RE: Re[2]: [sniffer] False Positive - no reaction?

2006-02-21 Thread Andy Schmidt
Hi Pete,

I agree that the email notification is tricky - because you might respond to
spam - and, you may NOT respond to someone who did not use an authorized
address.

On the other hand, if I KNEW there was an auto-response and I did NOT get a
response, it would be an indication to me, the user, that I must have done
something wrong. So - in a sense - no response is also a message I can
act on.

The only other suggestion I have is to create a 24 hour 'queue' display on
the web site. All you need to show is a column of the sender domain names of
the email (not the entire sender email address).  If I submit a false
positive I can confirm that it made it into your queue by checking the web
page.  This way, you don't need to send automated emails.

Best Regards
Andy Schmidt

Phone:  +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)
Fax:+1 201 934-9206 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Pete McNeil
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 11:04 AM
To: Andy Schmidt
Subject: Re[2]: [sniffer] False Positive - no reaction?

On Tuesday, February 21, 2006, 10:16:11 AM, Andy wrote:

AS Sorry - didn't mean to be pushy. I just thought that false 
AS positives are worse than missed spam, so I had assumed that they 
AS would always be at the top of the queue.

It is a very tough balancing act. Don't feel bad at all - you're not being
pushy. The current goal is to respond in less than 24 hours and if possible
to review twice per day. Yesterday a number of urgent tasks toppled that
schedule. The first review happened (at around
0600) but there were no FPs at that time. I'm working to increase the review
cycle... there are just a lot of things going on right now.

Just so everyone knows, we do hear - loud and clear - that responding to FPs
is important, and we have been much better about it over the recent past. I
expect that service aspect to improve moving forward along with other
things.

AS I can wait (PS - would have calmed my nerves, if there had been some 
AS automatic ticket number response that reassured me that my email 
AS was received. The web site makes it sound as if there's a million 
AS reasons why a false positive might not be accepted - so an automatic 
AS confirmation might be a good self-service tool.

That's a good point. I'll look at that possibility when I rewrite the false
processing bot. We're getting a lot of spam lately at our false@ address and
I would want to make sure that there was no outscatter.

I can tell the bot to only respond to validated senders, but then there is
the issue of email reliability in the response... what if you don't get the
response I mean. ... There are still folks that occasionally (some
frequently) send false reports from unauthorized addresses --- those would
not get a response... I'm overthinking this now %^b

When I get to the false processing bot I will add a response mechanism.

Thanks!

_M




This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For information and
(un)subscription instructions go to
http://www.sortmonster.com/MessageSniffer/Help/Help.html



This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For information and 
(un)subscription instructions go to 
http://www.sortmonster.com/MessageSniffer/Help/Help.html


Re: Re[2]: [sniffer] False Positive - no reaction?

2006-02-21 Thread Scott Fisher
I like this idea more than the email notification. I really don't need more 
emails.


- Original Message - 
From: Andy Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: sniffer@SortMonster.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 10:16 AM
Subject: RE: Re[2]: [sniffer] False Positive - no reaction?



Hi Pete,

I agree that the email notification is tricky - because you might respond 
to

spam - and, you may NOT respond to someone who did not use an authorized
address.

On the other hand, if I KNEW there was an auto-response and I did NOT get 
a

response, it would be an indication to me, the user, that I must have done
something wrong. So - in a sense - no response is also a message I can
act on.

The only other suggestion I have is to create a 24 hour 'queue' display on
the web site. All you need to show is a column of the sender domain names 
of

the email (not the entire sender email address).  If I submit a false
positive I can confirm that it made it into your queue by checking the web
page.  This way, you don't need to send automated emails.

Best Regards
Andy Schmidt

Phone:  +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)
Fax:+1 201 934-9206


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Pete McNeil
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 11:04 AM
To: Andy Schmidt
Subject: Re[2]: [sniffer] False Positive - no reaction?

On Tuesday, February 21, 2006, 10:16:11 AM, Andy wrote:

AS Sorry - didn't mean to be pushy. I just thought that false
AS positives are worse than missed spam, so I had assumed that they
AS would always be at the top of the queue.

It is a very tough balancing act. Don't feel bad at all - you're not being
pushy. The current goal is to respond in less than 24 hours and if 
possible

to review twice per day. Yesterday a number of urgent tasks toppled that
schedule. The first review happened (at around
0600) but there were no FPs at that time. I'm working to increase the 
review

cycle... there are just a lot of things going on right now.

Just so everyone knows, we do hear - loud and clear - that responding to 
FPs
is important, and we have been much better about it over the recent past. 
I

expect that service aspect to improve moving forward along with other
things.

AS I can wait (PS - would have calmed my nerves, if there had been some
AS automatic ticket number response that reassured me that my email
AS was received. The web site makes it sound as if there's a million
AS reasons why a false positive might not be accepted - so an automatic
AS confirmation might be a good self-service tool.

That's a good point. I'll look at that possibility when I rewrite the 
false
processing bot. We're getting a lot of spam lately at our false@ address 
and

I would want to make sure that there was no outscatter.

I can tell the bot to only respond to validated senders, but then there is
the issue of email reliability in the response... what if you don't get 
the

response I mean. ... There are still folks that occasionally (some
frequently) send false reports from unauthorized addresses --- those would
not get a response... I'm overthinking this now %^b

When I get to the false processing bot I will add a response mechanism.

Thanks!

_M




This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For information 
and

(un)subscription instructions go to
http://www.sortmonster.com/MessageSniffer/Help/Help.html



This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For information 
and (un)subscription instructions go to 
http://www.sortmonster.com/MessageSniffer/Help/Help.html






This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For information and 
(un)subscription instructions go to 
http://www.sortmonster.com/MessageSniffer/Help/Help.html


Re: Re[2]: [sniffer] False Positive - no reaction?

2006-02-21 Thread Darin Cox
That queue concept would be wonderful!  Hopefully it would have some simple
info extracted to show recipient, sender, subject, header info, and info on
the rule(s) it failed.  One of my ongoing challenges is matching responses
to reports and following up to see what additional actions are required.

Darin.


- Original Message - 
From: Andy Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: sniffer@SortMonster.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 11:16 AM
Subject: RE: Re[2]: [sniffer] False Positive - no reaction?


Hi Pete,

I agree that the email notification is tricky - because you might respond to
spam - and, you may NOT respond to someone who did not use an authorized
address.

On the other hand, if I KNEW there was an auto-response and I did NOT get a
response, it would be an indication to me, the user, that I must have done
something wrong. So - in a sense - no response is also a message I can
act on.

The only other suggestion I have is to create a 24 hour 'queue' display on
the web site. All you need to show is a column of the sender domain names of
the email (not the entire sender email address).  If I submit a false
positive I can confirm that it made it into your queue by checking the web
page.  This way, you don't need to send automated emails.

Best Regards
Andy Schmidt

Phone:  +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)
Fax:+1 201 934-9206


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Pete McNeil
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 11:04 AM
To: Andy Schmidt
Subject: Re[2]: [sniffer] False Positive - no reaction?

On Tuesday, February 21, 2006, 10:16:11 AM, Andy wrote:

AS Sorry - didn't mean to be pushy. I just thought that false
AS positives are worse than missed spam, so I had assumed that they
AS would always be at the top of the queue.

It is a very tough balancing act. Don't feel bad at all - you're not being
pushy. The current goal is to respond in less than 24 hours and if possible
to review twice per day. Yesterday a number of urgent tasks toppled that
schedule. The first review happened (at around
0600) but there were no FPs at that time. I'm working to increase the review
cycle... there are just a lot of things going on right now.

Just so everyone knows, we do hear - loud and clear - that responding to FPs
is important, and we have been much better about it over the recent past. I
expect that service aspect to improve moving forward along with other
things.

AS I can wait (PS - would have calmed my nerves, if there had been some
AS automatic ticket number response that reassured me that my email
AS was received. The web site makes it sound as if there's a million
AS reasons why a false positive might not be accepted - so an automatic
AS confirmation might be a good self-service tool.

That's a good point. I'll look at that possibility when I rewrite the false
processing bot. We're getting a lot of spam lately at our false@ address and
I would want to make sure that there was no outscatter.

I can tell the bot to only respond to validated senders, but then there is
the issue of email reliability in the response... what if you don't get the
response I mean. ... There are still folks that occasionally (some
frequently) send false reports from unauthorized addresses --- those would
not get a response... I'm overthinking this now %^b

When I get to the false processing bot I will add a response mechanism.

Thanks!

_M




This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For information and
(un)subscription instructions go to
http://www.sortmonster.com/MessageSniffer/Help/Help.html



This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For information and
(un)subscription instructions go to
http://www.sortmonster.com/MessageSniffer/Help/Help.html



This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For information and 
(un)subscription instructions go to 
http://www.sortmonster.com/MessageSniffer/Help/Help.html