Re: svn commit: r1828937 - /spamassassin/trunk/rules/60_whitelist_auth.cf

2018-04-14 Thread RW
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 18:18:36 -0400
Bill Cole wrote:

> On 11 Apr 2018, at 17:50 (-0400), Dave Jones wrote:

> > Besides, this *@*.google.com shouldn't be that common under a 
> > subdomain of google.com.  It's not *@google.com which would be a 
> > higher risk.  
> 
> No, *@google.com is still apparently only Google corporate mail. The 
> only spam I've ever seen from such addresses is stupid recruiter
> tricks.
> 
> 
At the moment all that's left is:
 
  def_whitelist_from_dkim  googlealerts-nore...@google.com

perhaps this could be replaced with some or all of:

  def_whitelist_auth  *@google.com
  def_whitelist_auth  *@accounts.google.com
  def_whitelist_from_dkim  *@*.google.com

it's the use of a google.com subdomain address for bounce handling that
caused the problem in the user list, the header 'From' address was
@gmail.com.


Re: svn commit: r1828937 - /spamassassin/trunk/rules/60_whitelist_auth.cf

2018-04-12 Thread Dave Jones

On 04/11/2018 05:18 PM, Bill Cole wrote:

On 11 Apr 2018, at 17:50 (-0400), Dave Jones wrote:


On 04/11/2018 04:29 PM, billc...@apache.org wrote:

Author: billcole
Date: Wed Apr 11 21:29:08 2018
New Revision: 1828937

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1828937&view=rev
Log:
Google Forms has generated spam, befouling the google.com reputation

Modified:
 spamassassin/trunk/rules/60_whitelist_auth.cf

Modified: spamassassin/trunk/rules/60_whitelist_auth.cf
URL: 
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/trunk/rules/60_whitelist_auth.cf?rev=1828937&r1=1828936&r2=1828937&view=diff 

== 


--- spamassassin/trunk/rules/60_whitelist_auth.cf (original)
+++ spamassassin/trunk/rules/60_whitelist_auth.cf Wed Apr 11 21:29:08 
2018

@@ -80,7 +80,6 @@ def_whitelist_auth *@visadpsmessage.com
  def_whitelist_auth *@*.pinterest.com
  def_whitelist_auth *@indeed.com
  def_whitelist_auth *@*.hyatt.com
-def_whitelist_auth *@*.google.com
  def_whitelist_auth *@*.sears.com
  def_whitelist_auth *@*.jcpenney.com
  def_whitelist_auth *@*.landsend.com




Do you have an example email of this?


Discussed on the Users list today. A mostly-Thai form with an internal 
Hotmail address.


If we report this to Google and they handle it properly, it doesn't 
mean that we need to remove this entry unless there is a major problem 
with trust.


I disagree. Handling complaints (which Google mostly doesn't in any 
case) is entirely inadequate to justify trusting mail sent by users they 
don't actually know with an active backend that has a track record of 
abuse. Google Docs has become a phishing platform and we should not be 
telling people to trust it by default.



A single email occurrence is not enough to remove them.


I don't have copies of the similar-sender garbage I've been rejecting 
because it has been aimed at bogus local addresses.


Besides, this *@*.google.com shouldn't be that common under a 
subdomain of google.com.  It's not *@google.com which would be a 
higher risk.


No, *@google.com is still apparently only Google corporate mail. The 
only spam I've ever seen from such addresses is stupid recruiter tricks.





I still contend that the benefits of that entry far outweigh a single 
report of spam that Google will handle if reported to them.  They do 
handle abuse reports and lock accounts all of the time.  I know this 
first hand from my own customers.


The def_white_auth entries aren't only for perfect senders but for 
senders that are targets of spoofing.  They say that this email was from 
Google so we can block other non-Google senders spoofing Google Docs 
shares with malicious links.


No one can say that the have never sent spam outbound.  It happens once 
in a while even to the best of us that go to great lengths to detect and 
prevent it.  Most RBLs will tolerate a small amount junk email and only 
list an IP when it's persistent.  These def_whitelist_auth entries 
should be treated the same way.


Dave


Re: svn commit: r1828937 - /spamassassin/trunk/rules/60_whitelist_auth.cf

2018-04-11 Thread Bill Cole

On 11 Apr 2018, at 17:50 (-0400), Dave Jones wrote:


On 04/11/2018 04:29 PM, billc...@apache.org wrote:

Author: billcole
Date: Wed Apr 11 21:29:08 2018
New Revision: 1828937

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1828937&view=rev
Log:
Google Forms has generated spam, befouling the google.com reputation

Modified:
 spamassassin/trunk/rules/60_whitelist_auth.cf

Modified: spamassassin/trunk/rules/60_whitelist_auth.cf
URL: 
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/trunk/rules/60_whitelist_auth.cf?rev=1828937&r1=1828936&r2=1828937&view=diff

==
--- spamassassin/trunk/rules/60_whitelist_auth.cf (original)
+++ spamassassin/trunk/rules/60_whitelist_auth.cf Wed Apr 11 21:29:08 
2018

@@ -80,7 +80,6 @@ def_whitelist_auth *@visadpsmessage.com
  def_whitelist_auth *@*.pinterest.com
  def_whitelist_auth *@indeed.com
  def_whitelist_auth *@*.hyatt.com
-def_whitelist_auth *@*.google.com
  def_whitelist_auth *@*.sears.com
  def_whitelist_auth *@*.jcpenney.com
  def_whitelist_auth *@*.landsend.com




Do you have an example email of this?


Discussed on the Users list today. A mostly-Thai form with an internal 
Hotmail address.


If we report this to Google and they handle it properly, it doesn't 
mean that we need to remove this entry unless there is a major problem 
with trust.


I disagree. Handling complaints (which Google mostly doesn't in any 
case) is entirely inadequate to justify trusting mail sent by users they 
don't actually know with an active backend that has a track record of 
abuse. Google Docs has become a phishing platform and we should not be 
telling people to trust it by default.



A single email occurrence is not enough to remove them.


I don't have copies of the similar-sender garbage I've been rejecting 
because it has been aimed at bogus local addresses.


Besides, this *@*.google.com shouldn't be that common under a 
subdomain of google.com.  It's not *@google.com which would be a 
higher risk.


No, *@google.com is still apparently only Google corporate mail. The 
only spam I've ever seen from such addresses is stupid recruiter tricks.



--
Bill Cole
b...@scconsult.com or billc...@apache.org
(AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses)
Currently Seeking Steady Work: https://linkedin.com/in/billcole


Re: svn commit: r1828937 - /spamassassin/trunk/rules/60_whitelist_auth.cf

2018-04-11 Thread Dave Jones

On 04/11/2018 04:29 PM, billc...@apache.org wrote:

Author: billcole
Date: Wed Apr 11 21:29:08 2018
New Revision: 1828937

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1828937&view=rev
Log:
Google Forms has generated spam, befouling the google.com reputation

Modified:
 spamassassin/trunk/rules/60_whitelist_auth.cf

Modified: spamassassin/trunk/rules/60_whitelist_auth.cf
URL: 
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/trunk/rules/60_whitelist_auth.cf?rev=1828937&r1=1828936&r2=1828937&view=diff
==
--- spamassassin/trunk/rules/60_whitelist_auth.cf (original)
+++ spamassassin/trunk/rules/60_whitelist_auth.cf Wed Apr 11 21:29:08 2018
@@ -80,7 +80,6 @@ def_whitelist_auth *@visadpsmessage.com
  def_whitelist_auth *@*.pinterest.com
  def_whitelist_auth *@indeed.com
  def_whitelist_auth *@*.hyatt.com
-def_whitelist_auth *@*.google.com
  def_whitelist_auth *@*.sears.com
  def_whitelist_auth *@*.jcpenney.com
  def_whitelist_auth *@*.landsend.com




Do you have an example email of this?  If we report this to Google and 
they handle it properly, it doesn't mean that we need to remove this 
entry unless there is a major problem with trust.  A single email 
occurrence is not enough to remove them.


Besides, this *@*.google.com shouldn't be that common under a subdomain 
of google.com.  It's not *@google.com which would be a higher risk.


Dave