Contents :
1 - Preamble
2 - Definition of NoCeM
3 - NoCeM or Cancel?
4 - Nocem issuers
5 - Descriptions and tips on existing nocems
6 - Conclusion
7 - References

1 - Preamble

This document, posted monthly, list the nocems currently published
on the "news.lists.filters" group.
It does not deal with nocems published in a local hierarchy.
The aim is to publicize existing general nocems so that server
administrators can decide which nocems they wish to apply or not.

2 - Definition

NoCeM (pronounced No See 'Em) is a modern solution for managing spam.

Rather than issuing a "cancel" on a spam message that most servers will
reject, we generate a message in the "news.lists.filters" group called
"nocem", which contain the message(s) to be deleted.

Each nocem is signed with a gpg key to guarantee its authenticity.

The manager of each server is free to apply these nocems or not,
unlike global cancels, nothing is imposed.

3 - NoCeM or Cancel?

- Using nocems requires the server administrator to modify its configuration
to accept them. Otherwise, the nocem does nothing on the server.
It's a simple text message.

- Cancel, on the other hand, is accepted by default by the server
configuration. It's up to the server administrator to modify his config
to refuse certain types of cancels. This is not always easy for servers
with little administration or little knowledge of "fr" specificities.

Reminder: general NoCeMs are published in news.lists.filters.

4 - Nocem issuers

- " bleachbot " <bleachbot@httrack.com>

- " nocembot " <nocem@usenet.ovh>

- <nocem@eternal-september.org>

- " nono le petit robot " <robot@pasdenom.info>

- " i2pn2-nocem " <i2pn2-nocem@i2pn2.org>

- "news.chmurka.net nocembot" <nocem@chmurka.net>

5 - Descriptions and tips for existing nocems

5.1 - " bleachbot "

Information : http://home.httrack.net/~nocem/

Public key : http://home.httrack.net/~nocem/bleachbot.asc

Types of nocems :
- spam : detection based on previously confirmed spam with BI>=20.
- site : flood and hipcrime detection.

Tip: Nocem has been a recognized source for years.
Recommended for use on all servers.

This robot seems to have stopped since January 1, 2024

5.2 - " nocembot "

Information : http://usenet.ovh/?article=nocem

Public key : http://usenet.ovh/files/alfanet_0x5789E33A_public

Types of nocems :
- spam : spams and clearly malicious articles
- flood : well-known regular flooders

Tip: New public Nocems source since June 5, 2023
(previously restricted to the news.usenet.ovh server).
The website details what is filtered.
Recommended for use on all servers.

5.3 - nocem@eternal-september.org

Information : https://www.eternal-september.org/index.php?showpage=nocem

Public key : : https://www.eternal-september.org/nocem-eternal-september.asc

Les types de nocems :
- spam : drugs/meds/cards/casino from GoogleGroups
- bot : bot generated pseudo discussions from various sources
(currently from Abavia).

Tip : New public Nocems source since septembre 25, 2023
Recommended use of on all servers.

5.4 - " nono le petit robot "

Information : https://pasdenom.info/nocem.html

Public key : http://pasdenom.info/gpg/robot.pasdenom.asc

Types of nocems :
- spam : spams 99,99%
- spam2 : spams with rare false positives
- spam3 : spam with false positives
- spam4 : spams with slightly more false positives
- site : rare manual notices

Tip: these nocems are the result of the use of "spamassasin".
An effective product usually used to detect spam in emails.
Here, the sample used to train the robot to detect spam seems
to be poorly done: too much false positives for spam.
Other types of nocem generate inappropriate false positives.
In particular spam3 and 4, which on some forums, such as fr.soc.politique,
could be seen as censorship.
The "site" nocem is used for abuse that is generally consensual.

5.5 - " i2pn2-nocem " <i2pn2-nocem@i2pn2.org>

Information : ?

Public key : https://www.novabbs.com/hierarchy/i2pn2-nocem.txt

Types of nocems :
- spam : These bot-spam NoCeM notices may cover any hierarchy and
are automatically generated by a spamassassin script.

Tip : Recommended use of on all servers.

5.6 - "news.chmurka.net nocembot" <nocem@chmurka.net>

Information : http://news.chmurka.net/nocem.php

Public key : http://news.chmurka.net/nocem-chmurka.asc

Types of nocems :
- thai : NoCeM notice for Thai flood originating from Google Groups.

Tip : Recommended use of on all servers.

6 - Conclusion

If you want to contribute to this document, you can reply directly
to this message (or by e-mail if you prefer).

7 - References:
- The NoCeM FAQ. V0.93: http://www.cm.org/faq.html
- Kleopatra: https://www.openpgp.org/software/kleopatra/
(certificate manager and GUI for GnuP)
- Global cancels: <news:m25ylayonf.fsf@raybanana.net>

faq <faq@usenet.ovh> wrote:

>Contents :
> 1 - Preamble
> 2 - Definition of NoCeM
> 3 - NoCeM or Cancel?
> 4 - Nocem issuers
> 5 - Descriptions and tips on existing nocems
> 6 - Conclusion
> 7 - References

>. . .

>The manager of each server is free to apply these nocems or not,
>unlike global cancels, nothing is imposed.

Oh, c'mon. Don't put statements in a document meant to be taken
seriously expressing the personal opinion of a certain party that is
unique among all of Usenet server administration.

That those two French News servers weren't configured to reject all
cancel messages was a decision made by their News administrators.

Accepting or rejecting control messages is a matter of how a News
server is configured, never an "imposition". News administrators run
Usenet, not parties issuing control messages.

Please use the term "News administrator", noting the capitalization.
They aren't managers.

>. . .

>3 - NoCeM or Cancel?

>- Using nocems requires the server administrator to modify its configuration
>to accept them. Otherwise, the nocem does nothing on the server.
>It's a simple text message.

>- Cancel, on the other hand, is accepted by default by the server
>configuration. It's up to the server administrator to modify his config
>to refuse certain types of cancels. This is not always easy for servers
>with little administration or little knowledge of "fr" specificities.

Yes. Configuring a News server to meet the needs of the users being
supported is a basic part of News administration. If one lacks such
knowledge, then one learns how to do these things.

I'm declaring the cron job posting this FAQ an instance of trolling.
I'll shut the fuck up now so as not to further troll feed.

Adam H. Kerman a présenté l'énoncé suivant :
> faq <faq@usenet.ovh> wrote:
>
>> Contents :
>> 1 - Preamble
>> 2 - Definition of NoCeM
>> 3 - NoCeM or Cancel?
>> 4 - Nocem issuers
>> 5 - Descriptions and tips on existing nocems
>> 6 - Conclusion
>> 7 - References
>
>> . . .
>
>> The manager of each server is free to apply these nocems or not,
>> unlike global cancels, nothing is imposed.
>
> Oh, c'mon. Don't put statements in a document meant to be taken
> seriously expressing the personal opinion of a certain party that is
> unique among all of Usenet server administration.
>
> That those two French News servers weren't configured to reject all
> cancel messages was a decision made by their News administrators.

Maybe yes, maybe no.
Who's to say that all admins running inn2 servers with versions lower
than 2.7 know that they accept all cancels ?
Some have discovered this through past abuse.

> Accepting or rejecting control messages is a matter of how a News
> server is configured, never an "imposition". News administrators run
> Usenet, not parties issuing control messages.

inn's default configuration means that nocems do nothing and cancels
(even abusive ones) are accepted. This is a fact.
I saw it for myself when I created my server.
Other admins have learned this too and have forbidden this type of
cancel on their servers. But are other admins aware of this (outside
the fr hierarchy, where this type of behavior has been frequent) ?
I don't know, and that's why I think it's worth mentioning.
We can certainly improve the faq, you can help.

> Please use the term "News administrator", noting the capitalization.
> They aren't managers.

English is not my native langage.
I'll note your suggestion for the next issue.

Sincerely

--
Admin of news.usenet.ovh

Le 01/05/2024 à 16:58, "Adam H. Kerman" a écrit :

> Oh, c'mon. Don't put statements in a document meant to be taken
> seriously expressing the personal opinion of a certain party that is
> unique among all of Usenet server administration.

One thing about LLP is that he doesn't take any remarks, even if something
is completely false he will not change it, his so-called faqs haven't been
discussed with anybody but himself so they have no value at all.