[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Marking BTS spam



Hi,
* Kevin Mark <kmark+debian-devel@pipeline.com> [2006-02-22 09:24]:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 08:20:45AM +0100, Nico Golde wrote:
> > * Kevin Mark <kmark+debian-devel@pipeline.com> [2006-02-22 07:51]:
> > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 01:07:39PM -0700, Shaun Jackman wrote:
> > > > Is it possible to mark a particular message to the BTS (as in
> > > > ###@bugs.debian.org) as spam? This information could be used for
> > > > filtering the web page reports, or possibly training the spam filter.
> > > > 
> > > there was added a 'button' on all bug-number pages to 'mark as spam' on
> > > near the bottom but IIRC it was marked as an experimental project to
> > > only collect data for future use. If this has been implemented and
> > > affect filtering, I guess the list-master would know. I guess some
> > > script-foo could be used to 'click' the spam 'button' on the web page
> > > but not my me x-)
> > 
> > I also had the idea of making it available via mail so I can 
> > make a shortcut for mutt/ng and a little shell script. Don't 
> > know what happened in the meantime.
> as a mutt user, I'd happily look for a mutt addition to click a few keys
> to help kill evil spam !

At the moment the spam-report.pl script uses:
<input type="hidden" name="listname" value="debian-devel" />
<input type="hidden" name="msg" value="msg00065.html" />
<input type="hidden" name="date" value="2005/09" />
To identify the message, this wouldn't work with a MUA so the idea came
to my mind was to identify the Mail with the message-ID.
Paskal Hakim asked what happens if someone fakes the message-ID in the old thread
about this topic. Well this could happen, so someone has another idea?
Regards Nico
-- 
Nico Golde - JAB: nion@jabber.ccc.de | GPG: 0x73647CFF
http://www.ngolde.de | http://www.muttng.org | http://grml.org
Forget about that mouse with 3/4/5 buttons -
gimme a keyboard with 103/104/105 keys!

Attachment: pgpyp17jy7bkA.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: