Re: Automated reporting?
"Mike Easter" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.spam.spamcop.help |
|---|---|
| Organization | SpamCop |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Forrest Aldrich wrote: > A while ago, I switched my config over to the new SC configuration > where you identify your mail gateways, et al. That's called 'mailhosts' > I thought this was an > effort to help automate reports (ie: not have to confirm them via the > web). If you are going to be a quick reporter, it is a requirement that you be mailhosted 'first' and 'approved' second. There is more difference to quick reporting than just not having to review and confirm the report and notification process.. A properly configured mailhosts decreases the likelihood of a parser error reporting your own provider, along with decreasing chances of some other parse mistakes. However, the possibility of a parsing error is never eliminated altogether. > Is this changed since then? Quick reporting still requires being mailhosted. A quick report does not require or allow the reporter to review how SC is going to report/notify the spamsource. A quick report also does not parse the spambody for spamvertiser links nor notify the provider/s for the spamvertisements. That result has advantages and disadvantages. So, the quick report is both faster and/but unreviewed, as such has the danger of reporting your own provider or other mistakes unreviewed, and reports and notifies only spamsources and not spamvertisers. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin