Discussion:
[HELP!] Shakespeare geeks have problems on our open forum....
(too old to reply)
Conrad
2008-08-09 15:31:14 UTC
Permalink
Hey, guys -

Over the past year or more, we've had a spammer on our group.

He's an ideological spammer:

There's a disputed area of Shakespeare research, called the authorship
question -- some people believe William Shakespeare did not actually
write the plays, which scholarly researchers (at universities, with
tenure) largely rule out of court, kind-of like the way biologists
rule creationism out of court.

So, they organize on the web, and on the usenet: and those who (like
myself) disagree with them mostly do it in an occasionally heated way,
but still in the form of a conversation.

The spammer, "Agent Jim," though, has a brief blurb with a few links
to his websites. He claims to have disproven the authorship
challengers once and for all (which is fine), but he keeps reposting
this blurb. Over the past year it's gotten really bad.

We have a couple of arguments for it being spam:

1. It's the exact same post; he only changes his name (sometimes
adopting names similar to people he dislikes in the group).

2. He has recently explained in a related, moderated forum that he
does it to break up discourse on the unmoderated site. (A few days
later the moderators of that forum bounced him for bad behavior.)

3. On a surveymonkey survey recently, posted over a few days on the
group, 100% of respondants said it was spam.


We're lit geeks, and don't know how to do the math spam index thing.

We'd *really* like to be able to talk about Shakespeare again...


Conrad.

ps - Some are pretty skeptical about moderating the group, since
people on the two sides of the debate consider one another biased
(with some justification). The spammer uses anonymous remailers: is
there anything we can do about this?

C.
Conrad
2008-08-09 15:48:32 UTC
Permalink
BTW, group I'm talking about is:

humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare

And the vast majority of us are using the Google Groups interface:

http://groups.google.com/group/humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare/topics

An example of the message can be found here:

http://groups.google.com/group/humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare/browse_thr
ead/thread/5e8df0465650dfa9/abda22cb7e84f167

--part of the trouble in this is that he uses pretty long subject
lines, posting to multiple threads at a time, forcing you to scroll
down to find substantial stuff. Also, he'll rename other people's
threads, concealing them with his spam.

Sometimes you'll see people post to his threads, changing the subject
lines.

An example message:

Re: Why Shakespeare Was Not Oxford (or Anyone Else Other than William
Shakespeare of Stratford Upon Avon)
us
http://tinyurl.com/2q7hd9
see also
www.shakespeareauthorship.com
See my demolition of Monsarrat's RES
paper!http://hometown.aol.com/kqknave/monsarr1.html
The Droeshout portrait is not unusual at
all!http://hometown.aol.com/kqknave/shakenbake.html
Agent Jim
We just don't know how to handle this kind of thing.


Conrad.
Xavier Roche
2008-08-09 16:10:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Conrad
humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare
Humm. The Breidbart Index is >>100 in the last few weeks.
Which makes any cleaning worthless: this interface is just not suitable,
because no spam is being filtered. No filter, no NoCeM notices accepted..
Post by Conrad
Sometimes you'll see people post to his threads, changing the subject
lines
The spammer is using different addresses and providers (open proxies ?)
and anonymous servers (dizum and friends), probably to prevent any
killfiling.
Post by Conrad
We just don't know how to handle this kind of thing.
Some messages are now announced in news.lists.filters -- but this will
not help people using gg groups, unfortunately.

Your only chance is to switch to a better news server, with correct
filters, such as albasani, glorb, aioe ..
Julien ÉLIE
2008-08-09 18:28:14 UTC
Permalink
Hi Xavier,
Post by Xavier Roche
Post by Conrad
humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare
Humm. The Breidbart Index is >>100 in the last few weeks.
[...]
Post by Xavier Roche
Some messages are now announced in news.lists.filters -- but this will
not help people using gg groups, unfortunately.
Why hadn't they been seen before?
--
Julien ÉLIE

« Le travail, c'est le refuge des gens qui n'ont rien
de mieux à faire. » (Oscar Wilde)
Xavier Roche
2008-08-09 20:55:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Julien ÉLIE
Post by Xavier Roche
Some messages are now announced in news.lists.filters -- but this will
not help people using gg groups, unfortunately.
Why hadn't they been seen before?
Well, recurrent spams posted in one single groups are hard to spot, I
presume. Especially when the sender/subject is randomized by a spambot.

But I'm still speechless to see people that are actually using GG
groups, full of spam/junk, with its crappy web interface.

Is it really so hard to install a decent newsreader and configure it
nowadays ?
Julien ÉLIE
2008-08-09 21:27:51 UTC
Permalink
Hi Xavier,
But I'm still speechless to see people that are actually using GG groups,
full of spam/junk, with its crappy web interface.
Is it really so hard to install a decent newsreader and configure it
nowadays ?
Maybe the major part of those who are using Google Groups do not know
what Usenet is, what a newsreader is and also what a news server is
(and where to find a good news server).
--
Julien ÉLIE

« Passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real
information available. » (Benford's law)
Conrad
2008-08-09 21:36:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Julien ÉLIE
Post by Xavier Roche
Is it really so hard to install a decent newsreader and configure it
nowadays ?
Maybe the major part of those who are using Google Groups do not know
what Usenet is, what a newsreader is and also what a news server is
(and where to find a good news server).
If you can point us to a good news server/reader, I'm sure some of us
would be interested.

However, there are some of us who use a lot of different computers; or
public computers; or so forth; or are simply not technically inclined;
and so a web-based solution is desirable.


Conrad.
Xavier Roche
2008-08-09 21:50:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Conrad
If you can point us to a good news server/reader, I'm sure some of us
would be interested.
http://www.albasani.net
http://www.glorb.com
news://news.aioe.org
http://individual.net
http://news.motzarella.org
http://news.datemas.de

Many of them with filters, and some of them being free.
Post by Conrad
However, there are some of us who use a lot of different computers; or
public computers; or so forth; or are simply not technically inclined;
and so a web-based solution is desirable.
Humm, unfortunately, I don't know any decent web-based solution..

Anyone ?
Kathy Morgan
2008-08-11 05:08:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Xavier Roche
Humm, unfortunately, I don't know any decent web-based solution..
http://www.NewsReader.com has an excellent web news reader. NNTP access
is available from NewsReader.com, but he also has a server-based,
GNKSA-compliant newsreader.
--
Kathy
Frank Slootweg
2008-08-10 09:36:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Conrad
Post by Julien ÉLIE
Post by Xavier Roche
Is it really so hard to install a decent newsreader and configure it
nowadays ?
Maybe the major part of those who are using Google Groups do not know
what Usenet is, what a newsreader is and also what a news server is
(and where to find a good news server).
If you can point us to a good news server/reader, I'm sure some of us
would be interested.
Others have already given pointers for the News server part. For the
newsreader part: Most people will probably use (MS-)Windows which
already has a bundled newsreader, Outlook Express or - on Windows Vista
- its replacement, Windows Mail.

My advice is to *start* with that. They probably already use OE/WM for
email, so they're used to the user interface. The other main advantages
are that they do not have to download and install any software, and that
- dependent on the News server - configuration can be as simple as
executing a single URL.

Once they know how to use a newsreader, they can switch to a 'better'
one like Xnews, etc..
Post by Conrad
However, there are some of us who use a lot of different computers;
That can often be accomodated by running the newsreader from an USB
memory stick or from a memory card.
Post by Conrad
or public computers; or so forth;
That will be problem if they do not allow to run software from a
memory stick or memory card.
Post by Conrad
or are simply not technically inclined;
and so a web-based solution is desirable.
There are some providers which provide web-based access to newsgroups.
NewsReader.Com (<http://www.newsreader.com>) is one such provider. AFAIK
there are a few others, but I don't have any pointers for them.

I hope this helps.
Conrad
2008-08-12 14:07:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Conrad
Post by Julien ÉLIE
Post by Xavier Roche
Is it really so hard to install a decent newsreader and configure it
nowadays ?
Maybe the major part of those who are using Google Groups do not know
what Usenet is, what a newsreader is and also what a news server is
(and where to find a good news server).
If you can point us to a good news server/reader, I'm sure some of us
would be interested.
  Others have already given pointers for the News server part. For the
newsreader part: Most people will probably use (MS-)Windows which
already has a bundled newsreader, Outlook Express or - on Windows Vista
- its replacement, Windows Mail.
Yeah, I've looked into the stats, and the top 3 user environments are
Windows XP, Vista, and 2003.

The fourth, though, is Mac OS X. Does OS X have any equivalent built-
in software, or can someone provide me with a link to a Mac solution?

I'd like to be able to do this all at once, rather than piecemeal over
a period of weeks.

After Unknown, there's also Win 2000, Linux (who I suppose to be uber-
geeks who can work this out themselves, if they haven't already) and
PPC, which I don't even know what it is. So I think with a Mac
solution I'll have something to offer just about everyone.
  My advice is to *start* with that. They probably already use OE/WM for
email, so they're used to the user interface. The other main advantages
are that they do not have to download and install any software, and that
- dependent on the News server - configuration can be as simple as
executing a single URL.
  Once they know how to use a newsreader, they can switch to a 'better'
one like Xnews, etc..
Post by Conrad
However, there are some of us who use a lot of different computers;
  That can often be accomodated by running the newsreader from an USB
memory stick or from a memory card.
Post by Conrad
or public computers; or so forth;
  That will be problem if they do not allow to run software from a
memory stick or memory card.
Ok. It may be that, if we can get most of the traffic off Google
Groups, and thus away from the spammer, he'll loose heart and wander
off.

(Or not.)
  There are some providers which provide web-based access to
newsgroups. NewsReader.Com (<http://www.newsreader.com>)
is one such provider. AFAIK
there are a few others, but I don't have any pointers for them.
Yeah, I should've mentioned I'm looking for a free solution. Telling
people that to protect themselves from this spammer will cost them $10/
month I don't think will go over very big. (Although I'm sure it's a
fine service; looks pretty slick.)


Conrad.
Kathy Morgan
2008-08-13 05:26:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Conrad
The fourth, though, is Mac OS X. Does OS X have any equivalent built-
in software, or can someone provide me with a link to a Mac solution? [...]
After Unknown, there's also Win 2000, Linux (who I suppose to be uber-
geeks who can work this out themselves, if they haven't already) and
PPC, which I don't even know what it is. So I think with a Mac
solution I'll have something to offer just about everyone.
A PPC is an older Mac. Mac OS doesn't come with a built-in newsreader,
but there are several excellent Mac newsreaders available free or cheap.
I use MacSOUP, which is an offline reader, shareware, $20. For online
readers, MT-Newswatcher is free and good. There are quite a few others
as well that I'm less familiar with. There are links and information at
<http://www.newsreaders.com/mac/clients.html>.
--
Kathy
Marc Bissonnette
2008-08-10 15:36:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Julien ÉLIE
Hi Xavier,
Post by Xavier Roche
But I'm still speechless to see people that are actually using GG
groups, full of spam/junk, with its crappy web interface.
Is it really so hard to install a decent newsreader and configure it
nowadays ?
Maybe the major part of those who are using Google Groups do not know
what Usenet is, what a newsreader is and also what a news server is
(and where to find a good news server).
Indeed - There was a short-term spammer in alt.support.cancer that
absolutely *insisted* that anything she disagreed with should be banned,
because it violated the TOS of the *website* www.google.com

No matter how fiercely she was beaten with a clue-stick, she absolutely
could not fathom the idea that Usenet was a completely separate entity from
the web.

She was proof of a genetic deviation in human evolution for clue-
resistance.
--
Marc Bissonnette
Looking for a new ISP? http://www.canadianisp.com
Largest ISP comparison site across Canada.
Something to sell ? http://www.pennypinchernewspaper.com
Seth
2008-08-12 21:10:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Conrad
ps - Some are pretty skeptical about moderating the group, since
people on the two sides of the debate consider one another biased
(with some justification).
Set up moderation to go to two people on each side, such that all
messages get sent to all moderators, and any moderator can approve a
message.

Or set up a moderation-bot that approves all messages unless they
contain a particular string (like the spammer's website).

Seth
Conrad
2008-08-14 14:13:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Seth
Or set up a moderation-bot that approves all messages unless they
contain a particular string (like the spammer's website).
Seth,

Is that possible? How do we do that?

And, thanks, Kathy, Frank, Julien, and Xavier, for the help and
direction; thanks, Marc, for the story; and thanks to those who wrote
me off-list.

We're trying to get people set up with filtering, and the news of your
cancel-bots was met with considerable fanfare (considering how badly
the group is now being spammed, as we start talking about
countermeasures, it's remarkable anybody is reading it).

Also we're complaining to his remailers, which I have doubts as to the
efficacy of; but I suppose you can't not pursue that.


Conrad.
Josh Hayes
2008-08-14 17:30:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Conrad
Post by Seth
Or set up a moderation-bot that approves all messages unless they
contain a particular string (like the spammer's website).
Seth,
Is that possible? How do we do that?
The moderator of talk.origins uses a robomod scheme using procmail and it's
VERY effective at despamming the group. I think I have a copy of his
procmail script lying around somewhere, or email me and I'll give you his
contact info off-list.

-Josh Hayes, moderator, sci.bio.evolution
Seth
2008-08-15 14:09:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Conrad
Post by Seth
Or set up a moderation-bot that approves all messages unless they
contain a particular string (like the spammer's website).
Is that possible? How do we do that?
soc.singles.moderated has a similar policy: robomoderated (but there,
the bot has a list of approved posters and a trivial way for anyone
else to add themselves to the list).

Seth
Conrad
2008-08-17 13:30:38 UTC
Permalink
Folks, a lot of us have moved over to newsreaders, and it's very
effective -- but, now the spammer has taken it up a notch.

He's successfully forging posts from hlas members: that is, it's
apparently indistinguishable (unless you look at the header details)
from a post from the user -- such as me. Also, he's doing this to
members-only groups.

Real winner.

How do we contend with this?

Would a robomoderator help here too? I imagine if he can pretend to
be one of us, he'd fool the moderator algorithm, too.

This is the header that pretends to be from me -- on a closed Google
Group.


Conrad.

Received: by 10.215.101.2 with SMTP id d2mr6570085qam.
29.1218933509112;
Sat, 16 Aug 2008 17:38:29 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <***@pseudo.borked.net>
Received: from pseudo.borked.net (pseudo.borked.net [71.33.249.115])
by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 22si11099490yxr.
1.2008.08.16.17.38.28;
Sat, 16 Aug 2008 17:38:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of
***@pseudo.borked.net designates 71.33.249.115 as permitted
sender) client-ip=71.33.249.115;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best
guess record for domain of ***@pseudo.borked.net designates
71.33.249.115 as permitted sender)
smtp.mail=***@pseudo.borked.net
Received: by pseudo.borked.net (Postfix, from userid 1001)
id 185CEE766C; Sat, 16 Aug 2008 18:38:32 -0600 (MDT)
Sender: Borked Pseudo Mailed <***@pseudo.borked.net>
Comments: This message did not originate from the Sender address
above.
It was remailed automatically by anonymizing remailer software.
Please report problems or inappropriate use to the
remailer administrator at <***@pseudo.borked.net>.
To: "Forest of Arden" <***@googlegroups.com>
From: Conrad <***@gmail.com>
Subject: BarBERini elected Pope URbANViii
Message-ID: <***@pseudo.borked.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 18:38:32 -0600 (MDT)
Xavier Roche
2008-08-17 14:10:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Conrad
This is the header that pretends to be from me -- on a closed Google
Group.
And therefore, this is beyond the scope of this group - gg groups are
not usenet groups, but a totally different realm.

Using regular usenet groups, using a filtered server, is probably the
only sane solution.
Conrad
2008-08-17 14:24:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Xavier Roche
And therefore, this is beyond the scope of this group - gg groups are
not usenet groups, but a totally different realm.
Does that mean that a standard usenet group will reject a remailer-
forged email of the kind he used there?
Post by Xavier Roche
Using regular usenet groups, using a filtered server, is probably the
only sane solution.
Thanks.

To switch a usenet newsgroup to robomoderation, does one appeal to the
same crowd as to found a usenet newsgroup?


Conrad.
Rob Kelk
2008-08-17 14:51:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Conrad
Post by Xavier Roche
And therefore, this is beyond the scope of this group - gg groups
are not usenet groups, but a totally different realm.
Does that mean that a standard usenet group will reject a remailer-
forged email of the kind he used there?
That depends on how moderation is set up for the group.

Human moderation will catch this sort of thing to the abiities of the
moderators. Robomoderation can be set up to reject posts claiming to
be from known people but not posted from those people's usual news
service providers. (That doesn't help if you and the forger use the
same NSP, such as Google Groups, though.)

It's physically possible that either type of moderation can be set up
to send an e-mail to the address that the poster claims is his own, and
not post the message until a confirrmation e-mail comes back. HOWEVER,
this means (a) everyone has to use their real e-mail addresses in the
group, and (b) a forger can mailbomb someone by posting hundreds of
posts with the othr person's e-mail address. For both those reasons, I
do not recommend using an "e-mail confirmation" system.

If the group isn't moderated, there's no protection at all from this
sort of thing.
Post by Conrad
Post by Xavier Roche
Using regular usenet groups, using a filtered server, is probably
the only sane solution.
Thanks.
To switch a usenet newsgroup to robomoderation, does one appeal to the
same crowd as to found a usenet newsgroup?
Yes - news.groups.proposals has regular posts with the contact info,
and I believe news.groups does too.
Post by Conrad
Conrad.
- --
Rob Kelk Personal address (ROT-13): eboxryx -ng- tznvy -qbg- pbz
Any opinions here are mine, not ONAG's.
ott.* newsgroup charters: <http://onag.pinetree.org>
Kathy Morgan
2008-08-18 04:21:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob Kelk
Post by Conrad
To switch a usenet newsgroup to robomoderation, does one appeal to the
same crowd as to found a usenet newsgroup?
Yes - news.groups.proposals has regular posts with the contact info,
and I believe news.groups does too.
Moderating a group in place is not likely to be a good solution because
of the problems involved in getting all enough news servers to change
the status. Having some servers carrying the group as moderated and
some as unmoderated seriously fractures the discussion and causes all
manner of extra headaches.

It's possible that the Big 8 Management Board would approve a request to
moderate the existing group in place, but I think it's highly
unlikely--certainly I would compaign (and vote) against it because of
the problems.

However, if enough of the regulars in the group do wish to have a
moderated group, and you have someone who is willing to provide
robomoderation or a person (or preferably a team) willing to do hands-on
moderation, you can request a new moderated group on the subject.

Details of how to request a Big 8 group are at
<http://www.big-8.org/dokuwiki/doku.php>.
--
Kathy, member of Big 8 Management Board but speaking only for myself
axlq
2008-08-19 21:23:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kathy Morgan
Moderating a group in place is not likely to be a good solution because
of the problems involved in getting all enough news servers to change
the status.
It wasn't a problem before, such as when talk.origins got robomoderated,
so why should it be a problem now?

-A
Tim Skirvin
2008-08-20 05:14:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by axlq
Post by Kathy Morgan
Moderating a group in place is not likely to be a good solution because
of the problems involved in getting all enough news servers to change
the status.
It wasn't a problem before, such as when talk.origins got robomoderated,
so why should it be a problem now?
Things have changed a lot over the last decade or so. Trying to
moderate the group in place would more than likely be unsuccessful on a
large number of the remaining news servers of the world, to the extent
that trying to do so would be practically impossible; and so those in
charge of making those decisions (hi, Kathy!) have decided to not pursue
that path.

That said, creating a new parallel group would probably be not
that hard in this case, and I could probably offer some tips and/or
software. The hard part would be finding the moderator.

- Tim Skirvin (***@big-8.org)
--
http://www.big-8.org/ Big-8 Management Board
http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage <FISH>< <*>
Conrad
2008-08-21 12:44:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kathy Morgan
Moderating a group in place is not likely to be a good solution because
of the problems involved in getting all enough news servers to change
the status.  Having some servers carrying the group as moderated and
some as unmoderated seriously fractures the discussion and causes all
manner of extra headaches.
I understand there may be practical or aesthetic matters on the
technical end: but practically speaking, the discussion on our
Shakespeare forum can hardly become more fractured. (Have you stopped
in lately?)

It takes, I'd say, about two weeks to have a decent discussion about
things Shakespearean -- sometimes months. In the past, those
discussions happened on hlas. Now, coversations last 2-4 days.


Conrad.
Xavier Roche
2008-08-21 12:50:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Conrad
I understand there may be practical or aesthetic matters on the
technical end: but practically speaking, the discussion on our
Shakespeare forum can hardly become more fractured. (Have you stopped
in lately?)
One more time, a solution is to use filtered servers. The spam posted in
hlas is currently targeted by NoCeM notices as it exploded Breidbard Index.
Seth
2008-08-17 21:14:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Conrad
Folks, a lot of us have moved over to newsreaders, and it's very
effective -- but, now the spammer has taken it up a notch.
He's successfully forging posts from hlas members: that is, it's
apparently indistinguishable (unless you look at the header details)
from a post from the user -- such as me. Also, he's doing this to
members-only groups.
Real winner.
How do we contend with this?
Would a robomoderator help here too? I imagine if he can pretend to
be one of us, he'd fool the moderator algorithm, too.
If posts are digitally signed, or the robomoderator looks carefully at
the headers, he can likely be prevented from posting.

(It would be quite simple to drop all posts from anonymous remailers,
for instance.)

Seth
Loading...