From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#46472: Make lisp/mail/uce.el obsolete Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2021 16:52:09 +0300 Message-ID: <83czoaqrjq.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83im6we6v8.fsf@gnu.org> <83mtw8cbku.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="27020"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: rgm@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, 46472@debbugs.gnu.org To: Stefan Kangas Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 12 15:53:23 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1maIDb-0006pP-1i for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 15:53:23 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42586 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1maIDZ-00085o-4Y for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 09:53:21 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49124) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1maIDG-00084U-BS for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 09:53:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:56855) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1maIDG-0007PN-2p for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 09:53:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1maIDG-0007kx-2b for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 09:53:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2021 13:53:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 46472 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: security Original-Received: via spool by 46472-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B46472.163404674929719 (code B ref 46472); Tue, 12 Oct 2021 13:53:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 46472) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Oct 2021 13:52:29 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40150 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1maICj-0007jF-C0 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 09:52:29 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:47134) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1maICe-0007is-TH for 46472@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 09:52:28 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:40082) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1maICY-00075l-AP; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 09:52:18 -0400 Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=2996 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1maICX-0004kh-SY; Tue, 12 Oct 2021 09:52:18 -0400 In-Reply-To: (message from Stefan Kangas on Mon, 11 Oct 2021 21:33:31 -0700) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:217031 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Kangas > Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2021 21:33:31 -0700 > Cc: 46472@debbugs.gnu.org, Glenn Morris , > Stefan Monnier > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > The method of "recommendation" you propose is too strong for my > > palate, sorry. In general, I believe that people should be left to > > their devices unless what they do causes harm to others. > > Second-guessing other people under the assumption that we know better > > is something I don't like doing, and don't like others doing to me. > > > > How about adding some warnings to uce.el instead, either in the > > commentary or when the main entry point is invoked for the first time > > in a session? > > Is this okay for emacs-28? No, please leave unnecessary changes out of emacs-28. > ;; The code in this file provides a semi-automatic means of replying > -;; to unsolicited commercial email (UCE) you might get. Currently, it > -;; only works with Rmail and Gnus. If you would like to make it work > -;; with other mail readers, see the mail-client dependent section of > -;; uce-reply-to-uce. Please let me know about your changes so I can > -;; incorporate them. I'd appreciate it. > +;; to unsolicited commercial email (UCE) you might get. I would leave the original text intact, as dividing it into two splits the description of the package, and the additional text is too long to keep the beginning in mind. > +;; -- !!! NOTE !!! -------------------------------------------- > +;; > +;; Replying to spam is at best pointless, but most likely actively > +;; harmful. > +;; > +;; - You will confirm that your email address is valid, thus ensuring > +;; you get more spam. Spammers use tricks like getting you to reply > +;; and/or clicking unsubscribe links, etc. to confirm that you > +;; should stay on their lists. > +;; > +;; - You will leak information (e.g. on your email server and setup), > +;; thus opening yourself up for further attack. More importantly, > +;; they are likely to find your IP, thus your physical location (see > +;; "geolocation"), and by combining that data with your name it > +;; should be trivial to find e.g. your home address and phone > +;; number. These two paragraphs basically says the same, so you could say the same more concisely and to the point by combining them. > +;; - You open yourself up to various kinds of social engineering. > +;; This could be the first in a planned exchange where they will > +;; attempt to trick you to divulge sensitive information. > +;; > +;; - You confirm that the email landed in your inbox, and not the spam > +;; folder. This confirms to them that their current method of > +;; spamming is useful, and helps them continue. These two just reiterate what you already said. > +;; - Scammers have been known to threaten, intimidate, and use other > +;; forms of criminal manipulation. Be aware that replying to spam > +;; can lead down a path that you may not want to be on. Likewise. So I think the same message could be usefully conveyed with much fewer words. > +(defcustom uce-i-want-to-use-this nil > + "Non-nil means that you don't want the warning message about this package. > +See `uce-reply-to-uce' for background." > + :type 'boolean > + :version "28.1") This is redundant, since users that don't want this should not load the package. > @@ -218,7 +266,44 @@ uce-reply-to-uce > "Compose a reply to unsolicited commercial email (UCE). > Sets up a reply buffer addressed to: the sender, his postmaster, > his abuse@ address, and the postmaster of the mail relay used. > -You might need to set `uce-mail-reader' before using this." > +You might need to set `uce-mail-reader' before using this. > + > +-- !!! NOTE !!! -------------------------------------------- > + > +Replying to spam is at best pointless, but most likely actively > +harmful. Why the same text again? > + (unless uce-i-want-to-use-this > + (pop-to-buffer (get-buffer-create "uce-reply-to-uce warning")) > + (insert "-- !!! NOTE !!! -------------------------------------------- And again?