From spamcop-help@news.spamcop.net  Thu Jan  1 02:08:49 1970
From: spamcop-help@news.spamcop.net (hank@spamcop.net)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:08:49 -0800
Subject: [SC-Help] Re: SpamCop-Help digest, Vol 19 #119 - 15 msgs
Message-ID: <12A09C3A-1DE4-11B2-B7DD-003065792668@spamcop.net>

On Monday, August 19, 2002,

>
>> Ed Felten makes some disturbing allegations at 
>> http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/archives/000014.html
>>
>> I think SpamCop may have abused its power here.  Please be more careful.
>
> <Yawn> Heard it all before.  Same old lying spammer-whine ("I got shut 
> down over just one complaint").

Close your mouth.  You didn't read the story.  And you don't know who you 
are talking about.  And you CAN know, easily.

You can look him up:  <http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~felten/>  He is a good 
guy.  He is a white hat. All the info is there for you to read.  Study!

Someone reported legitimate list mail mentioning his site as spam; Spamcop 
listed it as suspicious; his ISP kneejerked instead of thinking.  Everyone 
then tried to explain a mistake had been made. He found no way could 
SpamCop to fix a mistake, and he described this on the Risks list.  
Appropriately.  If you don't read comp.risks, you really should have been 
doing so for the past decade.  It's fundamental.

The chain of errors that got his site blocked is documented.
This Is A Risk Of Computing -- a classic example.

It added up to an accidental demonstration that a forger spammer could 
indeed commit a denial of service attack using SpamCop, knowing many ISPs 
now close accounts on suspicion and make people prove they're innocent -- 
or "just wait a week and it'll be delisted if nobody else complains."

Bad bug.  Please fix.