Re[3]: Redirectors.pm vs DecodeShortURLs.pm
"Kent Oyer" <[email protected]> Sat, 23 May 2026 04:51:34 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.spam.spamassassin.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
------=_Part_465_391412468.1779511894 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Can we get those terms defined for how they are being used here?=0AI th= ink that's part of the problem. It really hasn't been defined. Both redir= ectors and shorteners use HTTP and return 30x response codes such as:=0A3= 01 Moved Permanently=0A302 Found=0A308 Permanent Redirect=0Aetc.=0ASometi= mes the target URL is encoded in the query parameters but sometimes there= 's only a hash or token so you have to do an HTTP request to get it. Shor= teners always use a token because they're -- well -- short. But tokens ar= e also used in some URLs that are quite long. =0ASo the obvious distincti= on is that shorteners are short. But regardless of length, they all work = the same way. Thus, we only need one plugin to handle both.=0AThe questio= n is: Is one more "spammy" than the other? Do we need to score them diffe= rently? Shorteners are generally provided by companies whose only purpose= is to shorten URLs. The purpose of short URLs is to make them easier for= humans. But spammers don't care about the length. They only care about t= he redirect. So whether the redirect is from a "URL shortening company" o= r a company that uses redirection for some other purpose, they both have = the same value to a spammer. ------=_Part_465_391412468.1779511894 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE html><html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"t= ext/html; charset=3Dutf-8" /></head><body><div data-crea=3D"font-wrapper"= style=3D"font-family: Tahoma, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; direction: lt= r"><div>> Can we get those terms defined for how they are being used h= ere?</div><div><br></div><div>I think that's part of the problem. It real= ly hasn't been defined. Both redirectors and shorteners use HTTP and retu= rn 30x response codes such as:</div><div><br></div><div>301 Moved Permane= ntly</div><div>302 Found</div><div>308 Permanent Redirect</div><div>etc.<= /div><div><br></div><div>Sometimes the target URL is encoded in the query= parameters but sometimes there's only a hash or token so you have to do = an HTTP request to get it. Shorteners always use a token because they're = -- well -- short. But tokens are also used in some URLs that are quite lo= ng.=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div>So the obvious distinction is that sho= rteners are short. But regardless of length, they all work the same way. = Thus, we only need one plugin to handle both.</div><div><br></div><div>Th= e question is: Is one more "spammy" than the other? Do we need to score t= hem differently?=C2=A0Shorteners are generally provided by companies whos= e only purpose is to shorten URLs. The purpose of short URLs is to make t= hem easier for humans. But spammers don't care about the length. They onl= y care about the redirect. So whether the redirect is from a "URL shorten= ing company" or a company that uses redirection for some other purpose, t= hey both have the same value to a spammer.=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div= ><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><d= iv><br></div></div></body></html> ------=_Part_465_391412468.1779511894--