any case studies but from my own antispam experience and from watching gmail and other large providers

Replying to

and

I very much doubt spamassassin would help them

Replying to

and

I run nothing except spamassassin in a default config and I leave my email everywhere. I get lots of spam... all filtered

Replying to

and

Now you may claim this is atypical but I would like to hear why, for one

Replying to

nobody is trying to poke holes in your system specifically, actively extracting its filter rules

Replying to

and

also note that my experience is from web antispam, not mail antispam

10:56 PM · Oct 3, 2016Twitter Web Client

Replying to

and

"filter rules" in a loose sense - this is when I wish this was IRC and I wouldn't feel like I needed to save chars

Replying to

and

also you can blackhole email effectively and not give spammers an information backchannel, but anything gmail-scale has leaks

Show replies