moderated Re: Virus scanning


Marv Waschke
 

On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 09:42 PM, Shal Farley wrote:
I don't think I would go as far as Lena suggests, and moderate them without that being a group option; I'm concerned that few group moderators would have the knowledge to make a safe decision for their group. A choice between "moderate" or "reject" might be useful, with "reject" the default.
Agree with Shal on this. An email reflector like groups.io, is a multiplier-- it turns a single email into many emails. Cybercriminals love this. Send out a malevolent email to a single address and, depending on the size of the group, the poison goes to hundreds or thousands of potential victims. And those victims are predisposed to swallow the poison because it comes from a familiar source that they intentionally subscribed to. Even better if the email spoofs the name of a prominent member. This is a hacker's dream setup. These criminals are not nice people. Give them a chance and they will hurt you.

Rejecting is annoying, but aggressively scrubbing malware from multipliers like groups.io is good policy in my book. Moderators should hesitate and  consider carefully a decision to take the "moderate" option. Letting a malevolent email loose on your group could destroy it. Look at the annoyance of automatic rejection as a price a small price paid for the convenience and pleasure you get from membership in a groups.io group.

Best, Marv

Join main@beta.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.