Google Groups Spam

Not replying to anyone in particular, but this GG spam
in c.l.f is really out of hand.

I marked-as-spam about 425 messages last Thursday, but
I took Friday off, so no looking at the group until
today, Monday. I paged through 19(!) screens of spam
since Thursday afternoon, at about 23 messages per
screen = about another 200 messages (seems like more
than that, sigh...).

-Ken

On 03/19/2012 01:55 PM, Andrew Mai wrote:
> On 03/15/2012 01:03 AM, Xavier Roche wrote:
>
>> You are using a very badly maintained news server
>
> I am not using Google; I simply commented that Google still has spam.
>
>> Try albasani (http://albasani.net/), aioe (http://news.aioe.org/),
>> glorb (http://www.glorb.com/usenet.php), individual
>> (http://individual.net/) or eternal-september
>> (http://www.eternal-september.org/)
>
> I tried eternal-september.org. It was easy to sign up but then I could
> not figure out how to actually read the comp.lang.fortran group.
>
> I am now using news.sunsite.dk. It seems to work fine except I do not
> see how to easily delete read messages. (Pushing the "Delete" button in
> Thunderbird does not count -- I still need to push the button for each
> and every message.)

You don't delete others' posts on newsgroups. Tbird has a "view threads
with unread" and other typical newsreader options, such as Kill thread
(the thread will return if a new message is added).

On 3/19/2012 3:55 PM, Andrew Mai wrote:
> On 03/15/2012 01:03 AM, Xavier Roche wrote:
>
>> You are using a very badly maintained news server
>
> I am not using Google; I simply commented that Google still has spam.
>
>> Try albasani (http://albasani.net/), aioe (http://news.aioe.org/), glorb (http://www.glorb.com/usenet.php), individual
>> (http://individual.net/) or eternal-september (http://www.eternal-september.org/)
>
> I tried eternal-september.org. It was easy to sign up but then I could not figure out how to actually read the comp.lang.fortran group.
>
> I am now using news.sunsite.dk. It seems to work fine except I do not see how to easily delete read messages. (Pushing the "Delete"
> button in Thunderbird does not count -- I still need to push the button for each and every message.)
>
> Andy

ES works great for me after I figured out how to
setup the login. And the new spam control is
awesome in c.l.f.

To turn the delete key on in Thunderbird, use
Chris Ilias's great delete function:
http://ilias.ca/blog/2011/07/deletin...n-thunderbird/

Lynn

On Sunday, 11 March 2012 18:06:03 UTC, Robert Miles wrote:
> On Sunday, March 11, 2012 11:30:03 AM UTC-5, user1 wrote:

> During some hours, you will. However, during hours when a few of us are marking the spam, the spam will usually already be marked as abuse, and youwill see it only if you decide to click on it anyway (possibly so you can click on the triangle to the right of the gear, click on abuse, and mark itas abuse a second time so that it should disappear from the list for everyone except the two who have marked it as abuse).
>

Given that Google is seemingly unable to tackle this problem itself, perhaps it's time to start contacting the owners of the brands being advertised with complaints about irresponsibly promoted or counterfeit products, and explaining that Google is unwilling to to take any action over it. I'm not sure if the drugs being advertised are 'controlled' in the US, but here in the UK if you 'assist' irresponsible drug sales , you get sent to jail...

On 03/20/2012 05:44 PM, usenet@gfarlie.demon.co.uk wrote:
> On Sunday, 11 March 2012 18:06:03 UTC, Robert Miles wrote:
>> On Sunday, March 11, 2012 11:30:03 AM UTC-5, user1 wrote:
>
>> During some hours, you will. However, during hours when a few of us are marking the spam, the spam will usually already be marked as abuse, and you will see it only if you decide to click on it anyway (possibly so you can click on the triangle to the right of the gear, click on abuse, and mark it as abuse a second time so that it should disappear from the list for everyone except the two who have marked it as abuse).
>>
>
> Given that Google is seemingly unable to tackle this problem itself, perhaps it's time to start contacting the owners of the brands being advertised with complaints about irresponsibly promoted or counterfeit products, and explaining that Google is unwilling to to take any action over it. I'm not sure if the drugs being advertised are 'controlled' in the US, but here in the UK if you 'assist' irresponsible drug sales , you get sent to jail...
>

The only American assistance visible there is the willingness of Google
to carry the ads. Good luck on contacting the Asian makers of
counterfeit drugs and asking them to advertise elsewhere.

On Wednesday, March 21, 2012 5:27:53 AM UTC, Tim Prince wrote:
> On 03/20/2012 05:44 PM, usenet@gfarlie.demon.co.uk wrote:
> > On Sunday, 11 March 2012 18:06:03 UTC, Robert Miles wrote:
> >> On Sunday, March 11, 2012 11:30:03 AM UTC-5, user1 wrote:
> >
> >> During some hours, you will. However, during hours when a few of us are marking the spam, the spam will usually already be marked as abuse, and you will see it only if you decide to click on it anyway (possibly so you can click on the triangle to the right of the gear, click on abuse, and markit as abuse a second time so that it should disappear from the list for everyone except the two who have marked it as abuse).
> >>
> >
> > Given that Google is seemingly unable to tackle this problem itself, perhaps it's time to start contacting the owners of the brands being advertised with complaints about irresponsibly promoted or counterfeit products, and explaining that Google is unwilling to to take any action over it. I'm not sure if the drugs being advertised are 'controlled' in the US, but here in the UK if you 'assist' irresponsible drug sales , you get sent to jail....
> >
>
> The only American assistance visible there is the willingness of Google
> to carry the ads. Good luck on contacting the Asian makers of
> counterfeit drugs and asking them to advertise elsewhere.

What I was saying was contact the legitimate brand owners, not the counterfieters

usenet@gfarlie.demon.co.uk wrote:

> Given that Google is seemingly unable to tackle this problem itself,
> perhaps it's time to start contacting the owners of the brands being
> advertised with complaints about irresponsibly promoted or
> counterfeit products, and explaining that Google is unwilling to to
> take any action over it. I'm not sure if the drugs being advertised
> are 'controlled' in the US, but here in the UK if you 'assist'
> irresponsible drug sales , you get sent to jail...

Good luck tracking them down. I find it impossible to believe the drug
companies are not already aware of issue; not specifically in this
newsgroup but certainly they are aware of the alternative drug market.

There are exactly two entities who can effectively manage this spam;
the idiots who actually buy stuff from spammers and the google servers
who provide the point of origin. The issue confuses some but it really
has nothing to do with the google news interface provided by
google.

Their mail and news servers have never been secure and nearly everyone
knows it. To play devils advocate for a moment, I'll ask how do yo
provide servers anyone can use and still make them secure? There's no
perfect solution and the issues involved are not trivial. How much do
you want google reading and messing with your mail? Clearly to filter
mail something has to examine contents and deciding how and which mail
to examine and what to do with the results is a tough problem. What if
the mail filter picked up plans to rob a bank or kill people, what
action to take? That puts google in a clearly unwanted and hard
position, but clearly google could do better if they wanted.

stan <smoore@exis.net> wrote:
> usenet@gfarlie.demon.co.uk wrote:

>> Given that Google is seemingly unable to tackle this problem itself,
>> perhaps it's time to start contacting the owners of the brands being
>> advertised with complaints about irresponsibly promoted or
>> counterfeit products, and explaining that Google is unwilling to to
>> take any action over it. I'm not sure if the drugs being advertised
>> are 'controlled' in the US, but here in the UK if you 'assist'
>> irresponsible drug sales , you get sent to jail...

> Good luck tracking them down. I find it impossible to believe the drug
> companies are not already aware of issue; not specifically in this
> newsgroup but certainly they are aware of the alternative drug market.

It is hard to track down the e-mail, but if they are actually
selling something then it should be possible to find them.

One might argue that just sending the e-mail isn't illegal, but
actually selling prescription drugs without a prescription is.

-- glen

glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
> stan <smoore@exis.net> wrote:
>> usenet@gfarlie.demon.co.uk wrote:
>
>>> Given that Google is seemingly unable to tackle this problem itself,
>>> perhaps it's time to start contacting the owners of the brands being
>>> advertised with complaints about irresponsibly promoted or
>>> counterfeit products, and explaining that Google is unwilling to to
>>> take any action over it. I'm not sure if the drugs being advertised
>>> are 'controlled' in the US, but here in the UK if you 'assist'
>>> irresponsible drug sales , you get sent to jail...

Check this out:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_16...MainColumnArea

That will probably wrap poorly google "fake avastin CBS news" and
check out the guys story.

>> Good luck tracking them down. I find it impossible to believe the drug
>> companies are not already aware of issue; not specifically in this
>> newsgroup but certainly they are aware of the alternative drug market.
>
> It is hard to track down the e-mail, but if they are actually
> selling something then it should be possible to find them.

Tracking the people, money or products has proven beyond reach for law
enforcement so far. Even when you win a round of whack-a-mole, it
becomes a moot point.

> One might argue that just sending the e-mail isn't illegal, but
> actually selling prescription drugs without a prescription is.

Actually it doesn't work that way. Laws have limits and jurisdiction
problems. What law covers a guy in Africa selling drugs through a web
site in China and shipping the drugs from Amsterdam?

Certainly no one country has such a law. It's hard to imagine an
entity with deeper pockets or more lobbying clout than the drug
companies and they clearly haven't been able to make a dent. Some
countries, China comes to mind don't really care what the US thinks
about their laws and have no desire to help enforce US laws.

Most of the spammed drugs aren't regulated in a few counties; and in such
countries anyone can buy them over the counter or out in a
alley. There is no law that says I can't buy such a drug but there are
laws against importing such things in many countries. Catching
individual shipments of drugs in the mail systems is a fools errand.

stan <smoore@exis.net> wrote:

(snip, I wrote)
>> It is hard to track down the e-mail, but if they are actually
>> selling something then it should be possible to find them.

> Tracking the people, money or products has proven beyond reach for law
> enforcement so far. Even when you win a round of whack-a-mole, it
> becomes a moot point.

>> One might argue that just sending the e-mail isn't illegal, but
>> actually selling prescription drugs without a prescription is.

> Actually it doesn't work that way. Laws have limits and jurisdiction
> problems. What law covers a guy in Africa selling drugs through a web
> site in China and shipping the drugs from Amsterdam?

That is true, but likely it isn't even illegal to advertize
selling prescription drugs in the US, but only illegal to actually
do it.

But selling US drugs to US consumers, even from outside, likely
is illegal.

(snip)

-- glen

On Friday, March 23, 2012 2:57:29 AM UTC+9, stan wrote:
> usenet@gfarlie.demon.co.uk wrote:
>
> How much do
> you want google reading and messing with your mail? Clearly to filter
> mail something has to examine contents and deciding how and which mail
> to examine and what to do with the results is a tough problem.

Yes, but I use Norton to filter by e-mail and it does a splendid job of sorting the wheat from the chaff. Google could at least, for instance, divert suspect posts to a reserved group such as comp.lang.fortran.spam.

Regards,

Mike Metcalf

On Friday, March 23, 2012 2:57:29 AM UTC+9, stan wrote:
> usenet@gfarlie.demon.co.uk wrote:
>
> How much do
> you want google reading and messing with your mail? Clearly to filter
> mail something has to examine contents and deciding how and which mail
> to examine and what to do with the results is a tough problem.

Yes, but I use Norton for my e-mail and it does a splendid job of sorting the wheat from the chaff. Google could do something similar and, for instance, write suspect posts to a reserved group such as comp.lang.fortran.spam.

Regards,

Mike Metcalf

michaelmetcalf@compuserve.com wrote:
> On Friday, March 23, 2012 2:57:29 AM UTC+9, stan wrote:
>>
>> How much do you want google reading and messing with your mail?
>> Clearly to filter mail something has to examine contents and
>> deciding how and which mail to examine and what to do with the
>> results is a tough problem.
>
> Yes, but I use Norton for my e-mail and it does a splendid job of
> sorting the wheat from the chaff. Google could do something similar
> and, for instance, write suspect posts to a reserved group such as
> comp.lang.fortran.spam.

I think Google could do more, but I think Google reading public mail
is opening Pandora's box. I'm not a lawyer but I can imagine the
liability issues alone would be non trivial.

Using a Outlook Express as a reader, plus a single filter, I reduced 470
SPAM of today (displayed on first pass check of headers) to 20 genuine
messages (shown as final count). Works for me.
Filter line specifies one german and one french word as well as the usual
lingua franca English