[SC-Help] Re: SpamAssassin and SpamCop

[Mike Easter]

Chris wrote:
> Since SA has now added SpamCop to the automatic reporting process I
> wanted to also include that in my reporting process.  I was just
> wondering about what happens to spam reports that are made to the
> "geneirc" SpamCop address. FWIW I do a daily manual relook of each
> message in my spam folder before running the script to ensure there
> are no newsletters, virus reports or other FP's.

I saw what Graeme wrote...

Graeme Leith wrote:
> and SpamCop
> "http://www.spamcop.net/".

..but what you and Graeme are saying doesn't 'compute' to me yet.  Here
are the ways 'you' [where you can be an automated system such as SA or
MW or an OL macro or whatever] can submit something to spamcop.  You can
either paste it into the web parser or you can 'mail' it in a way that
adopts the same configuration or structure which would be achieved by
emailing it 'as an attachment' -- but in either case it is /not/ emailed
or pasted to a 'generic' address or a generic webparser.

That is, even that link above is 'individualized' and unique for every
reporter;  just as the submit email address is.  There isn't a 'generic'
reporting address or a generic reporting webpage.

Then, given that there isn't a generic, that means that every report is
'specific' for that reporter.  It also means that there is 'optimally' a
mechanism for 'approving' each of those reports - which might seem to be
'individually' - but can be 'grouped' for an email submission.

Let's imagine that it were being done manually by an OE Outlook Express
reporter.  I'll use that much-maligned mail agent because it turns out
to be a pretty handy SC reporting app.

The reporter would gang select all of their say 200 spams and forward
them all en masse as an attachment to their unique submit address.
Then, they would get a 'passle' of links to report, with each link
representing an opportunity to oversee how SC wanted to report the item.
Click click click.  Different people will describe different strategies
for making that go more quickly.

I don't want to talk about the methods for quick reporting which doesn't
involve that proper oversight and responsibility and therefore which I
discourage.  That is a subject for someone who is in favor of it or
supports its usage and has had some favorable experience, as opposed to
a disaster.

-- 
Mike Easter
kibitzer, not SC admin