Re: [Standards] Time to look at anti-spam XEPs? [Fwd: Re: [Operators] Strange users]
On 13.10.2011 00:44, Kim Alvefur wrote: Forwarded Message From: Mathias Ertlm...@fsinf.at Reply-to: XMPP Operators Groupoperat...@xmpp.org To: operat...@xmpp.org Subject: Re: [Operators] Strange users Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:51:23 +0200 [...] To make a long story short: I think we have a significant spamming problem on jabber. So, is it time to bring up the various anti-spam/abuse related XEPs? You're not the first telling this. And all those XEPs are deferred now :) -- Regards, Evgeniy Khramtsov, ProcessOne. xmpp:x...@jabber.ru.
Re: [Standards] Time to look at anti-spam XEPs? [Fwd: Re: [Operators] Strange users]
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Evgeniy Khramtsov xramt...@gmail.com wrote: On 13.10.2011 00:44, Kim Alvefur wrote: Forwarded Message From: Mathias Ertlm...@fsinf.at Reply-to: XMPP Operators Groupoperat...@xmpp.org To: operat...@xmpp.org Subject: Re: [Operators] Strange users Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:51:23 +0200 [...] To make a long story short: I think we have a significant spamming problem on jabber. So, is it time to bring up the various anti-spam/abuse related XEPs? You're not the first telling this. And all those XEPs are deferred now :) Deferred just means the authors haven't been updating or attempting to advance them - nothing more and nothing less. /K
Re: [Standards] Time to look at anti-spam XEPs? [Fwd: Re: [Operators] Strange users]
On 12 October 2011 15:44, Kim Alvefur z...@zash.se wrote: Forwarded Message From: Mathias Ertl m...@fsinf.at Reply-to: XMPP Operators Group operat...@xmpp.org To: operat...@xmpp.org Subject: Re: [Operators] Strange users Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:51:23 +0200 [...] To make a long story short: I think we have a significant spamming problem on jabber. So, is it time to bring up the various anti-spam/abuse related XEPs? No, it's not. XEPs are words, not action. The best way to properly revive the XEPs and ensure they'll stay revived is to implement them. I have some code for reporting already - if you're interested in working on it then I can find it for you... Regards, Matthew
Re: [Standards] Time to look at anti-spam XEPs? [Fwd: Re: [Operators] Strange users]
On 10/12/2011 8:29 AM, Matthew Wild wrote: On 12 October 2011 15:44, Kim Alvefurz...@zash.se wrote: Forwarded Message From: Mathias Ertlm...@fsinf.at Reply-to: XMPP Operators Groupoperat...@xmpp.org To: operat...@xmpp.org Subject: Re: [Operators] Strange users Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:51:23 +0200 [...] To make a long story short: I think we have a significant spamming problem on jabber. So, is it time to bring up the various anti-spam/abuse related XEPs? No, it's not. XEPs are words, not action. The best way to properly revive the XEPs and ensure they'll stay revived is to implement them. I have some code for reporting already - if you're interested in working on it then I can find it for you... Regards, Matthew Agreed, I haven't looked at the XEPs for anti-spam, but if you determine that a user is a spammer, then just reject their login. If you determine that a message stanza is SPIM, just block it. I don't think we can cut a deal with the spammers to stop what they're doing until the community can converge on an anti-spam XEP. With spim, spam, and abuse, a lot of times the difficult part is to identify the bad user or the bad stanza without accidentally denying service to legitimate users. An XEP is more useful for telling you what the standard procedure is for dealing with spam than telling you how to identify spam. Mike
