Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×
Spam Bug Communications Google Linux

Gmail Spam Filter Changes Bite Linus Torvalds 136

An anonymous reader points out The Register's story that recent changes to the spam filters that Google uses to pare down junk in gmail evidently are a bit overzealous. Linus Torvalds, who famously likes to manage by email, and whose email flow includes a lot of mailing lists, isn't happy with it. Ironically perhaps, it was only last week that the Gmail team blogged that its spam filter's rate of false positives is down to less than 0.05 per cent. In his post, Torvalds said his own experience belies that claim, and that around 30 per cent of the mail in his spam box turned out not to be spam. "It's actually at the point where I'm noticing missing messages in the email conversations I see, because Gmail has been marking emails in the middle of the conversation as spam. Things that people replied to and that contained patches and problem descriptions," Torvalds wrote.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Gmail Spam Filter Changes Bite Linus Torvalds

Comments Filter:
  • by Mouldy ( 1322581 ) on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @11:26AM (#50152787)
    Or if the other comment's got hit by spam filters
  • This Just In (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @11:26AM (#50152789)

    Individual that differs more than 6-sigma from the population's mean has trouble with automated tools designed for the average person.

    Gmail's spam filter is why email is still useful.

    • by sjbe ( 173966 ) on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @11:40AM (#50152915)

      Individual that differs more than 6-sigma from the population's mean has trouble with automated tools designed for the average person.

      Exactly. I use Gmail and I honestly haven't had a false positive (flagged as spam when it isn't) in over two years. I still get the occasional false negative (spam that isn't flagged) at a frequency of a few per week. It's good enough that I don't even bother to routinely check my spam filter. It also is pretty good on the training - once you've spent a little time telling it what is spam and what isn't for you in my experience it is pretty good after that. Frankly if you have to check your spam filter often it isn't a very good spam filter.

      I suspect Linus has rather unusual email requirements. Perhaps Gmail isn't the ideal solution for him. Very few tools are perfect for everyone. I'm a little surprised he's having that much trouble but stranger things have happened.

      • by Tx ( 96709 ) on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @11:58AM (#50153083) Journal

        I read about this a few days ago on The Register, according to one user there, this particular issue is to do with DKIM and mailing lists (the stuff Linus had issues with was all Linux kernel mailing list messages);

        bhtooefr "Basically, Google's enforcing DKIM from certain domains, and if a message is "from" someone whose e-mail host provides proper DKIM, but it's missing it, Google (and Yahoo) servers reject it. Mailing lists aren't usually set up to properly handle DKIM (being, effectively, a relay), and therefore get rejected.

        The workaround that I saw one mailing list use was to resend the e-mail from the mailing list's address, append "via (mailing list name)" to the name on the from field, and just have both the mailing list and the original author in reply-to."

        Seems like people running mailing lists need to take a look at how spam filters work, rather than mail providers changing anything. If I understand correctly, the policy is sensible and blocks a likely spam vector, and legit mailing lists could easily be set up to not fail that particular check.

        For regular mail, I'm like you guys, Google's spam filtering does a fantastic job. I never check my spam folder any more, unless I'm expecting an email and it doesn't arrive, but it's been ages since I had a false positive.

        • I've had this problem with small websites I run. A lot of contact forms default to using the submitter as from still, I have to edit the code that sends the mail in the module to be from the site's domain and use the reply-to.

          I started having to do this year's ago, yet very few modules let you take advantage of reply-to still. Very annoying.

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Mr. Slippery ( 47854 )

          Seems like people running mailing lists need to take a look at how spam filters work, rather than mail providers changing anything.

          No, you're backwards. It's up to spam filter developers to understand how mailing lists work and not falsely flag legitimate traffic. If your filter breaks a mailing list, your filter is broken.

          • by Anonymous Coward

            Except that you have it exactly backwards since almost all spam is just bulk mail exactly like any mailing list.

            If you are sending bulk mail it is your responsibility to know the best practices for maintaining unsubscribe, for physical contact info, for sending mail only to people that have double opted in. It is also your responsibility to setup SPF, reverse DNS, and increasingly DKIM if you want your bulk mail to make it to its destination. This is why companies like Dyn are around as they take all the g

            • by dgatwood ( 11270 )

              The reality is that most email list servers were set up a decade ago by somebody who hasn't touched it since. Expecting them to all upgrade their software to accommodate some new scheme is ridiculous enough to qualify for one of those "Your solution is impractical because" posts with the "it requires broad deployment on hundreds of thousands of servers, performed by tens of thousands of unpaid volunteers" checkbox checked.

              Unlike the people who set up most of those email list servers, the Google employees

          • Or perhaps you don't understand how mail spam filtering works?

            If I send a message to a mailing list server, and it resends the message claiming that it is me, this is wrong.

            C22@mail.com - > ML@MAILlist.com
            ML@MAILlist.com -> user@list.com (as C22@mail.com)

            list.com will always say MAILlist.com isn't mail.com, why is it sending me mail. This is a misconfigured mail relay problem, not a spam problem. MAILlist.com is not an authorized mail server of mail.com, it is completely valid to reject it as a spoo

          • by Bengie ( 1121981 )
            DKIM is an authentication mechanism. If the mailing list can't properly identify itself, it needs to get fixed.
        • For regular mail, I'm like you guys, Google's spam filtering does a fantastic job. I never check my spam folder any more, unless I'm expecting an email and it doesn't arrive, but it's been ages since I had a false positive.

          I will check my spam folder from time to time just to see what kind of spam is out there. I always like the 419 style scams. I rarely, very rarely, find any real mail in the spam folder. In fact, the few times I have found real mail in the spam folder, it was spammy in nature not a true communication that I valued.

          Really, kudos to the Google spam team.

      • by war4peace ( 1628283 ) on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @12:06PM (#50153155)

        GMail started flagging Youtube newsletters as SPAM but gets confused by another filter I added manually to all e-mails from Youtube. I had created a filter which adds a label to that type of e-mail, and now GMail says "This message was not sent to Spam because of a filter you created." every time I am getting an e-mail from Youtube.

        Funny, 'cause Youtube is owned by Google.

      • While I might agree with most of that, there's really no reason to flag a mid-thread reply as spam.

      • I get false positives regularly. Usually the "confirm your email address" messages from services whose sign-up processes are stuck in 2010.

      • I have. From this filter update no less.

        I receive mail on two different accounts from different addresses, with several hundred mail messages in the one account and several thousand in the other sitting in my inbox. As of last week messages started to go into the spam folder on both accounts until flagged as not spam.

        As an added bonus to stupidity, one of the addresses marked as spam is a prominent .edu address.

        • I observed this same problem on the day that Google announced their new Postmaster service. The servers I manage are all small, but nothing has changed, not even an IP address, in years, yet suddenly everything started going to spam folders for all Gmail addresses. I changed nothing in my DNS records and the auth headers all stated pass for SPF, DKIM, and DMARC. I signed up for the service, but the domains are too small for Google to bother reporting anything, so my conclusion is they tweaked their algorith
      • by jthill ( 303417 )
        I'm on a mailing list or two that get unusual traffic anyway (dev lists carrying patches) and they get steadily spammed. The false-positive rates on those are annoying. I'm looking at five false positives right now.
    • Re:This Just In (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Brave Guy ( 457657 ) on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @11:55AM (#50153063)

      Gmail's spam filter is why email is still useful.

      I might not be six sigmas from the population mean, but the aggressive filtering of Google's mail service is annoying me more and more. I don't use it myself, but quite a few of my recurring professional contacts do, often behind their own domains so there's no way to know until it breaks. Aside from the privacy implications of that, I'm getting awfully bored of finishing a day's work, e-mailing the results to wherever they need to go, and getting in the next morning to find a nasty note from Google that was sent back after I'd left saying my mail had been blocked because they considered something in the attached file a security risk. This is particularly infuriating if I'm working in the UK and sending the results to a contact on US time, because it costs between half a day and an entire day to catch up.

      • by Bengie ( 1121981 )
        Don't send files via email?
        • Yes, that's a possible workaround, but now we have a bunch more problems. E-mail is simple, standardised, and time-tested. There are plenty of tools that will let us transfer a file another way, but very few that will then keep that file associated with all the other relevant messages, and very few that literally everyone will have, and very few that don't require more effort to set up.

          Alternative proposal: Don't use e-mail services that don't do e-mail properly.

    • Re:This Just In (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Carewolf ( 581105 ) on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @11:57AM (#50153075) Homepage

      Individual that differs more than 6-sigma from the population's mean has trouble with automated tools designed for the average person.

      Gmail's spam filter is why email is still useful.

      In my experience it is crap. Not as bad as Linus experience, but it stil mistook on 1 in 200 emails just like google says and that is COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE. Having to find important emails in the thousands of spam emails is a problem, and haven't seen any other spam filter with that many false positives.

      • Having to find important emails in the thousands of spam emails is a problem...

        Maybe it wouldn't be such a problem if you deleted everything in your spam folder daily instead of just letting it sit there until it's 30 days old and gets removed automatically.
        • by Anonymous Coward

          But that's the same as stealing from Google!

      • by Rob Riggs ( 6418 )

        The main problem that I have experienced with Gmail's spam filter is that it is overly aggressive. I was on a Yahoo! group mailing list. It got hit by a spammer. I flagged the email as spam. Then a bunch of yahoos responded to the spam or to the people responding to the spam. All of those people's posts to that group started getting flagged as spam. I started noticing holes in conversations.

        Now, I kind of appreciate what Google is doing here. If you keep that behavior in place, you disincentivize the

      • Re:This Just In (Score:5, Informative)

        by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @01:19PM (#50153727)
        Not sure why Linus and you are complaining. Gmail already has a tool for eliminating false positives. You set up a filter to automatically give any email from a particular mailing list a label for that list. It's actually a great tool for auto-organizing your email if you subscribe to multiple lists like he does.

        When setting up the filter, you make sure to check the "Never send it to spam" option.
        • by gl4ss ( 559668 )

          he was complaining because without notice the behavior changed and he started missing valid emails from addresses previously he was responding to, partially without rhyme or reason, since he started missing in-between emails and sometimes would get a later email but see that there was mail in the 'thread' that he had missed due to the spam filter.

          the point is, gmail changed the spam filter without notice (like starting to mark mail "this would go to spam next week") or whatever.

    • I'd say about 99% of spam can be eliminated before even looking at the content of the message. The difference is, no legitimate email sender is going to be doing things that would get them filtered, like not having reverse DNS, being on a residential connection, or being on a major spam blacklist. As soon as you start filtering based on the content of the message, you're going to run into far more issues. On top of that, they don't know they've been filtered, whereas a server outright rejecting their messag
    • So, is google's spam filter the new tool to out unsuspecting mensa material?

      Because my mother-in-law was also fuming against it just a day or two ago.

  • by freeze128 ( 544774 ) on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @11:27AM (#50152801)
    Well, Linus doesn't *HAVE* to use gmail. There are other email providers.
    • Yeah, like Microsoft or Apple!

      • by Herve5 ( 879674 )

        Yeah, like Microsoft or Apple!

        No.
        Like any national, free, reasonable email provider (in my country, the post office does this).
        Like *all* our hosting service providers do, too, at no delta-cost, and in a well controlled manner if you chose an associative hosting. Many come to mind in Europe, like the belgian All2all, the french Ouvaton
        Sorry for the bluntness, that's not you but the mere idea of Torvalds registering at Google that shocked me...

        • by Anonymous Coward

          Maybe someone could explain to him how to set up his own mail server. IIRC there are free open source mail servers with spam filtering. I think there is even an open source OS to run it all if cost is an issue. He ought to look into it.

          • by HiThere ( 15173 )

            That was my first reaction as to how he should respond. But perhaps it would be better if he talked someone else into hosting the lists (and maintaining the server). Linus is probably quite busy with other business.

            Still, Cannonical might take the job, or the FSF. Perhaps the OpenSuse people. I'm not really sure I'd want Red Hat to have that much leverage.

        • Sorry for the bluntness, that's not you but the mere idea of Torvalds registering at Google that shocked me...

          Me too, that's why I mockingly replied with "Microsoft and Apple" as alternatives.

    • I for one am extremely shocked that the above post ('use other providers') be flagged as funny.
      Torvalds is the last person I'd imagine registering an email address @ Google.
      Wise as he may have been, sorry, but to me he's a moron now just because of this.
      I just hope I won't evolve his way when getting older.

      • Torvalds is the last person I'd imagine registering an email address @ Google... I just hope I won't evolve his way when getting older.

        Age has nothing to do with it. I'm older than Torvalds, and I refuse to use Gmail.

  • It is pretty much a given that the FP rate would go up as filters become more ubiquitous. This is how the spammers are winning the spam battles when people place too much faith in filters.

    As I have said before, spam is an economic problem. We won't solve the problem with filters, or with any kind of punishment (legal or otherwise); we need to look at this rationally as an economic problem.
    • by dpidcoe ( 2606549 ) on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @11:39AM (#50152899)
      One of the ways of combating it economically is to make it require more effort to successfully deliver spam to the target recipients. i.e. using a filter.
      • One of the ways of combating it economically is to make it require more effort to successfully deliver spam to the target recipients. i.e. using a filter.

        The problem is that the spammers can acquire more opportunity to get past filters (by taking over more computers for their botnets, to send more spam from with more permutations designed to confuse filters) with more ease than the time it takes to train the filters on what is spam and what is not. When using filters, it becomes an arms race - and only the spammers can win.

        In other words it already costs the spammers almost nothing to send out a deluge of billions of spam emails. They already know how

    • I suppose you would need others to look at the problem rationally, considering that you seem to be incapable of this particular skill.
  • I've noted an increment of spam on my Gmail account.
    From one email every few week to a couple per day.

    • by darniil ( 793468 )

      Do you mean you've noticed an increase in spam getting into your Inbox, or an increase of spam showing up in your spam folder?

      If the latter, I've noticed it comes and goes in waves. Sometimes it'll be days between getting a single spam in my spam folder, and sometimes I'll get two or three in one day.

      I want to say it's like a sine wave, but I haven't kept a record that would back up that claim.

      • Turns out it's actually a cosine wave, dummy.
      • The reason for the wave effect is at least in part because a relatively large proportion of the spam that gets sent actually comes from a very small number of sources. Someone figures out a formula for defeating the current spam filters on enough major systems to be viable and then exploits it heavily for as long as they can. The mail services note the changes in traffic, adapt, and block that traffic. On a really good day, a major spammer actually gets taken to court and removed from the system altogether

      • The SPAM folder is really the mail server's "I'm not 100% sure this is spam" folder.
        90% of spam never gets to your email account at all. Those are the messages the server is 100% sure is spam.

        I get more than my share of spam... but that's because I do things that confuse the mail server... such as flagging as not spam receipt emails from the viagra I bought from an online pharmacy. That right there pretty much fucks you for having any sort of reliable spam filtering.
    • My favorite are all the fucking goomoji in the subjects these days. "||mail.google.com/mail/e/" made a welcome addition to my uBlock filters...

  • by RonVNX ( 55322 ) on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @11:45AM (#50152957)

    Apparently he can't afford to purchase decent email service. Maybe someday he'll create something important and then he can get off the crap freemail.

    • Maybe someday he'll create something important and then he can get off the crap freemail.

      Yup. Given his past success with both Linux kernel and with GIT distributed source management, I too think that out of anyone Linus Torvalds might be the only guy able to effectively solve the SPAM problem.

      • He did. But nobody could every remember the name of the command.

        • by DrYak ( 748999 )

          But nobody could every remember the name of the command.

          And the Gnome guys promised to make a userfriendly GUI to help against that.
          But they are still arguing about how to make it follow HIG, and how to adapt to the upcoming GTK4.

  • Every sane spam filter returns three possible results:

    1. 1. Most likely ham
    2. 2. Most likely spam
    3. 3. Needs learning

    When you have three categories it will reduce the FP rate very hugely. And the most important fact is that a spam filter should never throw away spam. It can be illegal to do so, or at some time it is going to be illegal. You should keep all your spam for documentation, for this reason. Also, you can initialize (learn) your filters very quickly when migrating the system. Spam is a valuable resou

    • by pem ( 1013437 ) on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @11:55AM (#50153049)

      at some time it is going to be illegal [to throw away spam]

      WTF are you smoking, and can I haz some?

      No amendment, not even the first, makes it illegal for me to throw away shit that people decide to send to me.

      Spam is a valuable resource.

      Pigshit is a valuable resource. Spam is spam. The fact that you can look for similarities in it in order to trash more of it doesn't make it a valuable resource.

      • No amendment, not even the first, makes it illegal for me to throw away shit that people decide to send to me.

        No, but if your ISP incorrectly classifies a job offer sent to you as spam, and summarily deletes it, you're probably going to sue them.

        • If the sender's server does not conform to IETF standards, then there can pretty much never be a justification to force a server to accept email. Greylisting is a powerful tool that prevents enormous volumes of spam from ever being received by a server, and uses IETF standards to enforce this policy. Yahoo! strictly follows DMARC p=reject policies and also has sort-of greylist feature that verifies ports are open for inbound traffic on sending servers (I don't fully understand this, but they are one of the
          • As a follow-up, I just found a message refused by Gmail (sent via Mailgun through public list alias):

            "message": "552 5.7.0 This message was blocked because its content presents a potential\n5.7.0 security issue. Please visit\n5.7.0 https://support.google.com/mai... [google.com] to review our message\n5.7.0 content and attachment content guidelines. k3si2092734igx.18 - gsmtp",

          • And again, there's a difference between your ISP's mail server issuing an SMTP refusal code, which presumably would then result in a non-delivery message going back to the original sender, and your ISP's mail server accepting the message and deleting it, without informing either a) the sender, or b) the recipient.
            • by pem ( 1013437 )
              Depending on the operation of the service, it might be appropriate to analyze the message while the sender is connected and reject it immediately, or it might be appropriate to accept the message and analyze it later. If it is analyzed later and found to be spam, then (a) there is no need to deliver it to the user if the determination is conclusive enough; and (b) it should not be returned to the putative source.

              This is not rocket science, but too many people running mail servers don't understand the bac

              • And in this case, it should be marked as spam, and either a) held by the ISP for some period of time, per the ToS that the user agreed to, or b) delivered to the user, marked as spam, for them to do with as they see fit.

                The ONLY situation that anybody here has described that MUST NOT HAPPEN is this chain of three steps:
                1) Recipient's ISP SMTP server accepts a message
                2) Recipient's ISP SMTP server decides the message is spam
                3) Recipient's ISP SMTP server deletes the message with no notification to anybody

                The

                • by pem ( 1013437 )

                  There have, in fact, been lawsuits over [ISP deleting spam with no notification, even if its TOS says it will sometimes do that]

                  Citation needed. Seriously. I looked. And even if there was a suit, did the idiot win?

                  • Well, here's one along those lines: on Slashdot no less [slashdot.org]
                    • by pem ( 1013437 )
                      Apparently, the bulk of her case rested on unclear terms of service -- e.g. basically a contract dispute. (Well, that plus "misusing" her personal information, but as far as I can tell, the misuse was not handing stuff over to her.)

                      She settled out-of-court for an undisclosed amount (she probably didn't have to pay them for all the defamation she threw their way), and life goes on.

                      One case of unknown outcome 13 years ago in an area that would seem, on the surface, to be ripe for litigation, doesn't seem

                    • For example, there's nothing on wikipedia's email page or "online service provider law" pages about this, so, no, I'm still not convinced it would be a huge deal to tell people that you're dumping spam, and then dump spam.

                      That would be fine. Again, it's the 'accept, then silently delete' that's the problem.

  • Already resovled (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward

    You can tell this is old news given that it was this past weekend the Linus posted an update on Google Plus stating that false positive rates were back down to normal for him.

    https://plus.google.com/+LinusTorvalds/posts/dJdkRxUCRmK

  • That's what you get for unleashing your half-baked Git solution on the world. I've used it every day for two years and it is just a horrid mess. How many times I've had to do a "reset --hard" because a branch just shits itself for no good reason.

    And what if I want to bring up two separate branches side-by-side to do some copying? Can't fucking do it in Git.

    Linus, bless you for Linux. But curse you for Git. Git is Shit.

    • you must be the only one, i've not seen anyone else complain about git in that fashion - did you email your bug report to Linus (or did it get put in the spam folder by google)?
      • Oh come now. I quite like git (it's my go-to choice these days for everything---Darcs, I hardly knew ye) and I have occasionally had to reset--hard after fucking something up. I've found fuckups a little easier than I'd prefer.

        Besides generalised strostrup is right: there are two kinds of tools, those people complain about and those people use. I would therefore expect many complaints about git.

        (and many are not unjustified either)

    • And what if I want to bring up two separate branches side-by-side to do some copying? Can't fucking do it in Git.

      For side by side comparisions you can always just do a lightweight clone which pretty much should happen automatically if you clone to another directory within the same filesystem, i.e.
      git clone -b branch orig_repo branch_repo

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Git as source control = shit
      Git as a tool for Linus to merge kernel patch sets = amazing.

      Git is fantastic at what it was designed for.

      • by KlomDark ( 6370 )

        I totally agree. Git is way too focused on the repository maintainer than the day to day developer that just wants to check in code and not deal with the esoterica of the source control system. Even with Sourcetree it's just weird.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @12:01PM (#50153119)

    He posted about it in G+, a googler noticed and offered to look into it. One day later The Register is feeding off the echoes and the story is slashdotted.

    "Much better now.

    Of the 100+ messages caught as spam over-night, only two were false positives (and I reported them). My email is getting back to normal."

    https://plus.google.com/+LinusTorvalds/posts/dJdkRxUCRmK

  • Already Solved (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @12:03PM (#50153127)

    On the next day, Linus wrote "My email is getting back to normal."
    https://plus.google.com/+LinusTorvalds/posts/dJdkRxUCRmK

  • I'm sure NSA has a copy. All you need is to fill out a FIOA request and interrogate Michael Hayden until he admits it

  • by hymie! ( 95907 ) on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @12:28PM (#50153327)

    Somebody should tell Linus about this great new operating system I run at home. I have sendmail running on my machine, and it lets me control my spam filters and everything.

    It's called "Linux". I highly recommend it.

  • domain issues (Score:5, Interesting)

    by v(*_*)vvvv ( 233078 ) on Tuesday July 21, 2015 @12:53PM (#50153531)

    From his original post, there is a clear date he claims the FP rate to have gone up... so this isn't a blanket Gmail FP rate issue, but rather a Gmail or spam blacklist incident, which is quite different from what the summary would suggest. As of right now:
    http://mxtoolbox.com/SuperTool.aspx?action=blacklist%3aLKML.ORG&run=toolpage

    lkml.org Added to UCEPROTECTL2

    Uceprotectl2 Automatically Delists Entries

    This blacklist does not offer any form of manual request to delist. Your IP Address will either automatically expire from listing after a given timeframe, or after time expires from the last receipt of spam into their spamtraps from your IP Address.

    Uceprotectl2 Accepts Payments Or Donations

    This blacklist does support a manual request to remove, delist, or expedite your IP Address from their database upon Payment or Donation of fees to their organization. Please note the following; 1) MxToolBox does not in any way advocate the paying of removal from any blacklists. 2) Removal requests that are submitted without addressing the core problem will likely result in your IP Address being relisted in the database which can cause subsequent problems and extended listing periods without release.

    More information about UCEPROTECTL2 can be found at their website: http://www.uceprotect.net/ [uceprotect.net]

    Reason for listing - Net 146.185.176.0/21 is UCEPROTECT-Level2 listed because 36 abusers are hosted by RCN-ASN - Reality Check Network Corp./AS46652 there. See: http://www.uceprotect.net/rblc... [uceprotect.net]

    UCEPROTECTL2 seems a bit shady, but I am not blacklist expert.

    Also as a side note, any spam filter that attempts context evaluation has a tendency to mark emails with code or special character formatting as spam. Even emails with links. So for someone like Linus to have a higher blanket spam FP rate is also not surprising.

    The best gmail feature is the "never treat as spam" filter.

    • First up lkml.org [lkml.org] is a third party site that hosts Linux kernel mailing list archives on a website. Regular Linux kernel mail isn't actually sent from it (I believe that's done by vger [kernel.org]) so we're looking up the email reputation for the wrong IP...

      Secondly UCEPROTECT is a very aggressive blacklist which states upfront they will block people who they believe are in the vicinity of people who the judge to be sending them spam. It's not the be and end all though and on one server I looked some time ago it's effe

  • I just checked my spam folder again. I reserved a U-Haul, and the email confirming that reservation went to spam. One of the few false positives I get, but there are others.

    What's interesting is all the political fund-raising emails. Only the conservative ones end up in Spam (Campaign for Liberty, Conservative Senate committee, Scott Walker, Rand Paul, Jeb Bush, Mark Mix, etc.). That's fine - I don't really want to see those emails anyway. Yet, I get lots of the same emails from Hillary Clinton, Obama,

  • Almost half of the messages in my spam folder are not spam. Basically, any message not originating in their big five/four "cloud" complex is automatically treated as spam, even with freshly allocated and clearly marked as non-dynamic/non-residential IP space.

    Moreover, any time I access gmail via ipv6 (I have dual-stack) my messages are marked as spam and I receive terrible warnings about someone else trying to break into my e-mail, and that despite using the same system and browser and the IPv6 whois reco

  • I have the same experience. For many months now, Gmail has been overzealous in marking stuff as spam. Stuff like daily emails from servers I manage with log digests. Emails about pending security package upgrades. Even when I specifically say that a certain subject string (e.g. "logwatch") is to be excluded, Gmail ignores that rule. It has been very frustrating trying to exclude stuff via filters in Gmail.

  • automatically reject email failing its SPF or DKIM checks. If it's forged, by definition it's spam.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    What is probably causing Linus's problem is the open subscription nature of the LKML. I'm guessing that a lot of people are subscribing, then flagging messages as spam rather than deleting them. Once a certain threshold is hit, that and similar messages are then flagged as spam.

  • Was helping a guy having trouble posting to our LUG list the other day.

    He had DSN's being delivered to his GMail spam folder. I thought, "golly, how does Gmail figure those could be spam?" Nobody is going to sneak a Viagra ad through underneath a 550 report.

    Of course his other problem was he was using Comcast as an outbound relay. Their new relay retries a message once every second five times and then gives up forever. Totally breaks greylisting, or even temporary outages. Didn't even try my backup MX.

"I'm growing older, but not up." -- Jimmy Buffett

Working...