Re: Expanding shortened URLs (was Re: The "goo.gl" shortner is OUT OF CONTROL (+ invaluement's response))

2018-02-21 Thread Rob McEwen
On 2/21/2018 11:44 AM, Dianne Skoll wrote: On Wed, 21 Feb 2018 16:35:27 + Karol Augustin wrote: I think the point here might be that if Google acted promptly on abuse spammers would stop using shorteners. True, that might happen. OTOH, I see about as many spams with

Re: Expanding shortened URLs (was Re: The "goo.gl" shortner is OUT OF CONTROL (+ invaluement's response))

2018-02-21 Thread Dianne Skoll
On Wed, 21 Feb 2018 16:35:27 + Karol Augustin wrote: > I think the point here might be that if Google acted promptly on abuse > spammers would stop using shorteners. True, that might happen. OTOH, I see about as many spams with bit.ly shorteners as goo.gl shorteners

Re: Expanding shortened URLs (was Re: The "goo.gl" shortner is OUT OF CONTROL (+ invaluement's response))

2018-02-21 Thread Karol Augustin
On 2018-02-21 16:31, Dianne Skoll wrote: > On Wed, 21 Feb 2018 11:29:00 -0500 > Rob McEwen wrote: > >> Nevertheless, it is a shame to have to shift more of the burden onto >> spam filters to do more work (some of which requires MORE latency) - >> in order to partly mitigate

Re: Expanding shortened URLs (was Re: The "goo.gl" shortner is OUT OF CONTROL (+ invaluement's response))

2018-02-21 Thread Dianne Skoll
On Wed, 21 Feb 2018 11:29:00 -0500 Rob McEwen wrote: > Nevertheless, it is a shame to have to shift more of the burden onto > spam filters to do more work (some of which requires MORE latency) - > in order to partly mitigate Google's failure to prevent/correct the > abuse.

Re: Expanding shortened URLs (was Re: The "goo.gl" shortner is OUT OF CONTROL (+ invaluement's response))

2018-02-21 Thread Rob McEwen
On 2/21/2018 11:11 AM, Dianne Skoll wrote: I guess I misinterpreted: "...such automated lookups could also put a huge extra burden on Google's servers..." from Message-Id Oh yeah, I'd forgotten about that part. it was a more minor point.

Re: Expanding shortened URLs (was Re: The "goo.gl" shortner is OUT OF CONTROL (+ invaluement's response))

2018-02-21 Thread Dianne Skoll
On Wed, 21 Feb 2018 10:58:17 -0500 Rob McEwen wrote: > On 2/21/2018 10:37 AM, Dianne Skoll wrote: > > The concern voiced in another email about overloading Google's > > infrastructure is quite charming and quaint. > My concern was NEVER about overloading google. I guess

Re: Expanding shortened URLs (was Re: The "goo.gl" shortner is OUT OF CONTROL (+ invaluement's response))

2018-02-21 Thread Rob McEwen
On 2/21/2018 10:37 AM, Dianne Skoll wrote: The concern voiced in another email about overloading Google's infrastructure is quite charming and quaint. My concern was NEVER about overloading google. My concern was about Google auto-blocking or throwing a captcha at very high volume and

Re: Expanding shortened URLs (was Re: The "goo.gl" shortner is OUT OF CONTROL (+ invaluement's response))

2018-02-21 Thread Benny Pedersen
Dianne Skoll skrev den 2018-02-21 16:37: We do a HEAD request and it works on most URL shorteners. The concern voiced in another email about overloading Google's infrastructure is quite charming and quaint. +1 some with icla could add this to spamasssassin with

Expanding shortened URLs (was Re: The "goo.gl" shortner is OUT OF CONTROL (+ invaluement's response))

2018-02-21 Thread Dianne Skoll
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 23:38:53 -0700 "@lbutlr" wrote: > As I suspected, it is possible to get the goo.gl target URL without > loading the site, though using curl is probably not realistic in this > specific case. We do a HEAD request and it works on most URL shorteners. The