[tor-talk] webmail send while using TOR is tagged as spamends up in spam

[Friet Pan]

----- Original Message -----
From: MegaBrutal <megabrutal at gmail.com>
To: tor-talk at lists.torproject.org
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 1:25 PM
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] webmail send while using TOR is tagged as spamends up in spam

2016-07-19 7:13 GMT+02:00 Friet Pan <frietpan at ymail.com>:
>
> So now i also wonder how many people on this list are not receiving THIS message.

It was tagged as SPAM, but luckily I always check my SPAM folder for
false positives, so I unspammed it. This helps GMail to learn that
this message is safe.

To be precise, I'm not entirely sure whether your mail was tagged as
SPAM, or me's message who replied to it about an hour ago, since GMail
organizes conversations into threads, and I just found the thread in
the SPAM folder.




BUTBUT BUT.
Yahoo tags the mail as 'unauthenticated'
And google only looks for that tag, and ALWAYS puts ALL those messages in a spam foolder
This is a deal they appear to have with the rest of the dmarc.org cartel.

http://demarc.org and read between the lines what they not say for the sake of not saying it.

So untagging is only a red nose on a Sergey's face, to waste your time... You never win. they have a deal

I can be wrong and even a bit paranoia because of all of this so please do your own research.






>
> I'm NOT a spammer. Can i sue yahoo for falsely tagging my mails as spam?  or better can TOR sue Yahoo? :-D and win and get a lot of money to put into development?
>
> please have a look at dmarc.org it tries to explain in lawyer-ish speak how the yahoo, gmail, facebook aol, paypal, ebay, amazon cartel teamed together to force people to 'autenticate'
>
> authenticate as in ...get a code that they can use to invade our privacy. (or is this my brain going into paranoia mode?)
>
> can this be fixed?
>

Oh, boy... Flagging TOR-related messages as SPAM is only the top of
the iceberg. The e-mail system is already very discriminative in order
to filter SPAM, which would otherwise take the majority of mail
traffic. Innocent until proven guilty does not apply here. For
example, some providers block dynamic IPs by default. It bothers me
because I run my own mail server from a dynamic IP, and I don't think
it is fair to block my messages just because I happen to be sending
them from a dynamically allocated IP, while I have no history of
sending SPAM. Luckily, most providers use Spamhaus, and Spamhaus has a
quick de-listing procedure, so every time my IP changes, I need to go
to Spamhaus to de-list my IP. But it still causes a little pain in the
ass. Not to mention that others may use a different blacklist, for
example SORBS, which does not allow de-listing (or they have a long,
complicated de-listing procedure, and in the end they would not allow
me to de-list my dynamic IPs anyway).

So, can I sue those who list or block my messages because I send them
from a dynamic IP? I don't think so. The case is not very different
with TOR. For the higher anonimity of Tor, it has an even higher risk
of SPAM, significantly higher than dynamic IPs – who knows, maybe the
exit node you use was already used by spammers who were really sending
SPAM out through Tor. Since there is no way to discern the users of a
Tor exit node, there is no way to tell that you are not the same
spammer who was sending spam through the same node earlier. If you
think about it, Tor would be ideal for spammers to send spam, so
likely they use it.

It sucks. Well-intentioned people are blocked because OTHERS were
abusing services by spamming, or even worse, by using Tor to relay
their SPAM, which is not really the purpose of Tor. Since there is no
way to discern the good users from the bad ones, there is no way to
solve this problem.

-- 






YES this needs a real solution, not a semi solution that semi solves half of the effect but keeps the cause happy and even supports it. This supports spam and phishing. Spam will get more so-phish-ticated. And gov and corporate entities, can use spam and phishing to undermine our privacy EVEN MORE.

dmarc.org is NOT there to stop spam, dmarc is there to give 'someone' the option to circumvent stuff that attempts to give us SOME privacy

i want a new email system, that allows privacy from the ground up.

A system that stops spam in it's tracks.
A system that delivers mail peer to peer without a server.

And more good stuff hehehe

but I DONT HAVE ANY dev skills. 

and i don't want to say: HERE build this, and build it now.


But i do want to share my idea's with people who do have those skills 


One of my ideas is to find a good lawyer who can sue Yahoo Google and the rest on our behalf, win the case of our privacy vs their snooping. And use the money to build a better tor-everything


And yes. i was pissed when i wrote this. i'm sick and tired of this gov/corporate muppet-show. Lets block the crap out of them for a change.. Keep up the good work TOR DEVS. it's not perfect but it is at least something that somewhat works some of the time.  I hope my idea can push back a bit extra.

Bounce EVERYTHING, return to sender, address unknown. Unless it is a known and trusted sender. allow only as long as it's being trusted. else bounce and delete. 

THIS IS NOT censorship, it is privacy protection. by using a whitelist.
Eventually censor extreme cases by using a blacklist, stalkers or corporate entities who just don't understand what privacy means just need a bit more extreme solutions. Maybe blacklists can be turned off after some time, to see if humanity evolved or not...



ok enough for now.





tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk at lists.torproject.org
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk