Re: Lots of (easily recognisible) spam sent to the BTS today
On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 01:36:56PM -0800, Blars Blarson wrote:
> In article <E1GeU9Z-0004Jlfirstname.lastname@example.org> email@example.com writes:
> >On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 16:02:41 -0800, Blars Blarson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> >>We have a SA rule for this run now, but sending such hints to
> >>owner@bugs will get them seen much faster than debian-devel that I'm
> >>more than a week behind in reading.
> >So you really want to be manually informed about spam runs against the
> >BTS? Don't you notice unusual activity in some rrd-based monitoring
> If you have an idea for a new spamassassin rule that will get a
> current spam run without triggering on non-spam, send it to
> owner@bugs. Unfortunatly, much spam is now using anti-bayes tecniques
> and is hard to catch without also getting non-spam.
> I do see each message with a SA score >= -1, but at times I've been
> days behind slogging through them.
Does that mean that we shouldn't report spam we see in the BTS? If I
now see spam going to a bugreport of mine, I always go and press the
"this bug log contains spam". Should I just not bother with it?