From me at privacy.net Fri Oct 1 02:25:08 2004 From: me at privacy.net (Johnny Blaze) Date: Thu Sep 30 21:30:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Submitting Spam Via submit.xxxxx@spam.spamcop.net References: Message-ID: "Ellen" wrote in news:cjg0ol$6kj$1@news.spamcop.net: > > "Johnny Blaze" wrote in message > news:Xns9573D1BAE7467meprivacynet@216.154.195.61... >> >> And for Cox... the email account in question doesn't have filtering >> enabled. It would be strange that they let the email get to me in >> the first place, but wouldn't let me send it as an attachment. I'll >> take it up with Cox and see if they are doing so (I've got a good >> feeling that they're filtering outbound but letting inbound clobber >> us.. CYA, right? >> :-) >> > > TTBMK for outbound filtering you do not get a choice -- they are doing > it and the users have no say about it. I had a long talk with the Cox > abuse guy on the phone about this. I guess the theory is that if a > user doesn't want to turn it on inbound that's fine but this is an > attempt to stem or at least lessen the outbound spam being sent my > zombied machines that are smarthosting thru their mailservers and > annoying the rest of the world. > > I am real sure that the mail is never getting here as we pursued this > with a couple of other users when it first came up. I should also > mention that it used to be erratic in that some forwarding would show > up and some wouldn't -- just depends on what their filters are > recognizing. I spoke with a technician last night... his first response was "outbound mail isn't filtered." So I told him about how the newsgroup said that many Cox customers were complaining that they are in fact, filtered. He instantly demanded that I "prove" that I am a Cox customer by verifying my phone, address, etc. Then he put me on hold and came back and said that if I believe that the email was filtered in error, to forward it as an attachment to ThisIsNotSpam@cox.net. I haven't got a reply yet... I don't think I'll be holding my breath :-) From MikeE at ster.invalid Fri Oct 1 02:20:13 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Fri Oct 1 04:20:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Submitting Spam Via submit.xxxxx@spam.spamcop.net References: Message-ID: Johnny Blaze wrote: > Then he put me on > hold and came back and said that if I believe that the email was > filtered in error, to forward it as an attachment to > ThisIsNotSpam@cox.net. I haven't got a reply yet... I don't think > I'll be holding my breath :-) How would you know if he got it? Didn't 'got it'? -- ie it didn't get filtered before it made the loop to that addy? -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From ungesund at zwallet.com Fri Oct 1 03:17:58 2004 From: ungesund at zwallet.com (Peter) Date: Fri Oct 1 05:20:26 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: SpamCop's exceedingly (and annoyingly) coarse granularity References: Message-ID: <38979495.0410010117.223a5f96@posting.google.com> That?s what happened to me too and, so I think, to millions of other people trying to manage an internet presence! Editing and sending out my own Scottish newsletter to thousands of subscribers I often had to notice that such damned spam cops are blocking my emails. As my mail server removes email addresses which are blocking my issues after three trials there often were complaints from subscribers who didn?t get them. Moreover you cannot do anything against spammers who buy email addresses from companies searching the net for email addresses on websites through spiders. As I?m using a lot of different email addresses I already got several emails containing a virus from one of MY OWN email accounts! Isn?t that "funny"? And you can do NOTHING against this virtual insanity! Regards Peter jjsargent@go.com (Jeffrey J. Sargent) wrote in message news:... > It is annoying that SpamCop uses a meat ax, rather than a scalpel. I use > this address for my public contacts, including not only netnews but > mailing lists. Yet when I try to write *to* the outfit that operates > one list that I'm on, the mail gets blocked by SpamCop because this *site* > is considered a spammer (not just faked headers, but actually from go.com's > IP address). But I'm not spamming. Can't SpamCop come up with a smarter > way to let genuine email through? If I'm ever in a position to buy a > spam filter, this obtuse functioning has already guaranteed that I won't > buy SpamCop (unless the company fixes this). > > -- Jeffrey J. Sargent, jjsargent@go.com From ric.gates at bigsleep.org Fri Oct 1 10:30:01 2004 From: ric.gates at bigsleep.org (Blammo) Date: Fri Oct 1 05:30:05 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Submitting Spam Via submit.xxxxx@spam.spamcop.net References: Message-ID: On 29 Sep 2004 Ellen entered spamcop.help and left news:cjg0ol$6kj$1@news.spamcop.net: > TTBMK for outbound filtering you do not get a choice -- they are doing it > and the users have no say about it. This sounds somewhat similar to the problem I am having with my ISP. I wonder if you'd be interested in talking to them, especially since they use the spamcop bl. -- | Ric | From MikeE at ster.invalid Fri Oct 1 03:40:41 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Fri Oct 1 05:40:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: SpamCop's exceedingly (and annoyingly) coarse granularity References: <38979495.0410010117.223a5f96@posting.google.com> Message-ID: Peter wrote: > Editing and sending out > my own Scottish newsletter to thousands of subscribers I often had to > notice that such damned spam cops are blocking my emails. It is important that you realize what is going on there. When your newsletter gets blocked by someone's provider's spam filter, that means that the IP address that your mail is using is getting itself listed on blocklists such as spamcop's and likely others. That means that somehow you are using a 'spammy' IP for your mails. You should find out what is going on about that. If it is due to your own mails or newsletters being reported, there's some kind of problem with that in terms of how your mailing list is being managed. If it is due to your sharing of your outgoing email IP with others who are behaving 'spammily' or with bad mailing list management of whatever, then you should 'do something' about that. > As my mail > server removes email addresses which are blocking my issues after > three trials there often were complaints from subscribers who didn?t > get them. Yep. That's a problem. And, there's a lot more to good mailing list management than that. > Moreover you cannot do anything against spammers who buy email > addresses from companies searching the net for email addresses on > websites through spiders. Well, you can take actions to prevent them from harvesting your mail addresses from your websites. But, what does address harvesting bots have to do with this thread about your newsletters being blocked by providers using blocklists? > As I?m using a lot of different email addresses I already got several > emails containing a virus from one of MY OWN email accounts! Isn?t > that "funny"? And you can do NOTHING against this virtual insanity! Well, a poor little virus propagation has to have /somebody's/ addy in the From. ;-) -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From julian at mehnle.net Fri Oct 1 17:22:07 2004 From: julian at mehnle.net (Julian Mehnle) Date: Fri Oct 1 10:25:05 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] More spam from IPv6 spammer not being parsed In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi all, Julian Mehnle wrote: > Yesterday I received some spam from a real IPv6 address Oops, it just happened again: news://news.spamcop.net/cjjov8$63r$1@news.spamcop.net (in the .spam group, same subject). Again, the SpamCop parser refused to process it: Parsing header: No source IP address found, cannot proceed. Are there any plans to support IPv6 addresses in the SpamCop parser? From julian at mehnle.net Fri Oct 1 17:57:29 2004 From: julian at mehnle.net (Julian Mehnle) Date: Fri Oct 1 11:00:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: SpamCop's exceedingly (and annoyingly) coarse granularity In-Reply-To: References: <38979495.0410010117.223a5f96@posting.google.com> Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > Peter wrote: > > As I?m using a lot of different email addresses I already got several > > emails containing a virus from one of MY OWN email accounts! Isn?t > > that "funny"? And you can do NOTHING against this virtual insanity! > > Well, a poor little virus propagation has to have /somebody's/ addy in > the From. ;-) That's why SPF is a good thing (not necessarily to reliably block virus propagation, but to keep viruses from abusind 3rd parties' addresses). ;-) From gospamming at yourdomain.invalid Fri Oct 1 16:16:53 2004 From: gospamming at yourdomain.invalid (D.Diaz) Date: Fri Oct 1 11:20:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: More spam from IPv6 spammer not being parsed References: Message-ID: Julian Mehnle wrote in news:cjjp6g$63r$2@news.spamcop.net: > Are there any plans to support IPv6 addresses in the SpamCop parser? I hope so... Eventually, IPv6 will be the standard environment and IPv4 will be the legacy one. SpamCop will have to carry on with the change too. > Oops, it just happened again: > news://news.spamcop.net/cjjov8$63r$1@news.spamcop.net > (in the .spam group, same subject). > [quote from spam sample] X-Mailer: PEBKAC id:10T [/quote] *SPLORF* -- Daniel Diaz From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Oct 1 15:30:18 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Ellen) Date: Fri Oct 1 14:50:06 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: More spam from IPv6 spammer not being parsed References: Message-ID: "Julian Mehnle" wrote in message news:cjjp6g$63r$2@news.spamcop.net... > Hi all, > > Julian Mehnle wrote: > > Yesterday I received some spam from a real IPv6 address > > Oops, it just happened again: > news://news.spamcop.net/cjjov8$63r$1@news.spamcop.net > (in the .spam group, same subject). > > Again, the SpamCop parser refused to process it: > > Parsing header: > No source IP address found, cannot proceed. > > Are there any plans to support IPv6 addresses in the SpamCop parser? Please parse the spam and send me the tracking url. Thanks deputies spamcop.net Ellen From me at privacy.net Sat Oct 2 00:17:48 2004 From: me at privacy.net (Johnny Blaze) Date: Fri Oct 1 19:20:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Submitting Spam Via submit.xxxxx@spam.spamcop.net References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" wrote in news:cjj3ti$5tt$1 @news.spamcop.net: > Johnny Blaze wrote: >> Then he put me on >> hold and came back and said that if I believe that the email was >> filtered in error, to forward it as an attachment to >> ThisIsNotSpam@cox.net. I haven't got a reply yet... I don't think >> I'll be holding my breath :-) > > How would you know if he got it? Didn't 'got it'? -- ie it didn't get > filtered before it made the loop to that addy? HA! Good point... maybe thats the trick... damned, support chat... I couldn't hear the guy giggling when he told me that. From julian at mehnle.net Sun Oct 3 00:59:19 2004 From: julian at mehnle.net (Julian Mehnle) Date: Sat Oct 2 18:00:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: More spam from IPv6 spammer not being parsed In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ellen wrote: > Please parse the spam and send me the tracking url. For the record: mailed. Thanks for looking into it. From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Oct 2 19:04:14 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Pop (was Spamcop by accident)) Date: Sat Oct 2 18:10:06 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] OT: Re: Political unsolicited email? References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" wrote in message news:cjhfta$jq7$1@news.spamcop.net... | I'm getting a little confused, or perhaps we need to 'summarize', so I'll | remake our dialogue here | | Martin Edwards wrote: ... | > Yet I've been told off in another group for snipping. Apparently they | > like to be able to read the whole discussion in one post. ==> Not all groups' rules are the same, obviously. Basically, when in Rome, do as the Romans do. I -try- to do that most of the time, other times I forget or the particular post is silly in some way that I don't care so I don't correct my mistake. What group complaied about snipping? Must have been a highly techie group! But, I can imagine circumstances where it could be useful not to. | | | Martin Edwards wrote: | > No, I mean they bottom post, but do not trim. ==> By not trimming, you insure that the points being made are there and obvious in the entire delivered content. The -only- valid reason to trim, IMO, is to get rid of several previous less than useful posts, OR, as this group opined for so many years, to control bandwidth. This group also seriously frowns upon OT posts, especially when they are buried inside another relevant request for assistance, as is the case in this thread. This thread is now 100% OT w/r to "Political ... ?" | | | OK. We'll discuss communicating in some group where everyone [else, the | Romans] performs untrimmed noncontextualized bottom posting, and you are | going to come along and trim for your responses. ==> Love it: noncontextualized . Who decides that, the first person hearing the rumor, or the last person? If I snip out "And, you are saying ... " does that make the following para noncontextualized? | | And, you are saying that someone sometime in such a very unusual group | has complained because you trimmed. ==> What "such a very unusual group"? In what context is that meant? | | I would simply ignore that complaint. But/And I wouldn't take it upon | myself to try to convert the group, and I wouldn't argue with the person | who complained, and I wouldn't change my trim style. If they wanted to | read what was said before, they can look at the preceding message; I | might educate them to that fact. I guess I would configure my cite gizmo | differently than I use it here, which is a short form which includes only | your name, no addy or date or msgid - into one which includes the message | id. Then, if they wanted to know what came before unedited, they could | access the msg which I'm citing. ==> I can live with that. If that's all there is to it, why not accept top posting then? Rhetorical, not a real question. | | | And, my short form attribution line brings up another little peeve of | mine. I think the use of excessively long cutesy attributions is a | little silly. Not a little, quite a lot. | | -- | Mike Easter | kibitzer, not SC admin | ==> In reading this thread, top posting would have been a very trivial problem for me; not once did I need to or want to look backwards to see what the context was. A top post would have made it even faster and easier to read the new information in the post. Why should I have had to scroll all the way to the bottom to enter this giberishly useless little diatribe of sorts? Mike, I respect you and often read your posts for their good value/s, but(t), IMNSHO, you have moved beyond kibitzing to almost philosophisizing. Is that an indication that your most recent titrations were successful? I know I get a little more philosiphical each time mine work out well. You almost seem to have switched hemispheres the last few weeks . Seriously, top/bottom/side/inline/outline/upside-down posting discussions are actually moot since the group's rules mandate bottom posting, trimming and a few other things. Rather, discussions such as these should be more related to "the rules" of the group, whether they are preferred/right/wrong/gray or whatever. Normally, especially on a gentler, kinder ng such as this one is, one who doesn't adhere to the rules should prepare to meet the wrath of the gatekeepers or find another waft of ether to travail. And, contrary to some opinions, I do think that also applies to me. Usually if I screw up I'll ignore a complaint or two, or apologize, and once more promise to try to mend my ways. It is however sometimes great entertainment when someone takes it upon themselves to re-oirient and rearrange a long thread so it's presented "properly". Those can occasionally make me ROFL, even if it was one of my own postings that screwed it up. Now, I DO think ignoring previous format IS something punishable; eg top posting when there are already bottom posts, or vice-versa. That does make a thread unreadable after an iteration or two. While I'm thinking about it, there is an OEQuote-fix out there that will look at a mail and automatically assign colors to the posting's contents if there are more than two responders. I do find it quite useful at times, especially with an inline posting which also has top or bottom postings along with it. It works quite reliably and I recommend it for any newbies or anyone wishing OE did that. It only "colors" on your own screen by the way; the actual mail is untouched, incoming and outgoing. Pop -- If corn oil is made from corn, and vegetable oil is made from vegetables, then what is baby oil made from? From MikeE at ster.invalid Sat Oct 2 19:16:25 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sat Oct 2 21:20:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Re: Political unsolicited email? References: Message-ID: Pop (was Spamcop by accident) wrote: > A top post would have > made it even faster Topposting completely screws up conversational exchanges - it forces someone to have to restructure everything when the conversation develops and order needs to prevail. > While I'm thinking about it, there is an OEQuote-fix out there > that will look at a mail and automatically assign colors I use OE QF and I have those colors disabled. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From MikeE at ster.invalid Sat Oct 2 19:38:05 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sat Oct 2 21:40:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Re: Political unsolicited email? References: Message-ID: Pop (was Spamcop by accident) wrote: > "Mike Easter" >> OK. We'll discuss communicating in some group where everyone [else, >> the Romans] performs untrimmed noncontextualized bottom posting, and >> you are going to come along and trim for your responses. > ==> Love it: noncontextualized . Who decides that, the first > person hearing the rumor, or the last person? If I snip out > "And, you are saying ... " does that make the following para > noncontextualized? I created a space between my cite above and your response. It would be better for you to do that for clarity, and some posting 'instructions' instruct that. You are missing what I mean by 'noncontextualized'. The context I'm speaking of is the 'inline' contextualization - putting the particular part of the response just under the part we are talking about, like you and I are doing here. >> And, you are saying that someone sometime in such a very unusual >> group has complained because you trimmed. > ==> What "such a very unusual group"? In what context is that > meant? This whole subthread is about groups of people where 'everyone' bottom posts untrimmed and uncontextualized and then gripes at people who trim. That is such an unusual group that I have never seen it. > why not > accept top posting then? Rhetorical, not a real question. It doesn't work. It doesn't make a conversation, and the post is actually absent the 'context' of what got pushed down underneath, and as a result the 'thinking' doesn't actually 'fit together' - the top poster frequently isn't /paying attention/ to what is actually being said. They are not responding responsively and it makes a mess both structurally and, since they aren't 'listening' - you might as well not be talking to them. To create a strawman, noncontextualized untrimmed bottom posting, and then to say topposting is better than that, is a fallacious argument. Trimming is of the essence. If you are going to respond at all, trim, and respond contextually. If you aren't going to respond to some part, trim it out. Start at the top and go all the way to the bottom trimming out everything which isn't responded to. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From mrogoff at cesmail.net Sun Oct 3 08:11:18 2004 From: mrogoff at cesmail.net (Martin Rogoff) Date: Sun Oct 3 08:15:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Doesn't parse properly Message-ID: <9aqvl0plpvead5m6bn2qq57jrfshn8en79@4ax.com> I got this SPAM (http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z678730708zfb29634b971bd14eb20e3b65a3ae60e4z), and spamcop gave me this error: >error: couldn't parse head >Message body parser requires full, accurate copy of message When I look up the error information I receive: >I cannot emphasize enough that this is not a trick by spammers to "fool spamcop". >It is an error introduced by the recipient (you) when copying or submitting email to >spamcop. If you encounter this problem, please review how you submit spam to >SpamCop and take corrective action. Please don't just "fix up" the headers, but >actually find a way to submit them unaltered in the first place. Fixing headers by >hand only introduces even more fatal errors, not to mention being a big pain. > >The best way to submit spam to SpamCop is by forwarding it as an attachment >to your unique submission address - shown above the submission form on your >personal start page. As far as I can tell I did not 'submit' this. It came directly to my spamcop mailbox and was moved to my held mailbox. The only other way for something to get in my held mail is for it to be pulled from yahoo mail, and this did not come in that way. So why am I being told this is not a spammer trick and I am causing the error? Why am I being told I screwed up when I did not do anything? From MikeE at ster.invalid Sun Oct 3 07:08:00 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sun Oct 3 09:10:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Doesn't parse properly References: <9aqvl0plpvead5m6bn2qq57jrfshn8en79@4ax.com> Message-ID: Martin Rogoff wrote: www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z678730708zfb29634b971bd14eb20e3b65a3ae60e4z), >> error: couldn't parse head >> Message body parser requires full, accurate copy of message. Bottom line at the top: bad error message about a misconstructed spam. That error isn't informative about every type of body parsing problem which can cause it. > As far as I can tell I did not 'submit' this. It came directly to my > spamcop mailbox and was moved to my held mailbox. Submitted is any time the parser 'gets its hands on' a spam to parse. You submitted what SC held for reporting. I took your same spam in the tracker and I also submitted it and get the same body parse error message. > So why am I being told this is not a spammer trick and I am causing > the error? Why am I being told I screwed up when I did not do > anything? It's just an error message. Not all verbose output and error messages from SC describe the situation just right. In this case the header/body situation is all screwed up. There are body elements in the header, and even if I play with the spam experimentally to try to guess at how things used to be, it is still a mess. The way I would experiment would be to remove the X-lines which SC added after the spam was received, and also to put an empty line between the last line of the original headers and the first line of where the body should start. That gives this result www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z678746949z3dac9ae9088aea932a55d735df94277dz which is a successful body parse. Then, we can hypothesize about 'who screwed up' - which wasn't you. The most likely thing is that the spammer's ratware screwed up and failed to leave an empty line between the headers and the body, and also made some kind of rich text instead of real html and called the construction multipart alternative which it wasn't. Then SC got the item and found the first empty line in the headers which it interpreted as the end of the headers and put its Xlines there. Which would be some headers + some body including the body's content type and boundary delimitor + SC's Xlines + some more body missing the body's content type and boundary The result was definitely something which wouldn't body parse and was also 'misconstructed' which it gave an error message which is what you read. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From MikeE at ster.invalid Sun Oct 3 07:18:26 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sun Oct 3 09:20:06 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Doesn't parse properly References: <9aqvl0plpvead5m6bn2qq57jrfshn8en79@4ax.com> Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > Then SC got the > item and found the first empty line in the headers which it > interpreted as the end of the headers and put its Xlines there. Restating: Then SC got the item and tried to put its Xlines in the headers after the last headerline and to leave an empty line before the body; but since the body was 'squished into' the headers, that caused SC to put its Xlines after the part of the body which was squished, namely the boundary delimitor and the body content type descriptors. > Which would be some headers + some body including the body's content > type and boundary delimitor + SC's Xlines + some more body missing > the body's content type and boundary > > The result was definitely something which wouldn't body parse and was > also 'misconstructed' which it gave an error message which is what you > read. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From robin.greig at calalta.com Sun Oct 3 15:29:58 2004 From: robin.greig at calalta.com (Robin Greig) Date: Sun Oct 3 10:30:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Newby troubles submitting spam Message-ID: Good Morning, I apologize in advance if this is covered in a FAQ, I looked but didn't find any reference. Thanks Robin Win98 machine Outlook 2000 telus.net ISP Just signed up with Spamcop and am having trouble submitting spam via email forwarding (using Outlook 2000, could that be the problem.....?). I have tried submitting by attaching spam and by including in the original message, both generate what appears to me to be the same message: SpamCop encountered errors while saving spam for processing: SpamCop could not find your spam message in this email: Return-Path: Received: from vmx2.spamcop.net (sc-smtp2.eq.ironport.com [192.168.18.82]) by sc-app3.eq.ironport.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1ECB01435A for ; Sun, 3 Oct 2004 07:18:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail118.megamailservers.com (216.251.36.118) by vmx2.spamcop.net with ESMTP; 03 Oct 2004 07:18:59 -0700 X-POP-User: postmaster.calalta.com Received: from robin (d198-53-245-28.abhsia.telus.net [198.53.245.28]) by mail118.megamailservers.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with SMTP id i93EIv7c028094 for ; Sun, 3 Oct 2004 10:18:57 -0400 From: "Robin Greig" To: "Spam" Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?FW:_**SPAM**_re:=5F:_necessitate_hungry_m=E4l=EAs?= Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 08:19:53 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0000_01C4A921.C2DD1460" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C4A921.C2DD1460 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C4A921.C2DD1460 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment Reply-To: =?iso-8859-1?B?bWFycu/qZF9hbmRfc2luZ2zqX2Tkbepz?= From: =?iso-8859-1?B?bWFycu/qZF9hbmRfc2luZ2zqX2Tkbepz?= To: , , , , , Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?**SPAM**_re:=5F:_necessitate_hungry_m=E4l=EAs?= Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 07:43:15 -0600 Approved: Yes (127.0.0.1) Message-ID: <20041003124546.HLVT13101.priv-edtnes32.telusplanet.net@19-233-28.dial.terra.cl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-From_: janelethaterod@christianitymail.com Sun Oct 3 08:45:49 2004 X-Spam-Flag: YES X-MMR: 0 X-MMC: 39 X-MMX: 0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 needy m?rr??d and singl? and singl? wom?n gotta have hot-blooded partners see here: //hrnywvs.com/arn/gi.php or //wiveswhocheat69.biz/833096/dlw/fullpage.html If sent by mistake, you can of interrupting future ad-msgs: //perfectvgr.com/kiss/off/ apocrypha grosbeak loyal prize averred dominique densitometer base disdainful rembrandt balletomane muzak aniseikonic ingot commando streamline core histology lundberg sweepstake ovenbird lymphoma pontificate bookbind toothbrush affiance role bronx carpentry snifter byrd dunham harbinger ratty perversion hotbox atrophy churchwoman dutch corrosive freeing ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C4A921.C2DD1460-- The email which triggered this auto-response had the following headers: Return-Path: Received: from vmx2.spamcop.net (sc-smtp2.eq.ironport.com [192.168.18.82]) by sc-app3.eq.ironport.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1ECB01435A for ; Sun, 3 Oct 2004 07:18:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail118.megamailservers.com (216.251.36.118) by vmx2.spamcop.net with ESMTP; 03 Oct 2004 07:18:59 -0700 X-POP-User: postmaster.calalta.com Received: from robin (d198-53-245-28.abhsia.telus.net [198.53.245.28]) by mail118.megamailservers.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with SMTP id i93EIv7c028094 for ; Sun, 3 Oct 2004 10:18:57 -0400 From: "Robin Greig" To: "Spam" Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?FW:_**SPAM**_re:=5F:_necessitate_hungry_m=E4l=EAs?= Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 08:19:53 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0000_01C4A921.C2DD1460" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 From MikeE at ster.invalid Sun Oct 3 08:59:31 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sun Oct 3 11:00:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Newby troubles submitting spam References: Message-ID: Robin Greig wrote: > I apologize in advance if this is covered in a FAQ, I looked but > didn't find any reference. It is. See... from the very beginning instructions. How do I get my email program to reveal the full, unmodified email? - Microsoft products - http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/118.html - Outlook users please note: - "This means it is not possible to present any multipart, alternative or html messages to SpamCop in a way that SpamCop can properly parse the message. The result is that SpamCop will scan and parse the message header, but will not scan the message body for links to report." [ME: and that's for the *webparser*] > Outlook 2000 > Just signed up with Spamcop and am having trouble submitting spam via > email forwarding (using Outlook 2000, could that be the > problem.....?). Forwarding is an even bigger problem which is also covered in the faq http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/122.html "Outlook does not properly forward mail with the headers and message body intact. It is not possible to use SpamCop's email submission system with Outlook unless you use one of the below add-on programs or similar macro." > I have tried submitting by attaching spam and by including in the > original message, both generate what appears to me to be the same > message: You have to use the webparser and also use the outlook hack to the webparser. The fundamentals of the problem are that OL doesn't store the original message, like OE does. OL is designed to be a MAPI client for the office suite, not a spamhandler. OL detaches the headers and saves them, then converts the original spambody into something different, then when you want to give SC the original, instead OL gives SC the original headers and a 'regurgitated re-html-ized' version of the original, which often doesn't match the headers in content type at all. I think spamhandling with OL is a bad idea, but SC tries to accommodate it because it is a popular part of the office suite. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From user at domain.invalid Sun Oct 3 12:17:31 2004 From: user at domain.invalid (user@domain.invalid) Date: Sun Oct 3 13:20:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Newby troubles submitting spam In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > Robin Greig wrote: > >>I apologize in advance if this is covered in a FAQ, I looked but >>didn't find any reference. > > > It is. See... from the very beginning instructions. > > How do I get my email program to reveal the full, unmodified email? - > Microsoft products - > http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/118.html - Outlook users please > note: - > > "This means it is not possible to present any multipart, alternative or > html messages to SpamCop in a way that SpamCop can properly parse the > message. The result is that SpamCop will scan and parse the message > header, but will not scan the message body for links to report." > > [ME: and that's for the *webparser*] > > >>Outlook 2000 > > >>Just signed up with Spamcop and am having trouble submitting spam via >>email forwarding (using Outlook 2000, could that be the >>problem.....?). > > > Forwarding is an even bigger problem which is also covered in the faq > > http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/122.html > > "Outlook does not properly forward mail with the headers and message body > intact. It is not possible to use SpamCop's email submission system with > Outlook unless you use one of the below add-on programs or similar > macro." > > >>I have tried submitting by attaching spam and by including in the >>original message, both generate what appears to me to be the same >>message: > > > You have to use the webparser and also use the outlook hack to the > webparser. > > The fundamentals of the problem are that OL doesn't store the original > message, like OE does. OL is designed to be a MAPI client for the office > suite, not a spamhandler. OL detaches the headers and saves them, then > converts the original spambody into something different, then when you > want to give SC the original, instead OL gives SC the original headers > and a 'regurgitated re-html-ized' version of the original, which often > doesn't match the headers in content type at all. > > I think spamhandling with OL is a bad idea, but SC tries to accommodate > it because it is a popular part of the office suite. > Thanks, Robin From duncanObfsucation at punk.net Sun Oct 3 11:33:32 2004 From: duncanObfsucation at punk.net (D. Campbell (remove obfuscation)) Date: Sun Oct 3 13:25:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Newby troubles submitting spam: Outlook vs. OE References: Message-ID: "Robin Greig" wrote in message news:G1U7d.13554$223.84@edtnps89... > I apologize in advance if this is covered in a FAQ, I looked but didn't > find any reference. > > Just signed up with Spamcop and am having trouble submitting spam via > email forwarding (using Outlook 2000, could that be the problem.....?). > I have tried submitting by attaching spam and by including in the [snip] > X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) > Importance: Normal > X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Another responder found the FAQ references with pointers to "fix" Outlook's behavior. Another option is to use Outlook Express. Its upgrade path is easier (no product key to find) and it does the right thing with forwarded attachments. It does the wrong thing with newly set up accounts, though, so give it a bogus password until you've set the "leave on server" option. Also, it leaves hundreds of small files in "Temporary Internet Files" so, at least on my system, I have to clean up after it every week or so. duncan / noSpamPls at shack.punk.net From DELETE_westes at earthbroadcast.com Sun Oct 3 15:33:03 2004 From: DELETE_westes at earthbroadcast.com (CHANGE USERNAME TO westes) Date: Sun Oct 3 17:30:05 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] How to Get an ISP to Give You Correct Reverse IP? Message-ID: We have two ISPs that service our corporate network, and I would like to know how do you get an ISP to correctly identify your host using reverse IP. In particular with SBC DSL, all of the SBC addresses identify as ADSL hostnames. I have several correspondents who - unbelievably enough - block all incoming mail from any address that reverses to a DSL address. They automatically assume that this is spam. Since many companies these days use DSL networks, and they run their sendmail boxes on a public IP assigned on the a block within those DSL networks, such actions as blocking any incoming mail from a DSL address means you cannot receive mail from probably 10 to 40% of all businesses. I would like our corporate mail servers to correctly identify us to receivers using the company's domain. But how do I work through the SBC bureaucracy to accomplish this? The DSL support people seem completely clueless about the issue. -- Will westes AT earthbroadcast.com From MikeE at ster.invalid Sun Oct 3 16:16:11 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sun Oct 3 18:15:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: How to Get an ISP to Give You Correct Reverse IP? References: Message-ID: CHANGE USERNAME TO westes wrote: > We have two ISPs that service our corporate network, and I would like > to know how do you get an ISP to correctly identify your host using > reverse IP. It isn't necessarily the provider who controls the rDNS, it is the 'owner' of the netblock. > In particular with SBC DSL, all of the SBC addresses > identify as ADSL hostnames. Yes. > I have several correspondents who - > unbelievably enough - block all incoming mail from any address that > reverses to a DSL address. They automatically assume that this is > spam. I wouldn't say it like that. I would say they might use lists which block all listed IP addresses, and the listed IP addresses might include dynamic IPs, such as 64.174.48.18 rDNS adsl-64-174-48-18.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net or similar. > Since many companies these days use DSL networks, and they run their > sendmail boxes on a public IP assigned on the a block within those DSL > networks, such actions as blocking any incoming mail from a DSL > address means you cannot receive mail from probably 10 to 40% of all > businesses. Smarthost it > I would like our corporate mail servers to correctly identify us to > receivers using the company's domain. But how do I work through the > SBC bureaucracy to accomplish this? The DSL support people seem > completely clueless about the issue. That's probably not going to happen. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From Merlyn at Spamcop.net Sun Oct 3 19:15:29 2004 From: Merlyn at Spamcop.net (Merlyn) Date: Sun Oct 3 18:20:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: How to Get an ISP to Give You Correct Reverse IP? References: Message-ID: "CHANGE USERNAME TO westes" wrote in message news:cjpqvn$b24$1@news.spamcop.net... > We have two ISPs that service our corporate network, and I would like to > know how do you get an ISP to correctly identify your host using reverse > IP. > In particular with SBC DSL, all of the SBC addresses identify as ADSL > hostnames. I have several correspondents who - unbelievably enough - > block > all incoming mail from any address that reverses to a DSL address. They > automatically assume that this is spam. > > Since many companies these days use DSL networks, and they run their > sendmail boxes on a public IP assigned on the a block within those DSL > networks, such actions as blocking any incoming mail from a DSL address > means you cannot receive mail from probably 10 to 40% of all businesses. > > I would like our corporate mail servers to correctly identify us to > receivers using the company's domain. But how do I work through the SBC > bureaucracy to accomplish this? The DSL support people seem completely > clueless about the issue. > > -- > Will > westes AT earthbroadcast.com > Your Ip has a reverse dns setup if you have a mail server say mail.myhostexample.com and it is on Ip address 111.111.111.111 then you can setup a reverse record to point 111.111.111.111 to mail.myhostexample.com and you can also add a DNS spf text record. Like the ip you used to post with 64.174.48.18 has a reverse dns of adsl-64-174-48-18.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net it also has an email server: 220 mail.intersoft.com Z-Mail Central 0.90.74 beta: service ready canonical name mail.intersoft.com. aliases addresses 64.174.48.18 No matter what it is called it will always be an adsl line from packbell and whoever is blocking you will probably still be blocking you no matter what it is called. I see you also have had some problems lately according to your front page. You have also had some other problems in the past according to NANAE. -- Regards, Merlyn A Spamcop advocate No emails this account is for newsgroups only People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoided From duncanObfsucation at punk.net Sun Oct 3 17:10:23 2004 From: duncanObfsucation at punk.net (D. Campbell (remove obfuscation)) Date: Sun Oct 3 18:55:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: How to Get an ISP to Give You Correct Reverse IP? References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" wrote in message news:cjptku$g4i$1@news.spamcop.net: > westes wrote: > > We have two ISPs that service our corporate network, and I would like > > to know how do you get an ISP to correctly identify your host using > > reverse IP. > > It isn't necessarily the provider who controls the rDNS, it is the > 'owner' of the netblock. > Unless you can get your little block in the in-addr.arpa delegations you're dependant on a delegation from the entity curently delegated authority for the block. Owning a little /29, for instance, is nearly meaningless. > > In particular with SBC DSL, all of the SBC addresses > > identify as ADSL hostnames. > > Yes. > Uhm, no. For some address ranges the SBC/pacbell nameservers respond to the PTR request with a CNAME. The system responsible for maintaining the target PTR record is not under SBC/pacbell control. Example: ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;123.8.201.63.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR ;; ANSWER SECTION: 123.8.201.63.in-addr.arpa. 61 IN CNAME 123.120.8.201.63.in-addr.arpa. 123.120.8.201.63.in-addr.arpa. 43200 IN PTR goblin.punk.net. SBC is LOUSY at maintaining such associations. They require their servers to be traditional secondaries/ slaves to the new zones yet refuse administrative contact when a change of address on the customer's end breaks the mandatory slave setup. Find a clueful tech and be nice to him. When things are broken, remember that tech. To find that tech, mention that you'd like to set up an rfc2317 delegation. Have your own nameservers configured and running and tested before making that request. Read and understand rfc2317 before setting up the nameservers or pay someone to do it for you. PBI's practices don't store the network size, so ignore the bits about "/28" and so on. The zone name is the address you would have used to look up the ptr record for the network address of your subnet. > > I have several correspondents who - > > unbelievably enough - block all incoming mail from any address that > > reverses to a DSL address. They automatically assume that this is > > spam. > More likely the correspondants use a DNSBL that labels his address as dynamic or dialup or dsl. Changing your reverse-DNS isn't going to affect the DNSBL match. > > I would like our corporate mail servers to correctly identify us to > > receivers using the company's domain. But how do I work through the > > SBC bureaucracy to accomplish this? The DSL support people seem > > completely clueless about the issue. > Your corporate mail servers are under your control? Just give them names. They will identify themselves on outgoing mail transactions by that name and the receiving mailserver will write something like: Received: from bibblybobbly.reddwarf.net (4.3.2.1.adsl.pacbell.net [4.3.2.1]) ... (Say it in the voice of Robert Lewellen.) duncan From ric.gates at bigsleep.org Mon Oct 4 00:14:44 2004 From: ric.gates at bigsleep.org (Blammo) Date: Sun Oct 3 19:15:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: How to Get an ISP to Give You Correct Reverse IP? References: Message-ID: On 03 Oct 2004 Merlyn entered spamcop.help and left news:cjptm2$gar$1@news.spamcop.net: > No matter what it is called it will always be an adsl line from > packbell and whoever is blocking you will probably still be blocking > you no matter what it is called. > > I see this problem a lot, and the only thing I can do at my end is to whitelist that DSL line. The problem is when the MTA does a lookup of the connecting IP, it always gets the dsl name, never the MX name (no PTR for MX names). I believe the only way for them to deal with this problem is to get a second static IP for the mail server, or relay the mail though an outside server (a smarthost I suppose). I understand that some ISPs do have special cnames for outgoing IPs, if you can't get your own PTR for it. Also I've read that you can get the name server to point to your own name server on your local system, though I imagine that could cause problems when the system goes down (well, that would mess up mail delivery as well, wouldn't it?). I have spent quite some time looking into this, but still only guessing. Yes, I do understand that if the IP is listed somewhere for some reason, changing the name will make no difference. But I think the question here is getting the IP to resolve to something other than dsl.bla.bla. And if you don't have a static IP, you are SOL. -- | Ric From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Oct 4 00:18:09 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (RW) Date: Mon Oct 4 01:20:10 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Submitting Spam Via submit.xxxxx@spam.spamcop.net References: Message-ID: "Johnny Blaze" wrote in message > I spoke with a technician last night... his first response was "outbound > mail isn't filtered." So I told him about how the newsgroup said that > many Cox customers were complaining that they are in fact, filtered. He > instantly demanded that I "prove" that I am a Cox customer by verifying > my phone, address, etc. Then he put me on hold and came back and said > that if I believe that the email was filtered in error, to forward it as > an attachment to ThisIsNotSpam@cox.net. I haven't got a reply yet... I > don't think I'll be holding my breath :-) The problem is, this is going to break their filtering. It's not a case of 'this is not spam', because of course it is spam. If they adjust their filters to allow you to send it to SC, it will allow the same/similar mail to be sent to any address. I think what's needed is a bunch of cox customers to ride them to whitelist mail to @spam.spamcop.net (and the ftc address). Richard From no at no.spam Mon Oct 4 09:35:02 2004 From: no at no.spam (Michael Wise) Date: Mon Oct 4 11:40:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: How to Get an ISP to Give You Correct Reverse IP? References: Message-ID: In article , "CHANGE USERNAME TO westes" wrote: > We have two ISPs that service our corporate network, and I would like to > know how do you get an ISP to correctly identify your host using reverse IP. > In particular with SBC DSL, all of the SBC addresses identify as ADSL > hostnames. I have several correspondents who - unbelievably enough - block > all incoming mail from any address that reverses to a DSL address. They > automatically assume that this is spam. > > Since many companies these days use DSL networks, and they run their > sendmail boxes on a public IP assigned on the a block within those DSL > networks, such actions as blocking any incoming mail from a DSL address > means you cannot receive mail from probably 10 to 40% of all businesses. > > I would like our corporate mail servers to correctly identify us to > receivers using the company's domain. But how do I work through the SBC > bureaucracy to accomplish this? The DSL support people seem completely > clueless about the issue. There's no bureaucracy to work through...you simply ask SBC (via email to desccentraldcc[at]sbis.sbc.com) to delegate inaddr.arpa authority for your assigned net block to you. I have done it several times. --Mike From me at privacy.net Wed Oct 6 03:39:02 2004 From: me at privacy.net (Johnny Blaze) Date: Tue Oct 5 22:40:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Outlook, Cox, and the Complete Email Message-ID: I hacked this together to get around Cox's outbound mail filtering... I applied the registry hack: HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Office\11.0\Outlook\Options\Mail \SaveAllMIMENotJustHeaders = dword(0x1) Then installed Outlook Redemption (free for private use) Then I hacked together this macro: ' begin -------------------------------------------------- ' requires "Safe Outlook" Dependency via Redemption Option Explicit Private Sub SendToClipboard(text As String) Dim x As New DataObject x.SetText (text) x.PutInClipboard End Sub Private Function GetMsgText(mItem As MailItem) As String Dim utils As Redemption.MAPIUtils Set utils = CreateObject("Redemption.MAPIUtils") GetMsgText = utils.HrGetOneProp(mItem.MAPIOBJECT, CdoPR_TRANSPORT_MESSAGE_HEADERS) End Function Public Sub ReportSpam() Dim selected As Selection Dim mItem As MailItem Set selected = Application.ActiveExplorer.Selection If selected.Count > 0 Then For Each mItem In selected If mItem.Class = olMail Then SendToClipboard (GetMsgText(mItem)) MsgBox "Clipboad is ready." Else MsgBox "This macro only works on email messages." End If Next End If Set selected = Nothing End Sub ' end -------------------------------------------- So, now I highlight the spam messages, hit the macro-button, and each time the "Clipboard is ready" message box pops up, I paste the full text of the email into SpamCop's submission box (the single-window). From MikeE at ster.invalid Tue Oct 5 20:55:31 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Tue Oct 5 22:55:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Outlook, Cox, and the Complete Email References: Message-ID: Johnny Blaze wrote: > I hacked this together to get around Cox's outbound mail filtering... > So, now I highlight the spam messages, hit the macro-button, and each > time the "Clipboard is ready" message box pops up, I paste the full > text of the email into SpamCop's submission box (the single-window). So, I assume that means everything is working as you like? -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From forrie at Noforriesp.amcom Wed Oct 6 02:22:52 2004 From: forrie at Noforriesp.amcom (Forrest Aldrich) Date: Wed Oct 6 01:25:12 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Ricochet Harvestor discontinued? Message-ID: Hi there, I add Ricochet as an optional report item in my submissions. Recently, for at least 2-3 weeks, messages being sent to vipul.net are being rejected with messages like below. Does anyone have information about what's going on - and is SpamCop getting bounces like this from those who have Ricochet as an optional report item? Thanks, Forrest ============================================================ This is the Postfix program at host reflex.vipul.net. I'm sorry to have to inform you that the message returned below could not be delivered to one or more destinations. For further assistance, please send mail to If you do so, please include this problem report. You can delete your own text from the message returned below. The Postfix program : service unavailable Reporting-MTA: dns; reflex.vipul.net Arrival-Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 07:18:24 +0200 (CEST) Final-Recipient: rfc822; mail@vipul.net Action: failed Status: 5.0.0 Diagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; service unavailable ============================================================ From forrie at Noforriesp.amcom Wed Oct 6 02:23:51 2004 From: forrie at Noforriesp.amcom (Forrest Aldrich) Date: Wed Oct 6 01:25:21 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Ricochet Harvestor discontinued? Message-ID: Hi there, I add Ricochet as an optional report item in my submissions. Recently, for at least 2-3 weeks, messages being sent to vipul.net are being rejected with messages like below. Does anyone have information about what's going on - and is SpamCop getting bounces like this from those who have Ricochet as an optional report item? Thanks, Forrest ============================================================ This is the Postfix program at host reflex.vipul.net. I'm sorry to have to inform you that the message returned below could not be delivered to one or more destinations. For further assistance, please send mail to If you do so, please include this problem report. You can delete your own text from the message returned below. The Postfix program : service unavailable Reporting-MTA: dns; reflex.vipul.net Arrival-Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 07:18:24 +0200 (CEST) Final-Recipient: rfc822; mail@vipul.net Action: failed Status: 5.0.0 Diagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; service unavailable ============================================================ From me at privacy.net Wed Oct 6 13:40:46 2004 From: me at privacy.net (Johnny Blaze) Date: Wed Oct 6 08:45:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Outlook, Cox, and the Complete Email References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" wrote in news:cjvmov$ea2$1 @news.spamcop.net: > Johnny Blaze wrote: >> I hacked this together to get around Cox's outbound mail filtering... > >> So, now I highlight the spam messages, hit the macro-button, and each >> time the "Clipboard is ready" message box pops up, I paste the full >> text of the email into SpamCop's submission box (the single-window). > > So, I assume that means everything is working as you like? well, I'd rather just attach the spam to an email and send it.... but since that isn't going to happen, this is a fairly tolerable solution... spamcop and outlook side by side on the screen... paste, paste, paste :-) From MikeE at ster.invalid Wed Oct 6 08:50:28 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Wed Oct 6 10:50:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Outlook, Cox, and the Complete Email References: Message-ID: Johnny Blaze wrote: > "Mike Easter" >> So, I assume that means everything is working as you like? > > well, I'd rather just attach the spam to an email and send it.... but > since that isn't going to happen, this is a fairly tolerable > solution... spamcop and outlook side by side on the screen... paste, > paste, paste :-) Since you've already installed Redemption, you would only have to add Leon Mayne's OLSpamCop to get email submit capabilities http://www.olspamcop.org/ - OLSpamCop is an Outlook Add-in that processes emails and sends spam reports to a configurable email address (such as your SpamCop reporting address). It is listed in the OL 'suggestion box' on this page http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/122.html "Four add-on products have been created by SpamCop users to help streamline this process." I don't have any personal experience with any of those. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From h9vzc2i02 at sneakemail.com Wed Oct 6 09:08:49 2004 From: h9vzc2i02 at sneakemail.com (Anon_) Date: Wed Oct 6 11:10:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Outlook, Cox, and the Complete Email References: Message-ID: "Johnny Blaze" wrote in message news:Xns957A4E1EDAC9Bmeprivacynet@216.154.195.61... > "Mike Easter" wrote in news:cjvmov$ea2$1 > @news.spamcop.net: > > > Johnny Blaze wrote: > >> I hacked this together to get around Cox's outbound mail filtering... > > > >> So, now I highlight the spam messages, hit the macro-button, and each > >> time the "Clipboard is ready" message box pops up, I paste the full > >> text of the email into SpamCop's submission box (the single-window). > > > > So, I assume that means everything is working as you like? > > well, I'd rather just attach the spam to an email and send it.... but since > that isn't going to happen, this is a fairly tolerable solution... spamcop > and outlook side by side on the screen... paste, paste, paste :-) > *** Since you have 'something' to paste, instead of pasting into SC paste into notepad or WordPad and save as a text file. Then when you have finished processing the spams, just attach the batch of text files to an e-mail and submit THAT to SC. Process SC's response as usual. This way you do not have to wait for SC to parse each 'paste in' before processing the next spam. -- A SpamCop user and forum reader, Not Admin *** From dkona7b02 at sneakemail.com Wed Oct 6 15:19:01 2004 From: dkona7b02 at sneakemail.com (Spam Hater) Date: Wed Oct 6 14:19:07 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Outlook, Cox, and the Complete Email In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20041006141901.00f7c930@loki.fstrf.org> You guys are missing his first point. Cox is silently filtering SPAM out of all outgoing email... His emailed reports to SpamCop are not being received at all. His work around is the best he can do under the present circumstances and I think it is an interesting approach that may well benefit his fellow Cox customers in their reporting as well. It would be nice if someone on the FAQ committee could add his solution to the library... At 08:08 AM 10/6/2004 -0700, Anon_ typed: >"Johnny Blaze" wrote >> "Mike Easter" wrote >> >> > Johnny Blaze wrote: >> >> I hacked this together to get around Cox's outbound mail filtering... >> > >> >> So, now I highlight the spam messages, hit the macro-button, and each >> >> time the "Clipboard is ready" message box pops up, I paste the full >> >> text of the email into SpamCop's submission box (the single-window). >> > >> > So, I assume that means everything is working as you like? >> >> well, I'd rather just attach the spam to an email and send it.... but >since >> that isn't going to happen, this is a fairly tolerable solution... spamcop >> and outlook side by side on the screen... paste, paste, paste :-) >> > >*** >Since you have 'something' to paste, instead of pasting into SC paste into >notepad or WordPad and save as a text file. > >Then when you have finished processing the spams, just attach the batch of >text files to an e-mail and submit THAT to SC. Process SC's response as >usual. > >This way you do not have to wait for SC to parse each 'paste in' before >processing the next spam. From MikeE at ster.invalid Wed Oct 6 15:05:06 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Wed Oct 6 17:05:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Outlook, Cox, and the Complete Email References: Message-ID: >>>> Johnny Blaze wrote: >>>>> I hacked this together to get around Cox's outbound mail >>>>> filtering... Spam Hater wrote: > You guys are missing his first point. Cox is silently filtering SPAM > out of all outgoing email... His emailed reports to SpamCop are not > being received at all. His work around is the best he can do under > the present circumstances and I think it is an interesting approach > that may well benefit his fellow Cox customers in their reporting as > well. Ah, so. You are correct; I wasn't paying attention to the cox situation. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From h9vzc2i02 at sneakemail.com Wed Oct 6 18:20:27 2004 From: h9vzc2i02 at sneakemail.com (Anon_) Date: Wed Oct 6 20:25:14 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Outlook, Cox, and the Complete Email References: Message-ID: "Spam Hater" wrote in message news:mailman.262.1097086748.9607.spamcop-help@news.spamcop.net... > You guys are missing his first point. Cox is silently filtering SPAM out > of all outgoing email... His emailed reports to SpamCop are not being > received at all. His work around is the best he can do under the > present circumstances and I think it is an interesting approach that > may well benefit his fellow Cox customers in their reporting as well. > ** Sending spam to SC via hotmail circumvents the COX problem - since the mail is not sent via COX. -- A SpamCop user and forum reader, Not Admin *** From remaker at cisco.com Thu Oct 7 11:31:02 2004 From: remaker at cisco.com (Phillip Remaker) Date: Thu Oct 7 13:35:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Feature request Message-ID: I report all email spam through submit.xxxxxx@spamcop.net When I visit the website, I click "report now" and it works well. MAIN REQUEST: When I select "Send Spam Report(s) Now" I'd like to be taken to the next spam to be reported instead of the "report now" like. It would save me time. As it is, I have to wait, click and wait. Two waits. I'd only like to wait once (when I click "process") LESSER REQUESTS Tell me how many spams I have in queue to report. You have *N* Unreported Spam Saved From MikeE at ster.invalid Fri Oct 8 00:12:04 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Fri Oct 8 02:15:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: SpamCop cannot resolve http://csj.bjdblkii.info [200.157.160.248] (intelignet.com.br) References: Message-ID: posted to .spam & .help -- fups to .help Robi wrote: > Spamcop chokes on this one - can't resolve the links > is INTELIGNET.COM.BR blocking spamcop? > or is it a DNS issue? Here's a tracker for a modification of what you posted in .spam www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z680497069z82a3b3bde7fa9528989a5cb4a4fa045ez Tracking link: http://csj.bjdblkii.info/?qxmtmfq7aurw48qcsj Cannot resolve http://csj.bjdblkii.info/?qxmtmfq7aurw48qcsj It is a lot easier if you use the tracker - usually even if SC gags - because it gives better access to the orginal than if you put it into .spam and your newsreader bends the spam all over the place with linewraps and things that have to be removed by hand. Anyway; in addition to needing all of the repair that your newsreader induced, that item needed a blank line space after the header, and then in the final analysis, SC couldn't resolve the link csj.bjdblkii.info Neither can I 10/07/04 22:47:08 dns csj.bjdblkii.info No DNS for this address (host doesn't exist) I don't get your 200.157.160.248 unless I take it somewhere like dnsstuff which will start at the top and work down How I am searching: Searching for csj.bjdblkii.info A record at e.root-servers.net [192.203.230.10]: Got referral to TLD1.ULTRADNS.NET. [took 100 ms] Searching for csj.bjdblkii.info A record at TLD1.ULTRADNS.NET. [204.74.112.1]: Got referral to second.newwawes.info. [took 48 ms] Searching for csj.bjdblkii.info A record at second.newwawes.info. [200.205.84.225]: Timed out. Trying again. Searching for csj.bjdblkii.info A record at third.newwawes.info. [61.141.32.197]: Reports csj.bjdblkii.info. [took 1602 ms] Answer: csj.bjdblkii.info. A IN 1200 200.157.160.248 whois -h whois.afilias.info bjdblkii.info ... Name Server:FIRST.NEWWAWES.INFO Name Server:SECOND.NEWWAWES.INFO Name Server:THIRD.NEWWAWES.INFO I can't actually do a 'dig' on it with my own nameserver It has very flakey nameservice; here's some 'times': Time to look up bjdblkii.info A record Generated by www.DNSstuff.com at 05:53:41 GMT on 08 Oct 2004. Searching for bjdblkii.info A record at c.root-servers.net Got referral to TLD1.ULTRADNS.NET. [took 47 ms] Searching for bjdblkii.info A record at TLD1.ULTRADNS.NET. Got referral to second.newwawes.info. [took 50 ms] Searching for bjdblkii.info A record at second.newwawes.info. Timed out. Trying again. Searching for bjdblkii.info A record at second.newwawes.info. Timed out. Trying again. Searching for bjdblkii.info A record at third.newwawes.info. Timed out. Trying again. Searching for bjdblkii.info A record at first.newwawes.info. Timed out. Trying again. Searching for bjdblkii.info A record at second.newwawes.info. Timed out. Trying again. Searching for bjdblkii.info A record at second.newwawes.info. Timed out. Trying again. Sorry, I could not continue. If you persist, you can actually eventually get an IP for the 3rd nameserver, so then if you dig there 61.141.32.197 you get this; 0/07/04 22:56:31 dig bjdblkii.info @ 61.141.32.197 Dig bjdblkii.info@61.141.32.197 ... failed, couldn't connect to nameserver But, anyway, despite the horrific nameservice, if you lookat the 200.157.160.248 rDNS 200-157-160-248.intelignet.com.br you get whois -h whois.abuse.net inteligtelecom.com.br ... mail-abuse@nic.br postmaster@inteligtelecom.com.br (for com.br) and which is listed in some blocklists, such as spamhaus http://www.spamhaus.org/SBL/sbl.lasso?query=SBL19866 as the /25. so, that forces me to consider upstream adjacencies for AS17379 a /16 route: 200.157.0.0/16 descr: INTELIGNET Upstream Adjacent AS list AS1239 SPRN Sprint = abuse@sprint.net AS5511 OPENTRANSIT France Telecom = whois -h whois.abuse.net opentransit.net ... abuse@opentransit.net webmaster@opentransit.net postmaster@opentransit.net (for opentransit.net) So, the upshot is that you would do the inteligent plus its upstreams the spring and opentransit stuff. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Fri Oct 8 04:54:28 2004 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Glenn Daniels) Date: Fri Oct 8 03:55:19 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: SpamCop cannot resolve http://csj.bjdblkii.info [200.157.160.248] (intelignet.com.br) References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" wrote in message > posted to .spam & .help -- fups to .help > > Robi wrote: > > Spamcop chokes on this one - can't resolve the links > > is INTELIGNET.COM.BR blocking spamcop? > > or is it a DNS issue? > The site is 404 compliant through my ISP, but rather easy to locate using @nonymouse, and a WHOIS has no problem identifying the IP. So I figured it to be "blocked" from this end, rather than from Brazil. The domain in Robi's spamitem is one for the "hunter's" playlist, so I was thinking it probably to be an SBL issue and sure enough, Mike sez: > But, anyway, despite the horrific nameservice, if you lookat the > 200.157.160.248 rDNS 200-157-160-248.intelignet.com.br you get > > whois -h whois.abuse.net inteligtelecom.com.br ... > mail-abuse@nic.br postmaster@inteligtelecom.com.br (for com.br) > > and which is listed in some blocklists, such as spamhaus > http://www.spamhaus.org/SBL/sbl.lasso?query=SBL19866 as the /25. > which tells me that not only will they need to send much, much more spam to find suckers who can access the scamvendor website, I personally have no interest in notifying anyone as I consider it a problem resolving. If potential "buyers" must extract the link from the spamitem and slip past the sbl to access the site, I think it safe to assume that they are assuming risk of their own accord that steps beyond the solicitation of the spamitem. If the scamvendors get no business, soon enough they will realize that spamvertising a site we can't get to from here is not cost effective. Happy hunting! Glenn From spamcop at davnet.org Fri Oct 8 10:48:43 2004 From: spamcop at davnet.org (Kevin Davidson) Date: Fri Oct 8 09:50:20 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Feature request In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Phillip Remaker wrote: > I report all email spam through submit.xxxxxx@spamcop.net > > When I visit the website, I click "report now" and it works well. > > MAIN REQUEST: > > When I select "Send Spam Report(s) Now" I'd like to be taken to the next > spam to be reported instead of the "report now" like. It would save me > time. As it is, I have to wait, click and wait. Two waits. I'd only like > to wait once (when I click "process") > > LESSER REQUESTS > > Tell me how many spams I have in queue to report. You have *N* Unreported > Spam Saved > > > I could not agree more! kevin From spamcop at davnet.org Fri Oct 8 10:49:38 2004 From: spamcop at davnet.org (Kevin Davidson) Date: Fri Oct 8 09:50:34 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Report one or many? Message-ID: If I get 10 copies of "Voluptuous sluts get DIRTY!" at about the same time, should I report all 10 of them or just one? Kevin From MikeE at ster.invalid Fri Oct 8 08:46:21 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Fri Oct 8 10:50:20 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Report one or many? References: Message-ID: Kevin Davidson wrote: > If I get 10 copies of "Voluptuous sluts get DIRTY!" at about the same > time, should I report all 10 of them or just one? You can report all 10. They might be from several sources. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From spamcop at davnet.org Fri Oct 8 11:57:51 2004 From: spamcop at davnet.org (Kevin Davidson) Date: Fri Oct 8 11:00:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Report one or many? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > Kevin Davidson wrote: > >>If I get 10 copies of "Voluptuous sluts get DIRTY!" at about the same >>time, should I report all 10 of them or just one? > > > You can report all 10. They might be from several sources. Let's say they are all from the same place. For example, I just now got 6 spams: "Over 60 Prescription_Medication At Whol? S?le_Price" all within one minute and all from IP address 211.214.44.251. Kevin From MikeE at ster.invalid Fri Oct 8 09:29:53 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Fri Oct 8 11:30:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Report one or many? References: Message-ID: Kevin Davidson wrote: > Mike Easter wrote: >> Kevin Davidson wrote: >> >>> If I get 10 copies of "Voluptuous sluts get DIRTY!" at about the >>> same time, should I report all 10 of them or just one? >> >> >> You can report all 10. They might be from several sources. > > Let's say they are all from the same place. For example, I just now > got 6 spams: "Over 60 Prescription_Medication At Whol? S?le_Price" all > within one minute and all from IP address 211.214.44.251. We might be getting into some fine points about server hiccups that we could discuss, but it probably isn't very important here, since that is a dynamic DUL IP. The most likely thing is that those are 6 different items, and that the ratware was hiccuping, and that they are all legitimately reportable, which will have an effect on the source listing. The IP is already listed all over the place, including SCbl also places like cbl which does proxy/trojans. Occasionally a relay will get stuck and hiccup on a goodmail with a msgid and you can see identical legitimate msg id/s and determine that you are actually looking at multiple iterations of the same message. In this case the spammer might or not have put a msgid, and the recipient server might or not have put one if the spamware didn't, and there's no server involved, and it sounds like you can report all 6. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From remaker at suespammers.org Fri Oct 8 11:00:44 2004 From: remaker at suespammers.org (Phillip Remaker) Date: Fri Oct 8 13:05:21 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Feature request References: Message-ID: So, who would be the person to whom we should beg for feature requests? From MikeE at ster.invalid Fri Oct 8 11:23:57 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Fri Oct 8 13:25:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Feature request References: Message-ID: Phillip Remaker wrote: > So, who would be the person to whom we should beg for feature > requests? Well, I'm a supporter of 'talking about' such in the newsgroups, and letting the deputies see discussions about things and do what they want to about passing anything along - so they act as a filter and the newsgroup acts like a sounding board for the discussion and support and arguments - so your voice is both amplified and filtered ;-) There's a little bit of a problem with this particular newsgroup; since in some ways it is not supposed to exist anymore and it has lost some of the links to it which were previously found in help and forum sections. So, it doesn't get visited as much as the spamcop one at news://news.spamcop.net/spamcop - the page where that link was found http://www.spamcop.net/help.shtml#nntp no longer shows a link to this spamcop.help group. The other place where I don't usually go or send people is to the forums http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/ or http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showforum=3 I guess my bottom line is to use the spamcop newsgroup instead of the spamcop.help ng because it is more popular nowadays, what with the changes about access to this group and the way some people don't frequent it. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From mrichter at cpl.net Fri Oct 8 11:51:10 2004 From: mrichter at cpl.net (Mike Richter) Date: Fri Oct 8 13:55:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Report one or many? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Kevin Davidson wrote: > If I get 10 copies of "Voluptuous sluts get DIRTY!" at about the same > time, should I report all 10 of them or just one? Posted by a (mostly) happy SpamCop user, not an official: It depends on how angry (inspired) you are by DIRTY sluts. A single report suffices to put the proximate offenders on notice: the spamvertized site, the broken link (usually) in the relay chain, etc. In all likelihood, the other spew will have found different paths, but if not you will be repeating - hammering home - the obvious: that the site is spamvertized, that the relay is open (or whatever misconfiguration applies). In short, almost everything that matters is covered with the first report, but if you feel that only clean sluts should be promoted, then repeat for each offense. It is permitted and there's no law against feeling good through doing good. Mike -- mrichter@cpl.net http://www.mrichter.com/ From eddie at eddie.web Fri Oct 8 16:58:46 2004 From: eddie at eddie.web (eddie) Date: Fri Oct 8 16:00:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Report one or many? References: Message-ID: On Fri, 08 Oct 2004 10:57:51 -0400, Kevin Davidson scratched out the following: snip > Let's say they are all from the same place. For example, I just now got 6 > spams: "Over 60 Prescription_Medication At Whol? S?le_Price" all within > one minute and all from IP address 211.214.44.251. > > Kevin I rarely get more than 4 of those simultaneous identical spams, but when I do I report each one separately, and if they are from the same ISP, I add a note to each one that this is number 2, 3, etc. Even if they are from a hijacked zombie, to me it is the ISP's responsibility not to allow spam, and certainly to catch multiple emails to the same address. I no longer hold zombie owners or their ISPs innocent. They have had over a year to fix the problem. I now assume they support the practice and let them prove me wrong. -- Rather: I don't want to be argumentative, Mr. vice president. Bush41(veep):You do, Dan. Rather: No -- no, sir, I don't. From amenex at amenex.com Fri Oct 8 18:20:21 2004 From: amenex at amenex.com (George Langford, Sc.D.) Date: Fri Oct 8 17:20:33 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Accidentally paid for another year - status of account ? Message-ID: <200410082120.i98LKLel019867@email2.voicenet.com> Hello SpamCop Help ! While attempting to logon to my SpamCop webmail, I clicked on the wrong bookmark and thought it was time to pay for another year when your account renewal page came up. So I paid, and received an acknowledgement. Now I find that there is no place on the webmail site nor on SpamCop's homepage to review my account status - to find out when is the presumably new renewal date. Best regards for a fine service, George Langford From r_buecheler at hotmail.com Fri Oct 8 18:44:46 2004 From: r_buecheler at hotmail.com (Robi) Date: Fri Oct 8 18:50:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: SpamCop cannot resolve http://csj.bjdblkii.info [200.157.160.248] (intelignet.com.br) References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > posted to .spam & .help -- fups to .help > > Robi wrote: > > Spamcop chokes on this one - can't resolve the links > > is INTELIGNET.COM.BR blocking spamcop? > > or is it a DNS issue? > > Here's a tracker for a modification of what you posted in .spam > > www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z680497069z82a3b3bde7fa9528989a5cb4a4fa045ez > Tracking link: http://csj.bjdblkii.info/?qxmtmfq7aurw48qcsj > Cannot resolve http://csj.bjdblkii.info/?qxmtmfq7aurw48qcsj > > It is a lot easier if you use the tracker - usually even if SC gags - > because it gives better access to the orginal than if you put it into > .spam and your newsreader bends the spam all over the place with > linewraps and things that have to be removed by hand. Mike, my newsreader posted it exactly as I received it :) ~~~~~~~~~~~~

Order Now=

~~~~~~~~~~~~ unless your NR wraps incoming messages... Do you use OE quote-fix? At least OE alone shouldn't line-wrap in plain ole reading mode well, why I didn't post the tracker was because - IIRC - links used not to be included in the "preview" trackers. I see they are included now. > Anyway; in addition to needing all of the repair that your newsreader > induced, that item needed a blank line space after the header, and then > in the final analysis, SC couldn't resolve the link csj.bjdblkii.info > > Neither can I > > 10/07/04 22:47:08 dns csj.bjdblkii.info > No DNS for this address > (host doesn't exist) > > I don't get your 200.157.160.248 unless I take it somewhere like > dnsstuff which will start at the top and work down > > How I am searching: > Searching for csj.bjdblkii.info A record at e.root-servers.net > [192.203.230.10]: Got referral to TLD1.ULTRADNS.NET. [took 100 ms] > Searching for csj.bjdblkii.info A record at TLD1.ULTRADNS.NET. > [204.74.112.1]: Got referral to second.newwawes.info. [took 48 ms] > Searching for csj.bjdblkii.info A record at second.newwawes.info. > [200.205.84.225]: Timed out. Trying again. > Searching for csj.bjdblkii.info A record at third.newwawes.info. > [61.141.32.197]: Reports csj.bjdblkii.info. [took 1602 ms] > > Answer: > csj.bjdblkii.info. A IN 1200 200.157.160.248 > > whois -h whois.afilias.info bjdblkii.info ... > Name Server:FIRST.NEWWAWES.INFO > Name Server:SECOND.NEWWAWES.INFO > Name Server:THIRD.NEWWAWES.INFO > > I can't actually do a 'dig' on it with my own nameserver > > It has very flakey nameservice; here's some 'times': that's what I found out too, ergo my remark "or is it a DNS issue?" [...] > If you persist, you can actually eventually get an IP for the 3rd > nameserver, so then if you dig there 61.141.32.197 you get this; Well, I don't know how long and often I tried, but never got it to return the address through the NS - either one. I used net.daemon. although IP check, ping, tracert and web agent found the IP right away. No idea how nor what NS they actually used. > 0/07/04 22:56:31 dig bjdblkii.info @ 61.141.32.197 > Dig bjdblkii.info@61.141.32.197 ... > failed, couldn't connect to nameserver > > But, anyway, despite the horrific nameservice, if you lookat the > 200.157.160.248 rDNS 200-157-160-248.intelignet.com.br you get > > whois -h whois.abuse.net inteligtelecom.com.br ... > mail-abuse@nic.br postmaster@inteligtelecom.com.br (for com.br) > > and which is listed in some blocklists, such as spamhaus > http://www.spamhaus.org/SBL/sbl.lasso?query=SBL19866 as the /25. > > so, that forces me to consider upstream adjacencies for AS17379 a /16 > route: 200.157.0.0/16 > descr: INTELIGNET > > Upstream Adjacent AS list > AS1239 SPRN Sprint = abuse@sprint.net > AS5511 OPENTRANSIT France Telecom = > whois -h whois.abuse.net opentransit.net ... > abuse@opentransit.net webmaster@opentransit.net > postmaster@opentransit.net (for opentransit.net) > > So, the upshot is that you would do the inteligent plus its upstreams the > spring and opentransit stuff. but.. but.. but... 3 [ 12.124.56.145] 12.124.56.145 14 ms 4 [ 12.123.197.166] gbr2-p56.attga.ip.att.net 28 ms 5 [ 12.122.12.37] tbr2-p013602.attga.ip.att.net 27 ms 6 [ 12.123.20.253] ggr1-p370.attga.ip.att.net 27 ms 7 [ 192.205.32.122] att-gw.atl.opentransit.net 27 ms <-----------? 8 [ 193.251.240.85] 193.251.240.85 27 ms 9 [193.251.128.166] P12-0.OAKCR2.Oakhill.opentransit.net 41 ms 10 [ 193.251.243.81] P3-0.OAKCR1.Oakhill.opentransit.net 55 ms 11 [193.251.242.253] P4-0.NYKCR3.New-york.opentransit.net 110 ms 12 [193.251.241.242] P7-0.NYKBB3.New-york.opentransit.net 55 ms 13 [193.251.154.158] Intelig.GW.opentransit.net 165 ms <-------------? 14 [ 200.184.254.9] intelig-pos6-0-nxrrjo101.intelignet.com.br 179 ms 15 [ 200.184.254.1] intelig-pos4-0-nxrspo101.intelignet.com.br 165 ms 16 [200.184.254.114] intelig-pos1-0-0-dxrcas101.intelignet.com.br 179 ms 17 [ 200.184.202.81] intelig-fe12-0-0-darcas101.intelignet.com.br 274 ms 18 [200.184.238.170] 200-184-238-170.intelignet.com.br 179 ms so intelignet.com.br connectivity is provided by opentransit.net who get their connectivity through ATT spamhaven? Or have I got the tracert idea wrong? -- Robi From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Oct 8 20:52:19 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Ellen) Date: Fri Oct 8 20:00:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Accidentally paid for another year - status of account ? References: Message-ID: "George Langford, Sc.D." wrote in message news:mailman.264.1097270434.9607.spamcop-help@news.spamcop.net... > Hello SpamCop Help ! > > While attempting to logon to my SpamCop webmail, I clicked on the > wrong bookmark and thought it was time to pay for another year when > your account renewal page came up. So I paid, and received an > acknowledgement. Now I find that there is no place on the webmail > site nor on SpamCop's homepage to review my account status - to find > out when is the presumably new renewal date. > > Best regards for a fine service, > George Langford I sent your post to Jeff to take care of. Ellen From MikeE at ster.invalid Fri Oct 8 20:13:09 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Fri Oct 8 22:15:21 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: SpamCop cannot resolve http://csj.bjdblkii.info [200.157.160.248] (intelignet.com.br) References: Message-ID: Robi wrote: X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 > Mike Easter wrote: >> It is a lot easier if you use the tracker - usually even if SC gags - > Mike, my newsreader posted it exactly as I received it :) [I'm not trying to be argumentative - Yes, you are - No, I'm not - Yes, you are ;-) ] Well, you received it; and you took what you received and you 'newsreader' [OE with or without anything else] posted it. Then, I went to your posted message's Properties [which doesn't involve my OE QF which I /do/ use] to copy what my OE received from the newsserver and stored and which your OE [with or without QF] sent, without my OE introducing /additional/ influences, either from its own wrapping for the display, or the bad 'naked' OE wrapping typically remedied by QF's 'anti-OE-badwrapping' strategies. What I mean there is that the purest state that one/I can see what you sent and the SC newsserver posted is in the Properties, which is what I started with and started trying to 'fix'. > unless your NR wraps incoming messages... > Do you use OE quote-fix? Yes > At least OE alone shouldn't line-wrap in plain ole reading mode > > well, why I didn't post the tracker was because - IIRC - links used > not to be included in the "preview" trackers. I see they are included now. Yes. They are included now. Tracker is better than newsgroup posting. Except rarely. Daniel Diaz and I and I think someone else experimented with whether or not it is possible to post something in .spam without bending it. The subject is very complicated, and varies with the newsreaders; ie isn't 'universal' - it is possible to do some tricks by using attachments. >> It has very flakey nameservice; here's some 'times': > > that's what I found out too, ergo my remark "or is it a DNS issue?" Yes; we're on the same page about that. > [...] >> If you persist, you can actually eventually get an IP for the 3rd >> nameserver, so then if you dig there 61.141.32.197 you get this; > > Well, I don't know how long and often I tried, but never got it to > return the address through the NS - either one. Well, you know how tenacious I am sometimes. Or, if you don't know, I am. > I used net.daemon. although IP check, ping, tracert and web agent > found the IP right away. No idea how nor what NS they actually used. I like netdemon and use it for some things. I tend to use SSpers and when it doesn't work for some problem, go to an online gizmo like dnsstuff. One of these days I'm going cygwin and some other tools. If I haven't gone off in some direction which doesn't involve cygwin at all ;-) >> But, anyway, despite the horrific nameservice, if you lookat the >> 200.157.160.248 rDNS 200-157-160-248.intelignet.com.br you get >> >> whois -h whois.abuse.net inteligtelecom.com.br ... >> mail-abuse@nic.br postmaster@inteligtelecom.com.br (for com.br) >> >> and which is listed in some blocklists, such as spamhaus >> http://www.spamhaus.org/SBL/sbl.lasso?query=SBL19866 as the /25. >> >> so, that forces me to consider upstream adjacencies for AS17379 a >> /16 route: 200.157.0.0/16 >> descr: INTELIGNET >> >> Upstream Adjacent AS list >> AS1239 SPRN Sprint = abuse@sprint.net >> AS5511 OPENTRANSIT France Telecom = >> whois -h whois.abuse.net opentransit.net ... >> abuse@opentransit.net webmaster@opentransit.net >> postmaster@opentransit.net (for opentransit.net) >> >> So, the upshot is that you would do the inteligent plus its >> upstreams the spring and opentransit stuff. > > but.. but.. but... Okay, I think you want me to address the issue of ASN upstream adjacencies vs tracert/ing. First, let's chop off all of that useless topjunk from yours that has to do with whatever place you are located, which includes the att. > 7 [ 192.205.32.122] att-gw.atl.opentransit.net 27 ms > 13 [193.251.154.158] Intelig.GW.opentransit.net 165 ms > <-------------? 14 [ 200.184.254.9] > intelig-pos6-0-nxrrjo101.intelignet.com.br 179 ms 15 [ > 200.184.254.1] intelig-pos4-0-nxrspo101.intelignet.com.br 165 ms > 16 [200.184.254.114] intelig-pos1-0-0-dxrcas101.intelignet.com.br > 179 ms 17 [ 200.184.202.81] > intelig-fe12-0-0-darcas101.intelignet.com.br 274 ms 18 > [200.184.238.170] 200-184-238-170.intelignet.com.br 179 ms > > so intelignet.com.br connectivity is provided by opentransit.net who > get their connectivity through ATT spamhaven? Or have I got the tracert > idea wrong? Yes. sorta or mostly; or rather that you shouldn't determine that from what you saw in the tracert. The tracert is trying to get to you, and the top part is influenced by your own services and their 'deals' with who they like to deal with. Here's mine for the IP, with some abbreviation for clarity Trace 200.157.160.248 ... 5 66.185.150.254 (Sprint.atdn.net) 6 144.232.20.68 (sl-bb24-ana-9-0.sprintlink.net ok) 7 144.232.1.182 (sl-bb25-ana-15-0.sprintlink.net ok) 8 144.232.9.65 (sl-bb24-fw-1-0.sprintlink.net ok) 9 144.232.9.36 (sl-bb22-orl-2-0.sprintlink.net ok) 10 144.232.2.166 (sl-gw15-orl-14-0.sprintlink.net ok) 11 160.81.138.58 (sl-int-14-0.sprintlink.net ok) 12 200.184.254.13 (intelig-pos6-0-nxrspo101.intelignet.com.br 13 200.184.254.114 (intelig-pos1-0-0-dxrcas101.intelignet.com.br bogus) 14 200.184.202.81 (intelig-fe12-0-0-darcas101.intelignet.com.br) 15 200.184.238.170 211ms 210ms 212ms it doesn't get all the way there to the target, but you get the gist; my IP goes from some local stuff for me thru' atdn to sprint to intelignet. The tracert is a very 'limited' view of one little route taken by sort of one little packet [or a small family of them] whereas the ASN adjacency information, altho' not 'perfect' in telling the story, is based on much more sound information. You can 'expand' the ASN information if you want to mess with it. You can start with the first stuff, AS17379 intelignet, then go to the upstreams 1239 [sprint] and 5511 [opentransit] and then check /their/ upstreams. That gets way too complicated. The reason the ATT was in yours was probably because that is who 'your guys' who are at the very top, like to make their deals with; just like 'my guys' which are RR AOL like to make their deals with atdn.net at the top of mine. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From h9vzc2i02 at sneakemail.com Fri Oct 8 22:37:32 2004 From: h9vzc2i02 at sneakemail.com (Anon_) Date: Sat Oct 9 00:40:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: SpamCop cannot resolve http://csj.bjdblkii.info [200.157.160.248] (intelignet.com.br) References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" wrote in message news:ck7hd4$29o$1@news.spamcop.net... > Robi wrote: > X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 > > > Mike Easter wrote: > >> It is a lot easier if you use the tracker - usually even if SC gags - > > > Mike, my newsreader posted it exactly as I received it :) > > [I'm not trying to be argumentative - Yes, you are - No, I'm not - Yes, > you are ;-) ] > > Well, you received it; and you took what you received and you > 'newsreader' [OE with or without anything else] posted it. Then, I went > to your posted message's Properties [which doesn't involve my OE QF which > I /do/ use] to copy what my OE received from the newsserver and stored > and which your OE [with or without QF] sent, without my OE introducing > /additional/ influences, either from its own wrapping for the display, or > the bad 'naked' OE wrapping typically remedied by QF's > 'anti-OE-badwrapping' strategies. > ** This is another poster with a question. I'm using oe as my newsreader and have a question - If oe DOES s**w up the header/body when viewing it on the screen, does the "view source" also mess it up or can that be pasted into the submittal panel(s) on SC? I have been pasting that source into WordPad and saving as a text file and attaching the text file for submittal to SC - has always seemed to work ok - but is that source the original message that I received or is it "edited" somehow by oe? -- A SpamCop user and forum reader, Not Admin *** From MikeE at ster.invalid Fri Oct 8 23:23:57 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sat Oct 9 01:25:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: SpamCop cannot resolve http://csj.bjdblkii.info [200.157.160.248] (intelignet.com.br) References: Message-ID: Anon_ wrote: > This is another poster with a question. > > I'm using oe as my newsreader and have a question - > > If oe DOES s**w up the header/body when viewing it on the screen, > does the "view source" also mess it up or can that be pasted into the > submittal panel(s) on SC? I have been pasting that source into > WordPad and saving as a text file and attaching the text file for > submittal to SC - has always seemed to work ok - but is that source > the original message that I received or is it "edited" somehow by oe? I'm not completely sure that I understand you; so I'll just answer a question I like ;-) If OE is your mailuser agent, you can use its File/ Properties message source to capture and paste your spams into the parser; that works just fine. Wraps are not a problem. That's not exactly what we're talking about here, tho'. What we're talking about here is someone using their OE *newsreader* and pasting a spam into the *body* of a news *message*. The typical newsreader send configuration of OE is plaintext 'automatically wrap text at xx characters when sending' and that wrapped condition will affect what can be found in the Properties of the newsgroup message. So, their spam has been 'wrapped' - and those EOLs have to be removed manually. I know; I do it *all the time*. Some other newsreaders may have a variety of configurations. If we were going to instruct people how to post spams into .spam with their newsreader to keep those wraps out, it would vary newsreader by newsreader. For OE, it can be done by capturing the spam in the way you or I described above, then saving it as a text or eml file, then attaching that file to the newsgroup message instead of putting it into the body. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From Spam_N_Scams_Reporter at yahoo.whatever Fri Oct 8 23:47:27 2004 From: Spam_N_Scams_Reporter at yahoo.whatever (Spam N Scams Reporter) Date: Sat Oct 9 01:50:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Feature request In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Phillip Remaker wrote: > I report all email spam through submit.xxxxxx@spamcop.net > > When I visit the website, I click "report now" and it works well. > > MAIN REQUEST: > > When I select "Send Spam Report(s) Now" I'd like to be taken to the next > spam to be reported instead of the "report now" like. It would save me > time. As it is, I have to wait, click and wait. Two waits. I'd only like > to wait once (when I click "process") > > LESSER REQUESTS > > Tell me how many spams I have in queue to report. You have *N* Unreported > Spam Saved > > > I too had concidered this, but came to realize that doing what you suggest would take away the opportunity to submit spam by copy and paste from another email addy. From ric.gates at bigsleep.org Sat Oct 9 11:20:55 2004 From: ric.gates at bigsleep.org (Blammo) Date: Sat Oct 9 06:25:13 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Feature request References: Message-ID: On 08 Oct 2004 Spam N Scams Reporter entered spamcop.help and left news:ck7u1m$lme$1@news.spamcop.net: > Phillip Remaker wrote: > >> >> When I select "Send Spam Report(s) Now" I'd like to be taken to the >> next spam to be reported instead of the "report now" like. >> > I too had concidered this, but came to realize that doing what you > suggest would take away the opportunity to submit spam by copy and > paste from another email addy. > > An easy work-around would be to change the tabbing order in the page so that "Report Now" is first and you could simply hit Enter or Tab, Enter. Also a bit of Javascript could put focus on that link. And [Spamcop] could put focus on "Skip to reports", then I could simply hit Enter, Enter, Tab, Enter, Enter, etc. Actually I can do this now, but I have to hit Tab a whole bunch of times to get past the navigation links. -- | Ric | From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Oct 9 12:16:38 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Qman) Date: Sat Oct 9 12:20:05 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Report one or many? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >>but if you feel that only clean sluts should be promoted, then repeat for each offense<< Heeheehee! Thanks for the laugh, Mike! Mike Richter wrote: > Kevin Davidson wrote: > >> If I get 10 copies of "Voluptuous sluts get DIRTY!" at about the same >> time, should I report all 10 of them or just one? > > > Posted by a (mostly) happy SpamCop user, not an official: > > It depends on how angry (inspired) you are by DIRTY sluts. > > A single report suffices to put the proximate offenders on notice: the > spamvertized site, the broken link (usually) in the relay chain, etc. In > all likelihood, the other spew will have found different paths, but if > not you will be repeating - hammering home - the obvious: that the site > is spamvertized, that the relay is open (or whatever misconfiguration > applies). > > In short, almost everything that matters is covered with the first > report, but if you feel that only clean sluts should be promoted, then > repeat for each offense. It is permitted and there's no law against > feeling good through doing good. > > Mike From remaker at suespammers.org Sat Oct 9 10:39:27 2004 From: remaker at suespammers.org (Phillip Remaker) Date: Sat Oct 9 12:40:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Feature request References: Message-ID: > I too had concidered this, but came to realize that doing what you suggest > would take away the opportunity to submit spam by copy and paste from > another email addy. Not true!! When there are no more spam in the queue, THEN you go to the copy/paste page. There is no reason to keep going back to the copy /paste page where there is spam in queue!! Once the mail-in queueu is emupy, then go to the cut-paste page. If hand an urgent you want to "butt in" reporting, add a link to the reporting page to jump to the cut-and-paste page. Or, provide a different page (spamcopy queue) that will behave as I ask. Even if you add a button "Sent spam report now" "Send and move to next in queue" "Preview reports" "cancel" would help. From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Oct 9 13:26:50 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Don Wannit) Date: Sat Oct 9 15:30:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Feature request In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Phillip Remaker wrote: > LESSER REQUESTS > > Tell me how many spams I have in queue to report. You have *N* > Unreported > Spam Saved Fervent agreement! This has been requested many times by many SpamCoppers. IIRC, the [rare] response was something along the lines of "doing that counting would increase the system load and slow down SpamCop more than TPTB are willing to do." Sure would be nice, though. I'm willing to wait an extra second per page refresh of the Report Spam page. I wonder how large the aggregate cost really is. Lots of reporters, lots of page refreshes, those milliseconds add up. Still, it has to be lots less than a single cache-miss DNS lookup. -- Don Wannit A paid SpamCop user since 1999 From ric.gates at bigsleep.org Sat Oct 9 21:44:36 2004 From: ric.gates at bigsleep.org (Blammo) Date: Sat Oct 9 16:45:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Feature request References: Message-ID: On 09 Oct 2004 Phillip Remaker entered spamcop.help and left news:ck947p$doh$1@news.spamcop.net: > Not true!! When there are no more spam in the queue, THEN you go to > the copy/paste page. There is no reason to keep going back to the > copy /paste page where there is spam in queue!! Once the mail-in > queueu is emupy, then go to the cut-paste page. > > First of all, I use that quite often. And, often times, I don't want to go to the next in the queue. Secondly, it's not quite that simple, you have to consider all the possible things that might happen, such as when there is "nothing to do", there's an error, or when you have multiple reports open. It might seem very simple in theory, but in practice it can, at the very least, lead to confusion. Finally, opening the next spam automagically will not speed anything up at all. -- | Ric | From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Oct 9 22:24:13 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Pop (was Spamcop by accident)) Date: Sat Oct 9 21:25:21 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Report one or many? References: Message-ID: "Kevin Davidson" wrote in message news:ck65s6$s6p$2@news.spamcop.net... | If I get 10 copies of "Voluptuous sluts get DIRTY!" at about the same | time, should I report all 10 of them or just one? | | Kevin If it's a separate line on my screen, it gets reported; I don't care and don't keep track of any who/where - once I know it's spam, it's reported. The ONLY time I hesitate is when I go to my laptop say, and read the same spam from the same account; then I stop to consider whether it's a first-timer or not. My dick gets bigger every time I report one of those scums, so I don't need their crap anyway. From amenex at amenex.com Sun Oct 10 10:02:41 2004 From: amenex at amenex.com (George Langford, Sc.D.) Date: Sun Oct 10 09:02:46 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Did SpamCop eat my newly pop'd email ? Message-ID: <200410101302.i9AD2f6O004150@email2.voicenet.com> Hello Jeff ! Oh, oh. I just set up a new account with inmotionhosting.com and created two new email addresses. Their POP3 server requires authentication, so I checked the SSL box in my SpamCop POP3 setup. Voicenet also requires a secure connection (for webmail, at least) but when I checked that SSL box in my SpamCop POP3 setup, SpamCop could not retrieve my email. However, _something_ retrieved my email from my inmotionhosting.com accounts, because those inboxes are now empty, when I knew beforehand that I had email in them. Yet my SpamCop inbox and held mail have not displayed those emails yet. Where could they have gone ? This is not the end of the world, because I had already made hardcopies of the interesting emails, but I want to get my SpamCop POP3 setup in order before something good gets away. Incidentally, I set up the addys in my webpage (georgesbasement.com) so that robots do not have access to those addys ... I display images of the addys ... the names of the images are _not_ the addys. Best regards, amenex From amenex at amenex.com Sun Oct 10 11:51:54 2004 From: amenex at amenex.com (George Langford, Sc.D.) Date: Sun Oct 10 10:51:58 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Did SpamCop eat my newly pop'd email ? Message-ID: <200410101451.i9AEpsln009903@email2.voicenet.com> Hello Jeff ! I wrote in panic and in part: > ... _something_ retrieved my email from my inmotionhosting.com > accounts, because those inboxes are now empty, when I knew > beforehand that I had email in them. Yet my SpamCop inbox and > held mail have not displayed those emails yet. Where could they > have gone ? Call off the dogs ! The email arrived about an hour laterwith just a few smudges. Musta bin caught in the conveyor belt ... Best regards, amenex From abuse at ipns.com Mon Oct 11 12:04:19 2004 From: abuse at ipns.com (Abuse Account) Date: Mon Oct 11 14:05:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Spam traps Message-ID: Hello, We have been recently bl'd due to a spam trap which does not give any evidence files to go on. That information would be very useful in solving the problem on our end. We can not see anything in our logfiles that point to anyone sending messages to spamcop.net addresses and we know that we do not have open relays on our servers. We can not fix the problem with out knowing the originating IP address of the offender. Can anyone offer some sort of suggestion? Der Hausmeister Jesus Duarte UNIX/Windows Systems Administrator (geek) http://www.ipns.com/ jesus@cnnw.net jduarte@cnnw.net postmaster@cnnw.net abuse@cnnw.net support@cnnw.net postmaster@ipns.com abuse@ipns.com jesus@ipns.com jesus@miraclesandwonders.com From gospamming at yourdomain.invalid Mon Oct 11 19:13:42 2004 From: gospamming at yourdomain.invalid (D.Diaz) Date: Mon Oct 11 14:15:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Spam traps References: Message-ID: "Abuse Account" wrote in news:ckehrc$oih$1@news.spamcop.net: > Hello, > > We have been recently bl'd due to a spam trap which does not give > any > evidence files to go on. That information would be very useful in > solving the problem on our end. We can not see anything in our > logfiles that point to anyone sending messages to spamcop.net > addresses and we know that we do not have open relays on our servers. > We can not fix the problem with out knowing the originating IP address > of the offender. AFAIK, SpamCop spamtraps do not necessarily have 'spamcop.net' domains. > > Can anyone offer some sort of suggestion? > Yes; write to deputies admin.spamcop.net and explain your problem there, specifying the IP address(es) involved. Deputies can access the SpamCop database to look at spamtrap reports. They will cooperate with you to solve your problem. -- Daniel Diaz From Merlyn at Spamcop.net Mon Oct 11 15:19:10 2004 From: Merlyn at Spamcop.net (Merlyn) Date: Mon Oct 11 14:20:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Spam traps References: Message-ID: "Abuse Account" wrote in message news:ckehrc$oih$1@news.spamcop.net... > Hello, > > We have been recently bl'd due to a spam trap which does not give any > evidence files to go on. That information would be very useful in solving > the problem on our end. We can not see anything in our logfiles that > point > to anyone sending messages to spamcop.net addresses and we know that we do > not have open relays on our servers. We can not fix the problem with out > knowing the originating IP address of the offender. > > Can anyone offer some sort of suggestion? Here is an example header from another blocklist you are on. >From meltspossessions@mindspring.com Mon Oct 11 10:18:42 2004 Delivery-date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 10:18:42 -0400 Received: from [208.187.227.1] (helo=mail.ipns.com) by mail.victim.example with esmtp (Exim 4.41) id 1CH10c-0000vU-6s for psbltrap@kernelnewbies.nl; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 10:18:42 -0400 Received: from mail.libertynatural.com (mail.libertynatural.com [208.187.224.4]) by mail.ipns.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9BEIekL007147 for ; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 07:18:40 -0700 Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 07:18:40 -0700 Received: from terrestrial[200.97.87.123] by MAIL-38-4; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 07:18:23 -0700 From: "Tatiana Allen" To: psbltrap@kernelnewbies.nl Subject: ADD 2+ |NCHES TO Y0UR PEN1lS! Mime-Version: 1.0 -- Regards, Merlyn A Spamcop advocate No emails this account is for newsgroups only People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoided From Merlyn at Spamcop.net Mon Oct 11 15:25:55 2004 From: Merlyn at Spamcop.net (Merlyn) Date: Mon Oct 11 14:30:05 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Spam traps References: Message-ID: "Abuse Account" wrote in message news:ckehrc$oih$1@news.spamcop.net... > Hello, > > We have been recently bl'd due to a spam trap which does not give any > evidence files to go on. That information would be very useful in solving > the problem on our end. We can not see anything in our logfiles that > point > to anyone sending messages to spamcop.net addresses and we know that we do > not have open relays on our servers. We can not fix the problem with out > knowing the originating IP address of the offender. > > Can anyone offer some sort of suggestion? Sorry to post twice but here is another example from one of your other servers that is listed. >From satisfiableadult@sympatico.ca Sat Oct 09 11:06:59 2004 Delivery-date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 11:06:59 -0400 Received: from [208.187.190.24] (helo=mail4.ipns.com) by mail.victim.example with esmtp (Exim 4.41) id 1CGIoE-0003G0-J5 for psbltrap@kernelnewbies.nl; Sat, 09 Oct 2004 11:06:58 -0400 Received: from mail.libertynatural.com (mail.libertynatural.com [208.187.224.4]) by mail4.ipns.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i99F6u2I025116 for ; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 08:06:57 -0700 Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 08:06:56 -0700 Received: from counterexample[221.204.14.56] by MAIL-38-4; Sat, 09 Oct 2004 08:06:32 -0700 From: "Legend Handelman" To: psbltrap@kernelnewbies.nl Subject: AMAZ|NG PEN 1S DEVEl0PMENT PR0GRAM ! Mime-Version: 1.0 -- Regards, Merlyn A Spamcop advocate No emails this account is for newsgroups only People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoided From abuse at ipns.com Mon Oct 11 12:39:53 2004 From: abuse at ipns.com (Abuse Account) Date: Mon Oct 11 14:40:05 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Spam traps References: Message-ID: Thanxz, That helped quite a bit, one of our frame relay customers using M$ exchange. "Merlyn" wrote in message news:ckeiqv$qma$1@news.spamcop.net... > "Abuse Account" wrote in message > news:ckehrc$oih$1@news.spamcop.net... > > Hello, > > > > We have been recently bl'd due to a spam trap which does not give any > > evidence files to go on. That information would be very useful in solving > > the problem on our end. We can not see anything in our logfiles that > > point > > to anyone sending messages to spamcop.net addresses and we know that we do > > not have open relays on our servers. We can not fix the problem with out > > knowing the originating IP address of the offender. > > > > Can anyone offer some sort of suggestion? > > Here is an example header from another blocklist you are on. > > From meltspossessions@mindspring.com Mon Oct 11 10:18:42 2004 > Delivery-date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 10:18:42 -0400 > Received: from [208.187.227.1] (helo=mail.ipns.com) > by mail.victim.example with esmtp (Exim 4.41) > id 1CH10c-0000vU-6s > for psbltrap@kernelnewbies.nl; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 10:18:42 -0400 > Received: from mail.libertynatural.com (mail.libertynatural.com > [208.187.224.4]) > by mail.ipns.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9BEIekL007147 > for ; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 07:18:40 -0700 > Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 07:18:40 -0700 > Received: from terrestrial[200.97.87.123] by MAIL-38-4; > Mon, 11 Oct 2004 07:18:23 -0700 > From: "Tatiana Allen" > To: psbltrap@kernelnewbies.nl > Subject: ADD 2+ |NCHES TO Y0UR PEN1lS! > Mime-Version: 1.0 > > -- > > Regards, > Merlyn > > A Spamcop advocate > No emails this account is for newsgroups only > People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which > they avoided > > > From Merlyn at Spamcop.net Mon Oct 11 16:04:23 2004 From: Merlyn at Spamcop.net (Merlyn) Date: Mon Oct 11 15:05:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Spam traps References: Message-ID: "Abuse Account" wrote in message news:ckeju8$sg2$1@news.spamcop.net... > Thanxz, > > That helped quite a bit, one of our frame relay customers using M$ > exchange. > Glad I could assist :-) -- Regards, Merlyn A Spamcop advocate No emails this account is for newsgroups only People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoided From glnews030922 at highspot.net Mon Oct 11 22:24:50 2004 From: glnews030922 at highspot.net (Graeme Leith) Date: Mon Oct 11 16:25:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Spam traps In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <416AEC12.6030906@highspot.net> Abuse Account wrote: > Thanxz, > > That helped quite a bit, one of our frame relay customers using M$ exchange. Tell them they have weak passwords on the accounts "webmaster" and "test". The spammers are probably using those to authenticate and use the server as a relay. From rrfeigel at hotmail.com Wed Oct 13 19:36:43 2004 From: rrfeigel at hotmail.com (Robert Feigel) Date: Wed Oct 13 01:35:22 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Why is SpamCop asking for mulitple log-ins? Message-ID: OS: WIN2000PRO Browser: Mozilla Firefox v0.9.1 Problem: A couple of months ago, after my initial log-in, SpamCop started asking me to log-in again whenever I reported my first Spam of the day. Then, two days ago, SpamCop started requiring me to log-in several (up to six times) as it loaded and again when I reported any Spam. Thankfully, SpamCop is one of the very few sites I've given my password manager permission to remember, so it's not as bad as it could be. But I'd like to know why this is happening all of a sudden and what can be done to rectify it. Thank you in advance. Bob Feigel From bar_n0ne at hotmail.com Wed Oct 13 11:20:14 2004 From: bar_n0ne at hotmail.com (Berny) Date: Wed Oct 13 02:25:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Why is SpamCop asking for mulitple log-ins? References: Message-ID: "Robert Feigel" wrote in message news:ckiep6$u96$1@news.spamcop.net... > OS: WIN2000PRO > Browser: Mozilla Firefox v0.9.1 > > Problem: A couple of months ago, after my initial log-in, SpamCop > started asking me to log-in again whenever I reported my first Spam of > the day. > > Then, two days ago, SpamCop started requiring me to log-in several (up > to six times) as it loaded and again when I reported any Spam. > > Thankfully, SpamCop is one of the very few sites I've given my password > manager permission to remember, so it's not as bad as it could be. But > I'd like to know why this is happening all of a sudden and what can be > done to rectify it. Thank you in advance. > > Bob Feigel Next time when yoou have to login, click on the word "Advanced" and set your login period to something longer like a year. From rrfeigel at hotmail.com Wed Oct 13 23:49:43 2004 From: rrfeigel at hotmail.com (Robert Feigel) Date: Wed Oct 13 05:50:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Why is SpamCop asking for mulitple log-ins? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Berny wrote: > "Robert Feigel" wrote in message > news:ckiep6$u96$1@news.spamcop.net... > >>OS: WIN2000PRO >>Browser: Mozilla Firefox v0.9.1 >> >>Problem: A couple of months ago, after my initial log-in, SpamCop >>started asking me to log-in again whenever I reported my first Spam of >>the day. >> >>Then, two days ago, SpamCop started requiring me to log-in several (up >>to six times) as it loaded and again when I reported any Spam. >> >>Thankfully, SpamCop is one of the very few sites I've given my password >>manager permission to remember, so it's not as bad as it could be. But >>I'd like to know why this is happening all of a sudden and what can be >>done to rectify it. Thank you in advance. >> >>Bob Feigel > > > Next time when yoou have to login, click on the word "Advanced" and set your > login period to something longer like a year. > > Thank you ... but when I log-in I cannot find any option marked "Advanced." The tabs at the top are labeled "Report Spam," "Mailhosts,"Statistics," "Past Reports," "Preferences" and "Webmail." I tried finding "Advanced" under "Preferences" but nothing (btw - I was asked to log-in again when I opened Preferences). From bar_n0ne at hotmail.com Wed Oct 13 16:06:26 2004 From: bar_n0ne at hotmail.com (Berny) Date: Wed Oct 13 07:10:10 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Why is SpamCop asking for mulitple log-ins? References: Message-ID: "Robert Feigel" wrote in message news:ckitjf$k6p$1@news.spamcop.net... > Berny wrote: > > "Robert Feigel" wrote in message [MUCH SNIPPING] > Thank you ... but when I log-in I cannot find any option marked > "Advanced." The tabs at the top are labeled "Report Spam," > "Mailhosts,"Statistics," "Past Reports," "Preferences" and "Webmail." > > I tried finding "Advanced" under "Preferences" but nothing (btw - I was > asked to log-in again when I opened Preferences). It might be preferences now, but on the screen where you are asked to login, there at least used to be an "Advanced" link, just to the right of the text box supplied for logging in. I haven't and won't see it unless I delete my SC cookies, but it was there in September. From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Wed Oct 13 15:18:44 2004 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (JohnL) Date: Wed Oct 13 10:20:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Why is SpamCop asking for mulitple log-ins? References: Message-ID: "Berny" scribbled in news:ckj27m$r2b$1@news.spamcop.net: > It might be preferences now, but on the screen where you are asked > to login, there at least used to be an "Advanced" link, just to > the right of the text box supplied for logging in. I haven't and > won't see it unless I delete my SC cookies, but it was there in > September. Just tried logging out and as you log in, there is now a third box - a drop down - that you choose your expirey time, from 12 hours to 1 year. From spamcop at davnet.org Wed Oct 13 11:54:25 2004 From: spamcop at davnet.org (Kevin Davidson) Date: Wed Oct 13 10:55:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Report one or many? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > Kevin Davidson wrote: > >>Mike Easter wrote: >> >>>Kevin Davidson wrote: >>> >>> >>>>If I get 10 copies of "Voluptuous sluts get DIRTY!" at about the >>>>same time, should I report all 10 of them or just one? >>> >>> >>>You can report all 10. They might be from several sources. >> >>Let's say they are all from the same place. For example, I just now >>got 6 spams: "Over 60 Prescription_Medication At Whol? S?le_Price" all >>within one minute and all from IP address 211.214.44.251. > > > We might be getting into some fine points about server hiccups that we > could discuss, but it probably isn't very important here, since that is a > dynamic DUL IP. > > The most likely thing is that those are 6 different items, and that the > ratware was hiccuping, and that they are all legitimately reportable, > which will have an effect on the source listing. The IP is already > listed all over the place, including SCbl also places like cbl which does > proxy/trojans. > > Occasionally a relay will get stuck and hiccup on a goodmail with a msgid > and you can see identical legitimate msg id/s and determine that you are > actually looking at multiple iterations of the same message. In this > case the spammer might or not have put a msgid, and the recipient server > might or not have put one if the spamware didn't, and there's no server > involved, and it sounds like you can report all 6. > The reason I get so many is that I'm accessing the spam bucket for the whole company, representing multiple email boxes. I observe that incoming spam arrives in spurts of similar emails. I have 2000 spams a day to deal with, and it's not humanly possible to process them all through SpamCop. I'm trying to prioritize. Right now, I drop everything my Bayesian filter marks as 99%+ and everything already in the SpamCop RBL. That leaves me with maybe 60 spams left and those get reported. From spamcop at davnet.org Wed Oct 13 11:57:43 2004 From: spamcop at davnet.org (Kevin Davidson) Date: Wed Oct 13 11:00:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] No source IP address found, cannot proceed. Message-ID: I submit all my spam as forwarded email. I never have problems except today, three of the 60 gave this error: Here is your TRACKING URL - it may be saved for future reference: http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z682012133z9b86b8c6abd23e4cb0937c4875480220z No source IP address found, cannot proceed. Add/edit your mailhost configuration Finding full email headers Submitting spam via email (may work better) Example: What spam headers should look like Nothing to do. The problem is that in SpamCop, there is no way to view the submission, so I don't know what the issue is, and there's no way I can figure out which spam I submitted this refers to (without a prohibitive amount of work). From gospamming at yourdomain.invalid Wed Oct 13 16:22:00 2004 From: gospamming at yourdomain.invalid (D.Diaz) Date: Wed Oct 13 11:25:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: No source IP address found, cannot proceed. References: Message-ID: Kevin Davidson wrote in news:ckjfni$ffs$2@news.spamcop.net: > I submit all my spam as forwarded email. I never have problems except > today, three of the 60 gave this error: > > Here is your TRACKING URL - it may be saved for future reference: > http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z682012133z9b86b8c6abd23e4cb0937c487548022 > 0z No source IP address found, cannot proceed. [snip] > > The problem is that in SpamCop, there is no way to view the > submission, so I don't know what the issue is, and there's no way I > can figure out which spam I submitted this refers to (without a > prohibitive amount of work). > Indeed there is. Just click on the link labelled "View entire message" and you will see the complete email as it was submitted. There you will find that you did not submit a spam, but a SpamAssassin report with the actual spam attached at its end. The SpamCop parser tries to analyze the mail headers of the report, then stops with that "No source IP address found" error because those headers are only for internal handoffs inside your own ISP/organization. -- Daniel Diaz From firewoman at default.domain.not.available Wed Oct 13 12:26:29 2004 From: firewoman at default.domain.not.available (Firewoman) Date: Wed Oct 13 11:25:09 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Originating IP Spoofing Possible? Message-ID: I found the below statement on our ISP's website. I was concerned with the statement between the **'s. I e-mailed them with my concern (and some spammy evidence found in NANAS). "Spammers are crafty. Oftentimes, they look for ways to send their junk e-mail by way of other mail servers or e-mail addresses. In doing so, they can send e-mail without revealing their identities, enabling them to continue this abusive behavior. In many cases, when ISPs trace back these messages to identify the offender, **they find these addresses associated with a certain computer (identified by an IP address) that may not be the offending party.**" Their response: "IP addresses are commonly forged in email headers. Only a trusted relay will accurately log an IP address, and even then it can only log the IP of the host which is contacting it. If a spammer has obtained unauthorized access to a host which allows them to funnel spam through that host, the IP address of the true sender will very likely not appear in the headers." Does this mean that most of the time, when I am reporting spam thru SpamCop, that the originating IP is not correct and I am falsely reporting someone time after time? (Something tells me "no".) Should my response be: "Yes, but when your IP address is shows as the originating IP address on spam, is this an indication that you are going to deny it?" From MikeE at ster.invalid Wed Oct 13 09:27:50 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Wed Oct 13 11:30:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: No source IP address found, cannot proceed. References: Message-ID: Kevin Davidson wrote: www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z682012133z9b86b8c6abd23e4cb0937c4875480220z > No source IP address found, cannot proceed. > The problem is that in SpamCop, there is no way to view the > submission, Yes there is; use 'View entire message' function That item consists of - headers from a spam detecting system - body from the spam detecting system - headers of the original spam - body of the original spam The top headers aren't the spam and aren't parseable by SC. The spamheaders and spam contained /can/ be parsed by SC. If they are, the result is: www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z682023159z834703891b062ba984b7f38a15f0b7a8z Report Spam to: Re: 221.155.238.210 (Administrator of network where email originates) Re: http://bugaboo.virtualgetmed.com/o/index.html (Administrator of network hosting website referenced in spam) You should look at what you are feeding the parser. You aren't going to be able to feed it spams with that reporting systems header and body on top of it. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From gospamming at yourdomain.invalid Wed Oct 13 16:35:18 2004 From: gospamming at yourdomain.invalid (D.Diaz) Date: Wed Oct 13 11:40:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Originating IP Spoofing Possible? References: Message-ID: "Firewoman" wrote in news:ckjhb2$iec$1@news.spamcop.net: [snip] > Their response: > > "IP addresses are commonly forged in email headers. Only a trusted > relay will accurately log an IP address, and even then it can only log > the IP of the host which is contacting it. If a spammer has obtained > unauthorized access to a host which allows them to funnel spam through > that host, the IP address of the true sender will very likely not > appear in the headers." > This is correct. > Does this mean that most of the time, when I am reporting spam thru > SpamCop, that the originating IP is not correct and I am falsely > reporting someone time after time? (Something tells me "no".) > Of course not; SpamCop parser stops parsing when the chain between 'Received:' headers breaks, blaming the IP of the first "untrusted" machine as the source of spam. Obviously, most of the time, that machine is (I quote again) > a host which allows them to funnel spam through > that host, in other words, a zombie/hijacked computer acting as relay or open proxy. > Should my response be: "Yes, but when your IP address is shows as the > originating IP address on spam, is this an indication that you are > going to deny it?" > I hope they don't. If their IP address shows as the originating IP address on spam, they are responsible for it, and they have to find the compromised machine. -- Daniel Diaz From spamcop at davnet.org Wed Oct 13 12:37:28 2004 From: spamcop at davnet.org (Kevin Davidson) Date: Wed Oct 13 11:40:08 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: No source IP address found, cannot proceed. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: D.Diaz wrote: > Kevin Davidson wrote in > news:ckjfni$ffs$2@news.spamcop.net: > > >>I submit all my spam as forwarded email. I never have problems except >>today, three of the 60 gave this error: >> >>Here is your TRACKING URL - it may be saved for future reference: >>http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z682012133z9b86b8c6abd23e4cb0937c487548022 >>0z No source IP address found, cannot proceed. > > > [snip] > > >>The problem is that in SpamCop, there is no way to view the >>submission, so I don't know what the issue is, and there's no way I >>can figure out which spam I submitted this refers to (without a >>prohibitive amount of work). >> > > > Indeed there is. Just click on the link labelled "View entire message" > and you will see the complete email as it was submitted. There you will > find that you did not submit a spam, but a SpamAssassin report with the > actual spam attached at its end. The SpamCop parser tries to analyze > the mail headers of the report, then stops with that "No source IP > address found" error because those headers are only for internal > handoffs inside your own ISP/organization. > > You're right, for some reason Spam Assassin switched modes, causing the problem. However, as to the "View entire Message" (or "View full message") there is no such link on my web page in the situation above. When submitting a "normal" spam, that option appears, but when SpamCop refuses the message, either because it is too old, or in the case above, there is no view option presented (at least not to me). kevin From gospamming at yourdomain.invalid Wed Oct 13 16:40:13 2004 From: gospamming at yourdomain.invalid (D.Diaz) Date: Wed Oct 13 11:45:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: No source IP address found, cannot proceed. References: Message-ID: Kevin Davidson wrote in news:ckji23$jse$1@news.spamcop.net: > However, as to the "View entire Message" (or "View full message") > there is no such link on my web page in the situation above. When > submitting a "normal" spam, that option appears, but when SpamCop > refuses the message, either because it is too old, or in the case > above, there is no view option presented (at least not to me). > Hmmm... that's funny. Those always show up here to me; that's how I could see your problem with the tracker you posted. -- Daniel Diaz From MikeE at ster.invalid Wed Oct 13 09:43:31 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Wed Oct 13 11:45:07 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: No source IP address found, cannot proceed. References: Message-ID: Kevin Davidson wrote: > However, as to the "View entire Message" (or "View full message") > there is no such link on my web page in the situation above. When > submitting a "normal" spam, that option appears, but when SpamCop > refuses the message, either because it is too old, or in the case > above, there is no view option presented (at least not to me). Look into your preferences, report handling options, Show Technical Details during reporting, section and check show technical data. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From spamcop at davnet.org Wed Oct 13 12:59:31 2004 From: spamcop at davnet.org (Kevin Davidson) Date: Wed Oct 13 12:00:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: No source IP address found, cannot proceed. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: D.Diaz wrote: > Kevin Davidson wrote in > news:ckji23$jse$1@news.spamcop.net: > > >>However, as to the "View entire Message" (or "View full message") >>there is no such link on my web page in the situation above. When >>submitting a "normal" spam, that option appears, but when SpamCop >>refuses the message, either because it is too old, or in the case >>above, there is no view option presented (at least not to me). >> > > > Hmmm... that's funny. Those always show up here to me; that's how I > could see your problem with the tracker you posted. > This is what I see: http://www.qsinc.com/spamcop.jpg From MikeE at ster.invalid Wed Oct 13 10:03:37 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Wed Oct 13 12:05:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: No source IP address found, cannot proceed. References: Message-ID: Kevin Davidson wrote: > This is what I see: > > http://www.qsinc.com/spamcop.jpg Fix those preferences. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From spamcop at davnet.org Wed Oct 13 13:04:16 2004 From: spamcop at davnet.org (Kevin Davidson) Date: Wed Oct 13 12:05:10 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: No source IP address found, cannot proceed. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > Kevin Davidson wrote: > >>However, as to the "View entire Message" (or "View full message") >>there is no such link on my web page in the situation above. When >>submitting a "normal" spam, that option appears, but when SpamCop >>refuses the message, either because it is too old, or in the case >> above, there is no view option presented (at least not to me). > > > Look into your preferences, report handling options, Show Technical > Details during reporting, section and check show technical data. > Thanks, that did it. Kevin From bar_n0ne at hotmail.com Wed Oct 13 21:15:43 2004 From: bar_n0ne at hotmail.com (Berny) Date: Wed Oct 13 12:20:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Report one or many? References: Message-ID: "Kevin Davidson" wrote in message news:ckjfhc$ffs$1@news.spamcop.net... > Mike Easter wrote: > > Kevin Davidson wrote: > > > >>Mike Easter wrote: > >> > >>>Kevin Davidson wrote: > >>>SNIP > > > The reason I get so many is that I'm accessing the spam bucket for the > whole company, representing multiple email boxes. I observe that > incoming spam arrives in spurts of similar emails. > > I have 2000 spams a day to deal with, and it's not humanly possible to > process them all through SpamCop. I'm trying to prioritize. > > Right now, I drop everything my Bayesian filter marks as 99%+ and > everything already in the SpamCop RBL. That leaves me with maybe 60 > spams left and those get reported. Well multiple reports of the same source by the same SC account don't do much more, if any more, to trigger blacklisting, so if that is your objective the multiple spams should be reported by the multiple recipients for best effect. I wouldn't bother in your case unless you wanted to set up separate SC reporting accounts for reporting multiple identical spams. the algorithm doesn't give much weight to mutliple reports from the same source If I remember correctly. From dcfuz2po02 at sneakemail.com Wed Oct 13 12:23:03 2004 From: dcfuz2po02 at sneakemail.com (justme) Date: Wed Oct 13 14:15:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] POP configs needed Message-ID: SpamCop accidentally erased my POP list. (I think I may have forgotten to save changes.) Can anyone tell me the configuraion to put for one's main accounts and one's Hotmail/Yahoo accounts? Thanks much. catherine From jferris at LAMLASH.DEMON.CO.UK Wed Oct 13 21:23:04 2004 From: jferris at LAMLASH.DEMON.CO.UK (Gulper) Date: Wed Oct 13 15:25:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] help with header please hijacked spam Message-ID: After notifying my isp that my domain name was being used to send spam the best advise they could offer was to check the headers (below) and complain to the originators isp. I would appreciate any help in identifying such. It is not very obvious to me who to complain to. I have changed my domain name to (MYDOMAIN). If I'm in the wrong NG please advise as to where to post. Regards Gulper From: MAILER-DAEMON@sincity.telecable.es To: dcainbo@(MYDOMAIN).net Subject: failure notice Hi. This is the qmail-send program at sincity.telecable.es. I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses. This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out. : user is over quota --- Below this line is a copy of the message. Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3028 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2004 06:16:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cozzette.com) (218.234.88.94) by pop.igijon.com with SMTP; 10 Sep 2004 06:16:14 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?b?UGFpbiAmIEFueGlldHkgTWVkaWNhdGlvbg==?= From: "Donn Cain" MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <06ba01c496fd$f46bea03$05d9a458@rhsgbhdvj> Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 06:11:52 +0000 To: uriahh@igijon.com Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Discounts on Prescription Medication...bnte1e2xp4









TTUGSTB. GDRPCXBWTHFRDVH. JCRZBW. AEJSVDOWUY. cy7d8v394b. 2t0p68bbev. gegctn29r8. hg1jkqsira.2dfqcd12dz. x1vmgg2meb.mic3142khr. qwv7wz1tug. fxt2cg32oh. m69m4t3wsf. q6f7682dpl. 6b1lrn10ip. fjl2nb17o9. thzdif2px3. anztp13qpc. 32ilvdny5v. SZMAPCDFCQPIWCCZ out. From MikeE at ster.invalid Wed Oct 13 14:04:05 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Wed Oct 13 16:05:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: help with header please hijacked spam References: Message-ID: Gulper wrote: > After notifying my isp that my domain name was being used to send > spam the best advise they could offer was to check the headers > (below) and complain to the originators isp. I would appreciate any > help in identifying such. > It is not very obvious to me who to complain to. I have changed my > domain name to (MYDOMAIN). This is the right group to ask, but posting a spam in here is the wrong way. The newest best way to communicate about a spam or anything else which is an email is to put it into the parser, copy the tracking url, then cancel the report. The tracker for what you posted is this www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z682087533z3cf0ece93a3e8dca069c4ca9eb24ce8bz The older way is to post the item into the group spamcop.spam, but not to discuss it there, but to discuss it here. That method is inferior to the posting of the tracker here for several reasons. The source of your item was 218.234.88.94 no rDNS at Hanaro Telecom ie hananet. Their reg'd abuse.net addresses are nospam@hanaro.com security@hanaro.com rasung@hanaro.com abuse@hanaro.com postmaster@hananet.net spamcenter@hanafos.com The other advantage of using the parser is to tell you how SC would notify for the source abuse@hanaro.com ip-adm@hanaro.com -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From duncanObfsucation at punk.net Wed Oct 13 14:22:32 2004 From: duncanObfsucation at punk.net (D. Campbell (remove obfuscation)) Date: Wed Oct 13 16:05:08 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: No source IP address found, cannot proceed. References: Message-ID: "Kevin Davidson" wrote: > D.Diaz wrote: > > Kevin Davidson wrote in > > > >>http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z682012133z9b86b8c6abd23e4cb0937c4875480220z > >>No source IP address found, cannot proceed. > > > > find that you did not submit a spam, but a SpamAssassin report with the > > actual spam attached at its end. The SpamCop parser tries to analyze > > the mail headers of the report, then stops with that "No source IP > > address found" error because those headers are only for internal > > handoffs inside your own ISP/organization. > > > > > You're right, for some reason Spam Assassin switched modes, causing the > problem. > Consider yourself lucky it generated an error message. Before I'd found the configuration option that allowed spamassassin to tag the less spammy mail without changing the message structure I did submit a few of the spamassassin reports for parseing. In my case, though, the headers were useable. Spamcop saw my mailhost (the one that sent me the spamassassin report) as the source. Be careful, lest ye report yourself. d. From rrfeigel at hotmail.com Thu Oct 14 10:42:28 2004 From: rrfeigel at hotmail.com (Robert Feigel) Date: Wed Oct 13 16:45:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Why is SpamCop asking for mulitple log-ins? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Berny wrote: > "Robert Feigel" wrote in message > news:ckitjf$k6p$1@news.spamcop.net... > >>Berny wrote: >> >>>"Robert Feigel" wrote in message [MUCH SNIPPING] >> >>Thank you ... but when I log-in I cannot find any option marked >>"Advanced." The tabs at the top are labeled "Report Spam," >>"Mailhosts,"Statistics," "Past Reports," "Preferences" and "Webmail." >> >>I tried finding "Advanced" under "Preferences" but nothing (btw - I was >>asked to log-in again when I opened Preferences). > > > It might be preferences now, but on the screen where you are asked to login, > there at least used to be an "Advanced" link, just to the right of the text > box supplied for logging in. I haven't and won't see it unless I delete my > SC cookies, but it was there in September. > > Thanks for your help. I click on a link to log-in. When I click the link a dialogue window pops up telling me that I'm entering a secure site and asks me to click OK. Then a second dialogue window pops up promting me for my user name and password (and continues to pop up four or five times in a row). Once I log-in my browser opens the spam reporting page - which has no "Advanced" option. From jferris at LAMLASH.DEMON.CO.UK Wed Oct 13 22:51:23 2004 From: jferris at LAMLASH.DEMON.CO.UK (Gulper) Date: Wed Oct 13 16:55:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: help with header please hijacked spam References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" wrote in message news:ckk1ks$ef9$1@news.spamcop.net... > Gulper wrote: > > After notifying my isp that my domain name was being used to send > > spam the best advise they could offer was to check the headers > > (below) and complain to the originators isp. I would appreciate any > > help in identifying such. > > It is not very obvious to me who to complain to. I have changed my > > domain name to (MYDOMAIN). > > This is the right group to ask, but posting a spam in here is the wrong > way. > > The newest best way to communicate about a spam or anything else which is > an email is to put it into the parser, copy the tracking url, then cancel > the report. > > The tracker for what you posted is this > www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z682087533z3cf0ece93a3e8dca069c4ca9eb24ce8bz > > The older way is to post the item into the group spamcop.spam, but not to > discuss it there, but to discuss it here. That method is inferior to the > posting of the tracker here for several reasons. > > The source of your item was 218.234.88.94 no rDNS at Hanaro Telecom ie > hananet. Their reg'd abuse.net addresses are nospam@hanaro.com > security@hanaro.com rasung@hanaro.com abuse@hanaro.com > postmaster@hananet.net spamcenter@hanafos.com > > The other advantage of using the parser is to tell you how SC would > notify for the source abuse@hanaro.com ip-adm@hanaro.com > > > -- > Mike Easter > kibitzer, not SC admin > Mike, many thanks for the speedy and most helpful reply, also my apologies for not following protocol. Kindest Regards Gulper From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Wed Oct 13 17:57:02 2004 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (WazoO) Date: Wed Oct 13 18:00:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: POP configs needed References: Message-ID: "justme" wrote in message news:ckjr99$3mk$1@news.spamcop.net... > SpamCop accidentally erased my POP list. (I think I may have forgotten to > save changes.) Can anyone tell me the configuraion to put for one's main > accounts and one's Hotmail/Yahoo accounts? Thanks much. Not sure exactly which settings you need, but I would suggest hitting the SpamCop Email Setup Forum at http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php? There are a number of Pinned items that deal with specific ISPs, and a step-by-step for setting up OE ... Guessing that what you are asking for exists there ...or is it that you just need to supply your e-mail addresses at those other services? From ric.gates at bigsleep.org Wed Oct 13 23:28:24 2004 From: ric.gates at bigsleep.org (Blammo) Date: Wed Oct 13 18:30:06 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Why is SpamCop asking for mulitple log-ins? References: Message-ID: On 13 Oct 2004 Robert Feigel entered spamcop.help and left news:ckk3rb$ip0$1@news.spamcop.net: > I click on a link to > log-in. When I click the link a dialogue window pops up telling me that > I'm entering a secure site and asks me to click OK. Then a second > dialogue window pops up promting me for my user name and password (and > continues to pop up four or five times in a row). Once I log-in my > browser opens the spam reporting page - which has no "Advanced" option. > Don't use that link, just use http://members.spamcop.net/ It will rmember your password. I've been doing it this way in Mozilla for years and never had any trouble. -- | Ric | From ric.gates at bigsleep.org Wed Oct 13 23:51:35 2004 From: ric.gates at bigsleep.org (Blammo) Date: Wed Oct 13 18:55:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Why is SpamCop asking for mulitple log-ins? References: Message-ID: On 13 Oct 2004 Robert Feigel entered spamcop.help and left news:ckk3rb$ip0$1@news.spamcop.net: > Once I log-in my > browser opens the spam reporting page - which has no "Advanced" option. Right, the other replies are referring to the common cookie-login, when you go to http://www.spamcop.net/ . You and I are using HTTP-Auth so we don't see that. -- | Ric | From dcfuz2po02 at sneakemail.com Wed Oct 13 17:11:16 2004 From: dcfuz2po02 at sneakemail.com (justme) Date: Wed Oct 13 19:05:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: POP configs needed References: Message-ID: All seems to be working now except one Yahoo group. What I need is to re-learn what to put to POP my two new DSL accounts, and my two Yahoo and Hotmail accounts, as my POP page went blank. In other words, I need the verbiage to enter on my Options/Tools/Configure POP accounts. Right now I am not using SpamCop and I just renewed for another year. Please? Thanks from catherine "WazoO" wrote in message news:ckk8be$q76$1@news.spamcop.net... > "justme" wrote in message > news:ckjr99$3mk$1@news.spamcop.net... > > SpamCop accidentally erased my POP list. (I think I may have forgotten to > > save changes.) Can anyone tell me the configuraion to put for one's main > > accounts and one's Hotmail/Yahoo accounts? Thanks much. > > Not sure exactly which settings you need, but I would > suggest hitting the SpamCop Email Setup Forum at > http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php? There > are a number of Pinned items that deal with specific ISPs, > and a step-by-step for setting up OE ... Guessing that > what you are asking for exists there ...or is it that > you just need to supply your e-mail addresses at those > other services? > > From rcarlton at spamcop.net Wed Oct 13 17:16:37 2004 From: rcarlton at spamcop.net (Rick Carlton) Date: Wed Oct 13 19:20:07 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Spamcop Lookups Failing Message-ID: Is there a chance that rDNS for some spamvertizers is intentionally blocking Spamcop's ability to find the hosted site? I ask because this is happening much more frequently than it used to. Submit an email and the originating IP is found, but the destination server, alas - seems unreachablle. And, where the old trick of reloading the page would often nudge Spamcop into finding the server, that no longer works. And yet, I can take the not found URL and plug it into VisualRoute or do a traceroute just fine. Report : http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z682123954z7bbde3cd0979f9db9ca799da15d220e7z Spamvertised URL : everyday.stage.yourstuffabsolute.com Destination IP: 61.109.250.215 (on epnetworks.co.kr) Ralsky, I believe. From MikeE at ster.invalid Wed Oct 13 17:46:14 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Wed Oct 13 19:45:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Spamcop Lookups Failing References: Message-ID: Rick Carlton wrote: > Is there a chance that rDNS for some spamvertizers is intentionally > blocking Spamcop's ability to find the hosted site? Yes, but it is more likely they would just have very shoddy nameservice, or doing some spookystuff. www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z682123954z7bbde3cd0979f9db9ca799da15d220e7z Cannot resolve http://everyday.stage.yourstuffabsolute.com/s/ 10/13/04 16:40:42 dns everyday.stage.yourstuffabsolute.com Canonical name: yourstuffabsolute.com Aliases: everyday.stage.yourstuffabsolute.com Addresses: 61.109.250.215 200.139.105.66 200.139.105.67 200.139.105.68 211.115.213.176 A little tricky. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From rrfeigel at hotmail.com Fri Oct 15 09:56:05 2004 From: rrfeigel at hotmail.com (Robert Feigel) Date: Thu Oct 14 15:55:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Why is SpamCop asking for mulitple log-ins? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Blammo wrote: > On 13 Oct 2004 Robert Feigel entered spamcop.help and left > news:ckk3rb$ip0$1@news.spamcop.net: > > >>I click on a link to >>log-in. When I click the link a dialogue window pops up telling me that >>I'm entering a secure site and asks me to click OK. Then a second >>dialogue window pops up promting me for my user name and password (and >>continues to pop up four or five times in a row). Once I log-in my >>browser opens the spam reporting page - which has no "Advanced" option. >> > > > Don't use that link, just use > > http://members.spamcop.net/ > > It will rmember your password. I've been doing it this way in Mozilla for > years and never had any trouble. > Thank you. That works perfectly. Whew! From 79ytka802 at sneakemail.com Fri Oct 15 11:24:50 2004 From: 79ytka802 at sneakemail.com (Aviatrix) Date: Fri Oct 15 05:25:24 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Spamcop Webmail Bug Message-ID: I know one isn't supposed to cross-post, but the message below was sent to .mail several days ago, with not a single reply (seems no one is alive over there!) so I thought I'd try here instead. Here we go: I was using my Spamcop webmail account in earnest for a couple of days this week (i.e., to send mail) because of a problem with my usual "roaming" SMTP server. After sending my first handful of messages I suddenly discovered that sent mail was not being saved into the "sent mail" folder - and that was despite the fact that I had all the right boxes ticked. Not a big tragedy on this occasion, but obviously something that needs to be fixed! From wb8tyw at qsl.network Fri Oct 15 12:21:56 2004 From: wb8tyw at qsl.network (John E. Malmberg) Date: Fri Oct 15 12:25:06 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] [web forum]Your email address, ...has returned a bounce Message-ID: On the web forum, there is a thread: "Your email address, ... has returned a bounce" That is one of the known message headers and bodies of one of the current worms in circulation. It is spoofing serveral NDR formats, and mentioning several DNSbls as the reason for the rejections. If the O.P. has a system vulnerable to that worm and has triggered the payload, then they have some cleanup to do. -John wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Fri Oct 15 14:24:41 2004 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (WazoO) Date: Fri Oct 15 14:25:06 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: [web forum]Your email address, ...has returned a bounce References: Message-ID: "John E. Malmberg" wrote in message news:nYLP9JJh7GA1@eisner.encompasserve.org... > On the web forum, there is a thread: Copied your post "here" into that Topic "over there" .... I'm guessing that this was your end goal???? From nacromancer9 at myway.com Fri Oct 15 15:34:09 2004 From: nacromancer9 at myway.com (Bear) Date: Fri Oct 15 14:34:15 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] [web forum]Your email address, ...has returned a bounce Message-ID: <20041015183409.25C0A3962@mprdmxin.myway.com> i have been told by my mail box tech support team that the reason you got a bounce back was because of the Spam setting they have me set at will not allow your mail to come through. So that means you are attempting to send me unsolicited mail with your e-mail according to them. I do not know?Always and Sincerely Your's.... _______________________________________________ No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding. Make My Way your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com From nacromancer9 at myway.com Fri Oct 15 15:36:54 2004 From: nacromancer9 at myway.com (Bear) Date: Fri Oct 15 14:37:10 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: [web forum]Your email address, ...has returned a bounce Message-ID: <20041015183654.0BA623B72@mprdmxin.myway.com> I sent them the copy to show the tech support people what you said about the bounce back of my e-mail address. They then sent me their responce saying you are trying to send me unsolicited spam thta is why it was bounced back. Always and Sincerely Your's.... _______________________________________________ No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding. Make My Way your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com From duncanObfsucation at punk.net Fri Oct 15 13:38:32 2004 From: duncanObfsucation at punk.net (D. Campbell (remove obfuscation)) Date: Fri Oct 15 15:25:05 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] URLs in client side image maps not found Message-ID: http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z682627875za4cb212dee48bf51a27fe5f53e216908z This one is a phishing spoof trying to get online banking information. I treat those a bit more seriously than ads for ca1a's and vi@gr3. The suspicious part seems to me to be the link appearing under the login image which takes the user to http://troy.net.tempwebsite.net/boa/transit.html SpamCop didn't find that URL when parseing the message. d. From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Fri Oct 15 15:41:01 2004 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Cat) Date: Fri Oct 15 15:45:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: [web forum]Your email address, ...has returned a bounce In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Bear wrote: > Always and Sincerely Your's.... Sorry, I just have to comment on this, but if you're going to sign all your posts with the line I'm quoting above here, you should take the apostrophe out of Yours since it doesn't belong in there. I don't understand why some people always want to put apostrophes in words where they don't belong. From MikeE at ster.invalid Fri Oct 15 13:53:46 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Fri Oct 15 15:55:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: URLs in client side image maps not found References: Message-ID: D. Campbell (remove obfuscation) wrote: www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z682627875za4cb212dee48bf51a27fe5f53e216908z > The suspicious part seems to me to be the link > appearing under the login image which takes the > user to http://troy.net.tempwebsite.net/boa/transit.html > SpamCop didn't find that URL when parseing the > message. SC found it, but it didn't resolve. Tracking link: http://troy.net.tempwebsite.net/boa/transit.html [report history] Cannot resolve http://troy.net.tempwebsite.net/boa/transit.html If it doesn't resolve to an IP it doesn't 'exist' as a working link and there is no SC notify possible. If you 'like to' do extra work for phishers, you can go off on your own, outside of the SC notification process, and look at the domainname registration: whois -h whois.networksolutions.com tempwebsite.net ... Registrant: Eclipse Consulting Services, Inc. (LBHRCOCVSD) 1595 Cottonwood dr lewis center, OH 43035 US Domain Name: TEMPWEBSITE.NET Administrative Contact: Eclipse Consulting Services, Inc. (GVULMNFLJO) ecs@insight.rr.com 1595 Cottonwood dr lewis center, OH 43035 US 740-555-1212 Technical Contact: Network Solutions, LLC. (HOST-ORG) customerservice@networksolutions.com 13200 Woodland Park Drive Herndon, VA 20171-3025 US 1-888-642-9675 fax: 571-434-4620 You would tell netsol that their client Eclipse was providing a phishing site. But, the reality is that Eclipse is actually a 'legitimate' operation, see http://www.eclipse-consulting.com/ - so it looks like they had a client troy.net who was engaged in the illegal activity. You could also tell Eclipse that they don't have an abuse addy for the tempwebsite domain You can also tell Eclipse's provider what is going on: tempwebsite.net = 65.17.226.181 www.eclipse-consulting.com = 65.17.226.82 whois -h whois.arin.net 65.17.226.181 ... DataPipe DATAPIPE-NETBLK5 65.17.192.0 - 65.17.255.255 abuse@datapipe.com webecs DP-65-17-226-0-1 65.17.226.0 - 65.17.226.255 abuse@datapipe.com All of those things serve to keep webecs/Eclipse in line about this kind of behavior; in case they were complicit at all/ -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From duncanObfsucation at punk.net Fri Oct 15 18:26:24 2004 From: duncanObfsucation at punk.net (D. Campbell (remove obfuscation)) Date: Fri Oct 15 20:10:25 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: URLs in client side image maps found (my mistake) References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" wrote in message news:ckp9pa$o9b$1@news.spamcop.net... > D. Campbell (remove obfuscation) wrote: > www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z682627875za4cb212dee48bf51a27fe5f53e216908z > > > SpamCop didn't find that URL when parseing the > > message. > > SC found it, but it didn't resolve. > > Tracking link: http://troy.net.tempwebsite.net/boa/transit.html Fair enough. Either the algorithm changed sometime this afternoon or I just missed that the first time through. Seems someone else got a report through the system while the name still resolved. Assuming that resulted in the loss of nameservice for troy.net.tempwebsite.net I'm placated. Good enough. > > If you 'like to' do extra work for phishers, you can go off on your own, > outside of the SC notification process, and look at the domainname > registration: > Yeah, I could, or I could report it to the business being spoofed (done, by hand) and bring up the apparent mistake in a forum where it's likely to effect a change allowing hundreds of others to lart the webhost (in error, but done anyway). FWIW the report someone else got through this morning went to the datapipe.com address. SC works. > All of those things serve to keep webecs/Eclipse in line about this kind > of behavior; in case they were complicit at all/ > The site's down, iddnit? Problem solved. d. From wb8tyw at qsl.network Fri Oct 15 23:58:08 2004 From: wb8tyw at qsl.network (John E. Malmberg) Date: Fri Oct 15 23:00:36 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: [web forum]Your email address, ...has returned a bounce In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: WazoO wrote: > > Copied your post "here" into that Topic > "over there" .... I'm guessing that this > was your end goal???? Yes, as I have mentioned before, I do not have an easy way to post on the web forum from $dayjob. -John wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only From wb8tyw at qsl.network Sat Oct 16 00:04:55 2004 From: wb8tyw at qsl.network (John E. Malmberg) Date: Fri Oct 15 23:05:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: [web forum]Your email address, ...has returned a bounce In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Bear wrote: > I sent them the copy to show the tech support people what you said > about the bounce back of my e-mail address. They then sent me their > responce saying you are trying to send me unsolicited spam thta is > why it was bounced back. I see nothing in the previous posts in this thread relate to your post, so I do not understand the context. A person on the web forum was getting bounces for e-mails that they did not send, and did not realize that they were probably worms pretending to be bounces. And neither did several people that were trying to assist them. I have seen several copies of that worm in the past month. I do not know what the name of it is, as I do not have a worm scanner. -John wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only From ric.gates at bigsleep.org Sat Oct 16 04:06:48 2004 From: ric.gates at bigsleep.org (Blammo) Date: Fri Oct 15 23:10:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: [web forum]Your email address, ...has returned a bounce References: Message-ID: On 15 Oct 2004 Cat entered spamcop.help and left news:ckp94c$n74$1@news.spamcop.net: > I don't > understand why some people always want to put apostrophes in words where > they don't belong. > Or send eMail/ post news with spam attached... ugh! -- | Ric | From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Oct 16 19:58:25 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (TheWanderer) Date: Sun Oct 17 09:00:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Nag screen never stops nagging Message-ID: I am using FireFox v1.0. The nag screen comes up and insicates that I should reload after 6 seconds if the page does not refresh. The screen is refreshing every 6 seconds, but the nag remains. Even doing a manual refresh does not work From MikeE at ster.invalid Sun Oct 17 07:53:33 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sun Oct 17 09:55:21 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Nag screen never stops nagging References: Message-ID: TheWanderer wrote: > I am using FireFox v1.0. > > The nag screen comes up and insicates that I should reload after 6 > seconds if the page does not refresh. > > The screen is refreshing every 6 seconds, but the nag remains. > > Even doing a manual refresh does not work It's working OK for me IE6. Why don't you log out and log back in or do something 'different'. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Oct 17 22:00:05 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (TheWanderer) Date: Mon Oct 18 00:05:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Nag screen never stops nagging References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" wrote in message news:ckttdl$ijj$1@news.spamcop.net... > TheWanderer wrote: >> I am using FireFox v1.0. >> >> The nag screen comes up and insicates that I should reload after 6 >> seconds if the page does not refresh. >> >> The screen is refreshing every 6 seconds, but the nag remains. >> >> Even doing a manual refresh does not work > > It's working OK for me IE6. Why don't you log out and log back in or do > something 'different'. The system does reccomend FireFox. I just walked away and came back 1 hour later and the nag screen had gone away > > -- > Mike Easter > kibitzer, not SC admin > From ric.gates at bigsleep.org Mon Oct 18 11:09:20 2004 From: ric.gates at bigsleep.org (Blammo) Date: Mon Oct 18 06:10:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Nag screen never stops nagging References: Message-ID: On 16 Oct 2004 TheWanderer entered spamcop.help and left news:cktq3c$cvq$1@news.spamcop.net: > The screen is refreshing every 6 seconds, but the nag remains. > > Even doing a manual refresh does not work > When that happens, hold down the Shift key and hit Reload. -- | Ric From gabriel.galand at wanadoo.fr Wed Oct 20 12:26:37 2004 From: gabriel.galand at wanadoo.fr (Gaby) Date: Wed Oct 20 05:30:23 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] SpamCop and MailwasherPro Message-ID: Hello everybody I am a new user of spamcop and I am sending spam mail to spamcop via MailWasherPro. The question is : does MailWasher send everything necessary to spamcop to do the job, or do I have something else to do ? For I receive for each spam forwarded an e-mail from spamcop telling it will process the spam but it is not clear to me if they ask me to complete the job. Anybody using MailWasher could tell me exactly what to do ? Thank you Gaby From usenet-20041007 at spam.woody.ch Wed Oct 20 14:45:11 2004 From: usenet-20041007 at spam.woody.ch (Benoit Panizzon) Date: Wed Oct 20 09:50:19 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] How to add 'mailhosts' Message-ID: Hi all I have this kind of setup: MX -> spamfilter at an ISP. (mailertable)=> destination Server. Now often tryes to report the spamfilter at the ISP as the place where spammails originate. I tought I could solve that issue by usint the 'mailhost' function by defining that the spamfilter relay at the ISP is a 'good' machine. Well the test fails, as spamcop correctly notices that after the spamfilter machine there is one more hop to the destination machine. So according to the manual I should first add the destionation machine and then the spamfilter machine. Unfortunately I can't find any way to add a machine before the spamfilter one which holds the official MX. Any way to solve that issue? I think this is a very common issue, as the company where I work uses exactly this setup for all customers which want to use a external spamfilter/Virusfilter. -Benoit- From showker at aacug.org Wed Oct 20 11:38:36 2004 From: showker at aacug.org (Fred Showker) Date: Wed Oct 20 10:27:18 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] 2nd "Alias" email addresses in SpamCop ??? Message-ID: I'm using the SpamCop email POP account and nowhere can I find details of whether or not I can also forward "alias" email addresses that go to me which are also inundated with hundreds of spams a day. Can SpamCop also filter aliased addresses, or do they require additional accounts. (Which could get expensive) Fred From showker at aacug.org Wed Oct 20 11:38:45 2004 From: showker at aacug.org (Fred Showker) Date: Wed Oct 20 10:27:26 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] ? Email Account Strategy ??? Message-ID: I'm using the SpamCop email POP account and cannot figure out the best way to retrieve my email into my local computer without doing "forwarding" I use Eudora. Ideas? Fred From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Wed Oct 20 11:19:22 2004 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (WazoO) Date: Wed Oct 20 11:20:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: ? Email Account Strategy ??? References: Message-ID: "Fred Showker" wrote in message news:mailman.278.1098282446.9607.spamcop-help@news.spamcop.net... > I'm using the SpamCop email POP account and cannot > figure out the best way to retrieve my email into > my local computer without doing "forwarding" There is a spamcop.mail newsgroup, though JT had pushed support for that side of the house over to the web-based Forum. Over there, I can tell you that one of the FAQ entries points to a "How I use SpamCop" discussion .. maybe this is something to help? http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php? From nospam at nospam.org Thu Oct 21 01:17:07 2004 From: nospam at nospam.org (geo_splash_12) Date: Wed Oct 20 18:20:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: SpamCop and MailwasherPro In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Gaby wrote: > Hello everybody > I am a new user of spamcop and I am sending spam mail to spamcop via > MailWasherPro. > The question is : does MailWasher send everything necessary to spamcop to do > the job, or do I have something else to do ? > For I receive for each spam forwarded an e-mail from spamcop telling it will > process the spam but it is not clear to me if they ask me to complete the > job. > Anybody using MailWasher could tell me exactly what to do ? > > Thank you > > Gaby > > Spamcop reporting in MWP will just forward the message to spamcop, just fill in your spamcop submit address and the smtp server to be used and see how it arrives on www.spamcop.net under your account. It works like a champ, no other information is required, for each reported spam you have to complete the web page. Ejo From MikeE at ster.invalid Wed Oct 20 18:23:19 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Wed Oct 20 20:25:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: SpamCop and MailwasherPro References: Message-ID: geo_splash_12 wrote: > Gaby wrote: >> Hello everybody >> I am a new user of spamcop and I am sending spam mail to spamcop via >> MailWasherPro. > It > works like a champ, > Ejo Hey Ejo! Don't forget to get Gaby properly instructed on the elimination of bogus bouncing in MW. As we all know, the default MW configuration is to bogus bounce; and anyone who sez the words 'MW' in public should be assumed to be bogus bouncing unless they disavow it from the moment they introduce themselves as a MW user. Yes? That is, it should /not/ be assumed that a MW user /isn't/ a bogus bouncer; but quite the contrary. It should always be assumed that any MW user /is/ a bogus bouncer until proven otherwise. Especially if the word 'new' appears in the post. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From bite_me at its.fun Wed Oct 20 20:12:15 2004 From: bite_me at its.fun (salamandir) Date: Wed Oct 20 22:20:28 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Cannot connect to imap server: Connection refused Message-ID: once again, i try to log in to held mail and i get Cannot connect to imap server: Connection refused is it happening to anyone else? From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Wed Oct 20 22:45:13 2004 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (WazoO) Date: Wed Oct 20 22:50:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Cannot connect to imap server: Connection refused References: Message-ID: "salamandir" wrote in message news:pan.2004.10.21.02.12.15.54020@underwear.is.fun... > once again, i try to log in to held mail and i get > > Cannot connect to imap server: Connection refused > > is it happening to anyone else? Only complaint over in the web-Forum also says it's back up ..???? From nospam at nospam.org Thu Oct 21 10:49:22 2004 From: nospam at nospam.org (geo_splash_12) Date: Thu Oct 21 03:50:30 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: SpamCop and MailwasherPro In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Gaby wrote: > Hello everybody > I am a new user of spamcop and I am sending spam mail to spamcop via > MailWasherPro. > The question is : does MailWasher send everything necessary to spamcop to do > the job, or do I have something else to do ? > For I receive for each spam forwarded an e-mail from spamcop telling it will > process the spam but it is not clear to me if they ask me to complete the > job. > Anybody using MailWasher could tell me exactly what to do ? > > Thank you > > Gaby > > Read on Gaby and look at Mike's response. Please turn off all bounce notifications in Mailwasher to avoid forged mail addresses receiving your bounced e-mail. Do this under accounts, and then some sub-menu, it has a general flag that disables bouncing for that pop account. MWP still works like a champ after this minor surgical correction required to remove an idiosyncrasy left behind by the MW developers. Ejo From glnews030922 at highspot.net Thu Oct 21 14:39:18 2004 From: glnews030922 at highspot.net (Graeme Leith) Date: Thu Oct 21 08:40:05 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Cannot connect to imap server: Connection refused In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: salamandir wrote: > once again, i try to log in to held mail and i get > > Cannot connect to imap server: Connection refused > > is it happening to anyone else? Happens to me occasionally. I just try to reconnect. The worst it's ever been for me is that I was refused three times and it connected on the forth. -- Evidence shows Cyveillance abuse internet resources. I recommend unchecking their box in SpamCop reports. Cyveillance are part of the problem. They are not part of the solution. From me at privacy.net Thu Oct 21 23:19:37 2004 From: me at privacy.net (Johnny Blaze) Date: Thu Oct 21 18:20:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] COX blocking Spam Submission via Email Message-ID: I originaly posted this script to spamcop.help and here is a new revision... Cox is blocking submissions to ...@spam.spamcop.net and I use Outlook. This is my workaround (without using a webmail provider). This is a VBA Macro that will iterate through a selected number of emails and opens up internet explorer to spamcop.net and inserts the text into the box and submits the form. This works after you have applied the REG hack to make Outlook store all headers. This Reg Hack is referenced in several places in the online forum. Also, your spamcop account should use the one-box style submission. '---- begin Option Explicit ' COX Outbound Spam Submission Workaround ' ' Requirements: ' Safe Outlook reference (Redemption) ' Microsoft Internet Controls reference ' ' Usage: ' Highlight the spam, run the macro (or press a macro-button), log into ' spamcop. When spamcop is back at the submission page, press OK on the ' dialog in Outlook. Private ie As InternetExplorer Private Function GetMsgText(mItem As MailItem) As String Dim utils As New Redemption.MAPIUtils GetMsgText = utils.HrGetOneProp(mItem.MAPIOBJECT, CdoPR_TRANSPORT_MESSAGE_HEADERS) Set utils = Nothing End Function ' Revise this before you use it Private Sub MoveMsg(mItem As MailItem) Dim dest As MAPIFolder Set dest = Session.Folders.Item("Personal Folders").Folders.Item ("Spam Quarantine").Folders.Item("Sent Spam") mItem.Move dest Set dest = Nothing Set mItem = Nothing End Sub Private Sub SetupIE() Set ie = New InternetExplorer ie.navigate "http://members.spamcop.net" ie.Visible = True ' allow time for loading and logging in Do DoEvents Loop Until ie.readyState = READYSTATE_COMPLETE End Sub Private Sub CloseIE() Set ie = Nothing End Sub Private Sub SubmitSpam(spam As String) Dim doc As Object Set doc = ie.document doc.forms("submitspam")("spam").Value = spam doc.forms("submitspam").submit Set doc = Nothing End Sub Public Sub ReportSpam() Dim selected As Selection Dim mItem As MailItem Dim first As Boolean Dim doc As Object SetupIE Set selected = Application.ActiveExplorer.Selection first = True If selected.Count > 0 Then For Each mItem In selected If mItem.Class = olMail Then If first Then first = False Else MsgBox "Are you ready for another SPAM?" End If SubmitSpam GetMsgText(mItem) ' You should revise the MoveMsg sub before uncommenting ' the next line 'MoveMsg mItem Else MsgBox "This macro only works on email messages." End If Set mItem = Nothing Next End If Set selected = Nothing CloseIE End Sub ' --- end From bite_me at its.fun Thu Oct 21 19:34:19 2004 From: bite_me at its.fun (salamandir) Date: Thu Oct 21 21:40:10 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Cannot connect to imap server: Connection refused References: Message-ID: On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 21:45:13 -0500, WazoO, an eminent manifestation of divinity, wrote: > "salamandir" wrote in message > news:pan.2004.10.21.02.12.15.54020@underwear.is.fun... >> once again, i try to log in to held mail and i get >> >> Cannot connect to imap server: Connection refused >> >> is it happening to anyone else? > > Only complaint over in the web-Forum also says it's back up ..???? it came back up shortly after i posted... apparently the same nameless demon that caused it to go down in the first place decided to work its magic somewhere else. i wish whoever is responsible for finding out why such things happen would get around to doing so and put the fix in... it's the only complaint i have about spamcop's service. From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Thu Oct 21 22:44:12 2004 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (WazoO) Date: Thu Oct 21 22:45:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Cannot connect to imap server: Connection refused References: Message-ID: "salamandir" wrote in message news:pan.2004.10.22.01.34.18.800902@underwear.is.fun... > On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 21:45:13 -0500, WazoO, an eminent manifestation of > divinity, wrote: > > > > Only complaint over in the web-Forum also says it's back up ..???? > > it came back up shortly after i posted... apparently the same nameless > demon that caused it to go down in the first place decided to work its > magic somewhere else. > > i wish whoever is responsible for finding out why such things happen > would get around to doing so and put the fix in... it's the only complaint > i have about spamcop's service. For as short as the time-line seemed to be and the lack of a mountain of complaints, my initial guess would be that you hit while a system was being re-booted. Only a guess. From gabriel.galand at wanadoo.fr Fri Oct 22 12:14:45 2004 From: gabriel.galand at wanadoo.fr (Gaby) Date: Fri Oct 22 05:15:25 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: SpamCop and MailwasherPro References: Message-ID: Thank you Mike and Ejo for advice First I must stress the point that I do not bounce anymore messages, and I disabled MW to do so. This is why I am trying to use spamcop as the only mean to fight against the spam enemy. But I suppose that even without bouncing MW is still usefull. Correct ? (I did not understand what you mean by a "champ" (I am not a native english speaking)). And above all, I want to be sure to understand how spamcop works, and what is my job to be done. If I understood correctly For EVERY message forwarded to spamcop AND accepted by spam cop (e-mail notification), I must REPORT. What does this mean ? This report seems to be to click on the button "Send report". Is that all ? Maybe you could tell me to read the spamcop help pages, but these pages were not clear to me. Sorry to seam so little experienced ! Gaby "geo_splash_12" a écrit dans le message de news: cl7pm3$j36$1@news.spamcop.net... > Gaby wrote: >> Hello everybody >> I am a new user of spamcop and I am sending spam mail to spamcop via >> MailWasherPro. >> The question is : does MailWasher send everything necessary to spamcop to >> do the job, or do I have something else to do ? >> For I receive for each spam forwarded an e-mail from spamcop telling it >> will process the spam but it is not clear to me if they ask me to >> complete the job. >> Anybody using MailWasher could tell me exactly what to do ? >> >> Thank you >> >> Gaby > > Read on Gaby and look at Mike's response. Please turn off all bounce > notifications in Mailwasher to avoid forged mail addresses receiving your > bounced e-mail. Do this under accounts, and then some sub-menu, it has a > general flag that disables bouncing for that pop account. MWP still works > like a champ after this minor surgical correction required to remove an > idiosyncrasy left behind by the MW developers. > > Ejo From nospam at nospam.org Fri Oct 22 12:35:01 2004 From: nospam at nospam.org (geo_splash_12) Date: Fri Oct 22 05:40:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: SpamCop and MailwasherPro In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Gaby wrote: > Thank you Mike and Ejo for advice > > First I must stress the point that I do not bounce anymore messages, and I > disabled MW to do so. A wise decision. > This is why I am trying to use spamcop as the only mean to fight against the > spam enemy. But I suppose that even without bouncing MW is still usefull. > Correct ? (I did not understand what you mean by a "champ" (I am not a > native english speaking)). Try once to bounce a mail to your own account in mailwasher, basically that information is sent to everyone on the to: and cc: fields in the mail header. Problem is that those addresses are often falsified. Champ: as is champion, thus preforming very well. > And above all, I want to be sure to understand how spamcop works, and what > is my job to be done. Spamcop simply accepts input on basis of submitted mails or input that you provide via copy and paste on their web page. This information is used to maintain a blacklist, and this blacklist is used as a filter to mark spam in Mailwasher, or by others using other mail programs or spam filters. > If I understood correctly > For EVERY message forwarded to spamcop AND accepted by spam cop (e-mail > notification), I must REPORT. What does this mean ? It means that if you submit a e-mail that you get an acknowlegdement by .. e-mail. This link information provided in the spamcop report can be used to finish off the spam reporting procedure. > This report seems to be to click on the button "Send report". > Is that all ? If you agree with the way the spam is parsed and how the reports are sent out, then yes, that's all. > Maybe you could tell me to read the spamcop help pages, but these pages were > not clear to me. You're welcome if you need further information. Ejo > > Sorry to seam so little experienced ! > > Gaby > > "geo_splash_12" a ?crit dans le message de news: > cl7pm3$j36$1@news.spamcop.net... > >>Gaby wrote: >> >>>Hello everybody >>>I am a new user of spamcop and I am sending spam mail to spamcop via >>>MailWasherPro. >>>The question is : does MailWasher send everything necessary to spamcop to >>>do the job, or do I have something else to do ? >>>For I receive for each spam forwarded an e-mail from spamcop telling it >>>will process the spam but it is not clear to me if they ask me to >>>complete the job. >>>Anybody using MailWasher could tell me exactly what to do ? >>> >>>Thank you >>> >>>Gaby >> >>Read on Gaby and look at Mike's response. Please turn off all bounce >>notifications in Mailwasher to avoid forged mail addresses receiving your >>bounced e-mail. Do this under accounts, and then some sub-menu, it has a >>general flag that disables bouncing for that pop account. MWP still works >>like a champ after this minor surgical correction required to remove an >>idiosyncrasy left behind by the MW developers. >> >>Ejo > > > From little at pussy.com Fri Oct 22 11:57:52 2004 From: little at pussy.com (Tha King) Date: Fri Oct 22 13:55:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] yumy littel girl Message-ID: http://www.littleapril.com/tour.html?s=25&w=105565&p=2 :) From little at pussy.com Fri Oct 22 11:58:53 2004 From: little at pussy.com (Tha King) Date: Fri Oct 22 13:55:10 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] dogs and horses cock Message-ID: http://click.zoopartners.com:8080/ct?id=27131&banner=908 dogs and horses cock From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Oct 22 17:47:26 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Pop (was Spamcop by accident)) Date: Fri Oct 22 16:50:05 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] OT: Mike Easter, got a sec? Message-ID: Been hanging around the SC groups a long, long time - since early days and you've been around a good share of that time. MIght I expect a response if I were to ask you: -- Who are you? Besides a kibitzing non-kibitzer, I mean -- What do you do for a living? -- My sister says you're about 40, unmarried, drink socially, and would like to meet you (she's being facetious, don' wurry). I say you're much younger, probably nerdish, and live for your work in between good bouts of drinking once a month or so! Like I used to be =[;-{~ Anyway, when I see so many lucid (usually anyway) posts, responses, and attitudes such as yours I get curious. KUDOS! Errr, should I have said QDOS? So, if I might expect a response, what's it? Pop -- Smile, this's all a compliment! From MikeE at ster.invalid Fri Oct 22 17:10:47 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Fri Oct 22 19:10:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Mike Easter, got a sec? References: Message-ID: Pop (was Spamcop by accident) wrote: > Been hanging around the SC groups a long, long time - since early > days and you've been around a good share of that time. > > MIght I expect a response if I were to ask you: > -- Who are you? Besides a kibitzing non-kibitzer, I mean > -- What do you do for a living? > -- My sister says you're about 40, unmarried, drink socially, > and would like to meet you (she's being facetious, don' > wurry). I say you're much younger, probably nerdish, and live > for your work in between good bouts of drinking once a month or > so! Like I used to be =[;-{~ > > Anyway, when I see so many lucid (usually anyway) posts, > responses, and attitudes such as yours I get curious. KUDOS! > Errr, should I have said QDOS? > > So, if I might expect a response, what's it? > Smile, this's all a compliment! I'm smiling, I'll accept it as complimentary. Now let me see how to dance around this and keep some separation between meatspace and cyberspace. I'll bet your sister is under 40, unmarried, drinks socially and would be fun to have a few drinks with ;-) - but I think y'all are way up there near Lake Cayuga and Cornell and such and I'm way over here in a different corner of the US in San Diego. Or, maybe you're somewhere else in that Finger Lake region My favorite beverage when I'm at home is to 'flip' between bottles of Grolsch and Heineken [which I'm doing right now] - poured into a frozen ceramic or stoneware stein/mug. I buy my beer by the case and stack it in the garage, but that's because I like to get a good deal, not because the recyclers have to get a special truck to pick up my empty bottles. However, I will admit that I keep cold beer stashed in both the fridge in the house as well as the one in the garage. As we like to say in reference to some airplane situations, beer at the store or not iced down is like runway behind you or altitude above you. That would be, not the way or where you want it at the critical moment I'm not sure what nerdish is vis me; I'm pretty smart and I have a lot of different kinds of interests and I'm not very 'urbane' -- I'd rather be comfortable than some other way, so I 'live in' T-shirts rather than polos or something worse. I don't even /do/ ties. My T-shirts tend to fit the 'got the T-shirt' description rather than 'just' a T-shirt. Lotsa OTL OverTheLine ones, also 'prizes' for things, a friend gives me her bloodbank donor ones since I never get that done anymore. I also have a black one that sez 'older than dirt' that I got for a birthday. And I have a gift coffee mug that sez '40 ain't old if you're a tree' - if those items give you a clue about that birthyear stuff. That's all the meatspace me you get today. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From nospam at nospam.org Sat Oct 23 02:36:10 2004 From: nospam at nospam.org (geo_splash_12) Date: Fri Oct 22 19:40:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Mike Easter, got a sec? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > My favorite beverage when I'm at home is to 'flip' between bottles of > Grolsch and Heineken [which I'm doing right now] - poured into a frozen > ceramic or stoneware stein/mug. I buy my beer by the case and stack it > in the garage, but that's because I like to get a good deal, not because > the recyclers have to get a special truck to pick up my empty bottles. Is Mike Dutch? From MikeE at ster.invalid Fri Oct 22 19:45:10 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Fri Oct 22 21:45:17 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Mike Easter, got a sec? References: Message-ID: geo_splash_12 wrote: > Mike Easter wrote: >> Grolsch and Heineken > Is Mike Dutch? You would think so from those choices -- and I have been to the Netherlands a couple of times -- but I just sorta 'evolved' thru' the years^1 from one beer choice to another and kinda settled on those little green bottles. Usually when I'm out to a bar or restaurant typically there's no Grolsch, and Heineken is just fine. Unfortunately sometimes there's no Heineken either and then when that happens most often the other beer choices are so far from my palate that I just go off in some completely different direction. There are a lot of things I like to drink besides beer -- so if I can't have one of my favorite beers, I'm liable to drink anything. Not 'some other' beer. I'm /beer/ picky, but not actually 'picky'. Gins, rums, some scotches, Glenfiddich is good and I like several others, the occasional bourbon, some straight Irish whiskeys like Tullamore Dew. There are some great bars where the choices are nearly unlimited. But most of my wine drinking is out of a box. I also buy wine boxes by the 'six pack' but that's because it is inconvenient to go to that booze store, and my friends like to drink wine from the box too. For those who are fainting, yes, we're talking about boxes of 5 liters. Chardonnay, Merlot. I'm flexible on my box brands, but not too experimental. ^1 High school Lone Star - then Schlitz back when it was good - then years of Budweiser - now the Dutch green bottles -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From nospam at nospam.org Sat Oct 23 10:50:41 2004 From: nospam at nospam.org (geo_splash_12) Date: Sat Oct 23 03:55:25 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Mike Easter, got a sec? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > You would think so from those choices -- and I have been to the > Netherlands a couple of times -- but I just sorta 'evolved' thru' the > years^1 from one beer choice to another and kinda settled on those little > green bottles. Usually when I'm out to a bar or restaurant typically > there's no Grolsch, and Heineken is just fine. Unfortunately sometimes > there's no Heineken either and then when that happens most often the > other beer choices are so far from my palate that I just go off in some > completely different direction. It is funny that they sell it in Green bottles over there, this is the export version of Heineken en Grolsch. Here we have different bottles and I noticed minor differences in taste. Our neighbors have some pretty good beers: Hoegaarden, Duvel, Malle, Leffe, you should try them. > There are a lot of things I like to drink besides beer -- so if I can't > have one of my favorite beers, I'm liable to drink anything. Not 'some > other' beer. I'm /beer/ picky, but not actually 'picky'. Gins, rums, > some scotches, Glenfiddich is good and I like several others, the > occasional bourbon, some straight Irish whiskeys like Tullamore Dew. > There are some great bars where the choices are nearly unlimited. But > most of my wine drinking is out of a box. I've once visited one of the distilleries in Scotland, I thought it was Glenlivet. Bourbon is typically american, I don't think I can get that here. You should try our Ketel 1, it is made in this neighborhood, we call it jenever. The following is in Dutch: http://www.stud.tue.nl/~alcibiad/ketel1.php > > I also buy wine boxes by the 'six pack' but that's because it is > inconvenient to go to that booze store, and my friends like to drink wine > from the box too. For those who are fainting, yes, we're talking about > boxes of 5 liters. Chardonnay, Merlot. I'm flexible on my box brands, > but not too experimental. Wines are actually my favorite at the moment, and contrary to most places in the US you can simply get it in the supermarket. I'm still thinking about a wine cellar as a form of investment rather then stocks or bonds. The good thing is that you still have something to enjoy when it loses its value. But, as Kees van Kooten once explained us, keeping a wine cellar is considered a "modernism" because the reality is that most of us don't have the discipline to leave the collection untouched for a while. Ejo From somewhat at odds.tld Sat Oct 23 13:19:56 2004 From: somewhat at odds.tld (Derek T) Date: Sat Oct 23 07:20:21 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Mike Easter, got a sec? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: >>Mike Easter wrote: > > >>>Grolsch and Heineken If you like those may I suggest you try Oranjeboom and (different in style but my favourite lager) Kronenbourg 1664 (the French 6.2% is best!). Subject to availability in S. Cal/Mexico! From amp at spamcop.net Sat Oct 23 14:41:44 2004 From: amp at spamcop.net (Ade) Date: Sat Oct 23 08:45:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Attn Deputies - Report Spam Web Page Bug Message-ID: I've identified a problem on http://mailsc.spamcop.net which appears to have only started since the website was redesigned recently. I've done a quick search of recent messages in the forum and can't see any other posts about this. If I click on the Report Spam 'tab' I can process a spam message as normal. The resulting page lists where all the reports were sent to, along with a new box for pasting the next spam. It is this second reporting page that is broken, because 90% of the time I get the "no data / too much data" error page even for messages well below 50 KB in size (only very small messages seem to be processed successfully). If I click on Report Spam 'tab' and re-process the message from here it gets submitted fine. It's as if this page is only allowing messages below 5 KB in size to be processed, not 50 KB! Can anyone else replicate this error? Thanks, Ade. FYI - I'm running IE 6 under Windows XP Professional SP2, with all the latest critical patches. From nospam at nospam.org Sat Oct 23 16:04:30 2004 From: nospam at nospam.org (geo_splash_12) Date: Sat Oct 23 09:05:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn Deputies - Report Spam Web Page Bug In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ade wrote: > I've identified a problem on http://mailsc.spamcop.net which appears to have > only started since the website was redesigned recently. I've done a quick > search of recent messages in the forum and can't see any other posts about > this. > > If I click on the Report Spam 'tab' I can process a spam message as normal. > The resulting page lists where all the reports were sent to, along with a > new box for pasting the next spam. It is this second reporting page that is > broken, because 90% of the time I get the "no data / too much data" error > page even for messages well below 50 KB in size (only very small messages > seem to be processed successfully). If I click on Report Spam 'tab' and > re-process the message from here it gets submitted fine. > > It's as if this page is only allowing messages below 5 KB in size to be > processed, not 50 KB! > > Can anyone else replicate this error? > > Thanks, > > Ade. > > FYI - I'm running IE 6 under Windows XP Professional SP2, with all the > latest critical patches. > > So, what do you submit to spamcop, an e-mail I hope with the complete header of that e-mail? It looks like you're using outlook or so and that you're trying to feed something without a header or a body. Ejo From MikeE at ster.invalid Sat Oct 23 08:50:25 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sat Oct 23 10:50:23 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Mike Easter, got a sec? References: Message-ID: geo_splash_12 wrote: > Mike Easter wrote: >> Grolsch, and Heineken > It is funny that they sell it in Green bottles over there, this is the > export version of Heineken en Grolsch. Here we have different bottles > and I noticed minor differences in taste. Our neighbors have some > pretty good beers: Hoegaarden, Duvel, Malle, Leffe, you should try > them. Whenever I get into a discussion about 'my' Grolsch and Heineken with a European, they don't think much of my choice in Dutch beer and are usually suggesting something else to me. Last year I got into a discussion in alt.spam with a Norwegian who was very partial to Belgian beer, which I don't like at all. That is, I don't like the 'standard' or normal Belgian beer, which is a strong fruity winey kinda thing which many folks are very fond of. Belgium is huge on its beer drinking, much more so than Germany or Holland. I don't have any experiences with Belgian pilseners - because all of the Belgian bars I was in when there were 'way into' their favorite type of beer. The typical Belgique doesn't think much of pilseners. >> some scotches, Glenfiddich is good > I've once visited one of the distilleries in Scotland, I thought it > was Glenlivet. Bourbon is typically american, I don't think I can get > that here. You should try our Ketel 1, it is made in this > neighborhood, we call it jenever. The following is in Dutch: > > http://www.stud.tue.nl/~alcibiad/ketel1.php > Wines are actually my favorite at the moment, and contrary to most > places in the US you can simply get it in the supermarket. Yes, wine in supermarkets in my state too. But I have my best 'choices' and buys of boxed wine in a big liquor store 'warehouse' type operation, such as Beverages and More. > I'm still > thinking about a wine cellar as a form of investment rather then > stocks or bonds. The good thing is that you still have something to > enjoy when it loses its value. But, as Kees van Kooten once explained > us, keeping a wine cellar is considered a "modernism" because the > reality is that most of us don't have the discipline to leave the > collection untouched for a while. Heh. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Oct 23 11:11:54 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Ellen) Date: Sat Oct 23 11:15:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn Deputies - Report Spam Web Page Bug References: Message-ID: "Ade" wrote in message news:cldjhm$f8i$1@news.spamcop.net... > I've identified a problem on http://mailsc.spamcop.net which appears to have > only started since the website was redesigned recently. I've done a quick > search of recent messages in the forum and can't see any other posts about > this. > > If I click on the Report Spam 'tab' I can process a spam message as normal. > The resulting page lists where all the reports were sent to, along with a > new box for pasting the next spam. It is this second reporting page that is > broken, because 90% of the time I get the "no data / too much data" error > page even for messages well below 50 KB in size (only very small messages > seem to be processed successfully). If I click on Report Spam 'tab' and > re-process the message from here it gets submitted fine. > > It's as if this page is only allowing messages below 5 KB in size to be > processed, not 50 KB! > > Can anyone else replicate this error? > > Thanks, > > Ade. > > FYI - I'm running IE 6 under Windows XP Professional SP2, with all the > latest critical patches. > > I tried a couple of emails using MSIE -- one was almost 30K which was the largest one I could put my hands on at the moment -- and was not able to recreate your problem. I have not installed SP2 yet altho I do have all the other patches installed. I will look for a larger email and see if I can get it to fail. I'll also keep an eye out for anyone else reporting the same problem. Ellen From dsp4ever2002 at yahoo.com Sat Oct 23 15:25:41 2004 From: dsp4ever2002 at yahoo.com (Scott C.) Date: Sat Oct 23 14:30:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Not getting responses from Spamcop Message-ID: For the last week or so I am not getting back most of what I report to Spamcop. I forward the spam as attachments, and about 80% the time get nothing back. Any ideas as to what I should do ?? Thanks From masfjorden at spamcop.net Sat Oct 23 21:36:21 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (helge) Date: Sat Oct 23 14:40:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Definitions: Bounce or reject Message-ID: Below are the definitions used in fastmail.fm's faq. As far as I know, spamcop scholars use the terms differently; a reject is what happens at SMTP level, while a bounce happens after the mail has been accepted. Comments? helge # What does the 'Bounce' action do? 'Bounce' takes the currently selected emails and sends back an email to the addresses the 'From' address provided in the email(s), saying basically that 'the email address does not exist' in a standard internet email protocol way. Some more organised spammers remove these from their lists, although many spammers forge the 'From' address so they do not receive these bounces. After sending the bounce response, the messages are deleted. There has been some confusion about the terms bounce, reject, block sender, discard, and reject silently. There are subtle differences, though some people won't care about them. bounce: Most commonly, what happens when a mail server ("MTA") refuses, or fails to accept mail to an address e.g. give the error: 550 username, User Unknown. or mailbox full, or these days, blacklisted IP, server unavailable, or for some other reason, the mail server (MTA) refuses the message before the body of the message has been received. reject: A FastMail.FM term or Sieve filter command to that causes action very similar to a traditional bounce, but occurs after the MTA has received the whole message for further processing. From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Sat Oct 23 15:06:44 2004 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (WazoO) Date: Sat Oct 23 15:10:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Not getting responses from Spamcop References: Message-ID: "Scott C." wrote in message news:cle7n2$dsr$1@news.spamcop.net... > For the last week or so I am not getting back most of what I report to > Spamcop. I forward the spam as attachments, and about 80% the time get > nothing back. Any ideas as to what I should do ?? Thanks See the FAQ over at the web-based Forum ... this issue has its own entry, to include a recent addition concerning a number of ISPs invoking spam blocking on outgoing e-mail. http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php? From MikeE at ster.invalid Sat Oct 23 13:47:23 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sat Oct 23 15:50:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Definitions: Bounce or reject References: Message-ID: helge wrote: > Below are the definitions used in fastmail.fm's faq. > As far as I know, spamcop scholars use the terms differently; a reject > is what happens at SMTP level, while a bounce happens after the mail > has been accepted. Comments? At least they were decent enough to accurately define what their gizmo does, so you can avoid doing bad things, but they are still using the words badly, and now they've chosen to use the word 'reject' badly as well, which it usually isn't. > # What does the 'Bounce' action do? > > 'Bounce' takes the currently selected emails and sends back an email > to the addresses the 'From' address provided in the email(s), saying > basically that 'the email address does not exist' in a standard > internet email protocol way. Some more organised spammers remove > these from their lists, although many spammers forge the 'From' > address so they do not receive these bounces. After sending the > bounce response, the messages are deleted. That is a bogus bounce. Do not use. > There has been some confusion about the terms bounce, reject, block > sender, discard, and reject silently. There are subtle differences, > though some people won't care about them. > > bounce: Most commonly, what happens when a mail server ("MTA") > refuses, or fails to accept mail to an address e.g. give the error: > > 550 username, User Unknown. which is *not* what is happening in this case of the bounce described at the top. That 550 is also a 'reject' - and what they are describing below is *not* a true or proper 550 reject. > or mailbox full, or these days, blacklisted IP, server unavailable, or > for some other reason, the mail server (MTA) refuses the message > before the body of the message has been received. > > reject: A FastMail.FM term or Sieve filter command to that causes > action very similar to a traditional bounce, but occurs after the MTA > has received the whole message for further processing. After the mta has accepted the message, it can no longer perform a reject, because it didn't reject when it had the chance. Now it can only create a newmail, like a bogus bounce. It sounds to me like their [bogus] Bounce action and their [bogus] 'reject' sieve command are both bogus and abusive and should not be used, and they only differ in the kind of bogus message they put on the item -- much like MW has variants of how it does its bogus bouncing. Do not use any of that stuff. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From masfjorden at spamcop.net Sat Oct 23 23:04:01 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (helge) Date: Sat Oct 23 16:05:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Definitions: Bounce or reject In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: snip excellent explanation > Do not use any of that stuff. I won't. I am involved in a discussion over there, and I have asked for essential improvements of the faq. On the other hand fastmail as a service looks good in my view. Thanks, Mike helge From masfjorden at spamcop.net Sat Oct 23 23:10:01 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (helge) Date: Sat Oct 23 16:10:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Definitions: Bounce or reject In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: snip Do you mind my quoting you over there? ( I don't know that I will, but just in case) http://www.emailaddresses.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=17 helge From MikeE at ster.invalid Sat Oct 23 14:38:00 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sat Oct 23 16:40:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Definitions: Bounce or reject References: Message-ID: helge wrote: > Mike Easter wrote: > > snip excellent explanation > >> Do not use any of that stuff. > > I won't. I am involved in a discussion over there, and I have asked > for essential improvements of the faq. On the other hand fastmail as a > service looks good in my view. > > Thanks, Mike YW, hopefully if I'm wrong and have misinterpreted something, we'll get ourselves straightened out; but I took a little looksee over at http://www.fastmail.fm/docs/faqparts/Mailbox.htm#MbxBounce What does the 'Bounce' action do? to see if there was anything else in there. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From MikeE at ster.invalid Sat Oct 23 15:01:06 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sat Oct 23 17:00:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Definitions: Bounce or reject References: Message-ID: helge wrote: > Mike Easter wrote: > Do you mind my quoting you over there? ( I don't know that I will, but > just in case) > http://www.emailaddresses.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=17 Nah, I don't mind, go ahead; if you tell them where you got it, at least the newsserver news.spamcop.net, and someone wants to 'discuss it' they'll know to come over here. I see a .no heiabrann disparaging bogus bouncing - is that you? -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From masfjorden at spamcop.net Sun Oct 24 00:09:37 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (helge) Date: Sat Oct 23 17:10:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Definitions: Bounce or reject In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > helge wrote: > >>Mike Easter wrote: > > >>Do you mind my quoting you over there? ( I don't know that I will, but >>just in case) >>http://www.emailaddresses.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=17 > > > Nah, I don't mind, go ahead; if you tell them where you got it, at least > the newsserver news.spamcop.net, and someone wants to 'discuss it' > they'll know to come over here. > > I see a .no heiabrann disparaging bogus bouncing - is that you? > > yes From MikeE at ster.invalid Sat Oct 23 15:24:49 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sat Oct 23 17:25:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Definitions: Bounce or reject References: Message-ID: helge wrote: > Mike Easter wrote: >> I see a .no heiabrann disparaging bogus bouncing - is that you? > yes The problem you are having there is that you are 'disparaging' a fm 'feature' just as I disparage MW's bogus bounce - except that you have some dudes who are claiming to be busy antispam who don't like your opinion. Although they claim to be busy antispammers and nanae visitors, they wouldn't dare take their pro-bogusbounce attitude over to nanae. They would be killed over there. mcowger and cosffm seem to be claiming to use it very carefully - some of those who are arguing with you are actually just arguing that fm should have the feature so that it could be used if correctly - and some others are coming over to your side that some people there are confusing proper smtp transaction rejection with the bad bogus bouncing. You are doing just fine - you're just 'attacking' fm like I attack MW. Perhaps it would have been better to try to recommend cleaning up the docs and recommending more people standing up against bogus bouncing in the forums, like you are. Actually over in the MW forums 'everybody' speaks out against bogus bouncing. Strange, considering how bad the MW hype is about the 'feature/flaw' and how bad the fundamental 'construction' of MW is for complexity of getting bogus bouncing completely disabled and how bad the docs are on bogus bouncing. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From MikeE at ster.invalid Sat Oct 23 15:44:37 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sat Oct 23 17:45:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Definitions: Bounce or reject References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > Although they claim to be busy antispammers and nanae visitors, they > wouldn't dare take their pro-bogusbounce attitude over to nanae. They > would be killed over there. mcowger's newest opinion is somewhat more complex -- because he gets into the nasty problem of the disputed smtp functionality which results in MTAs 'having' to do the 'right thing' - depending upon your perspective - with a piece of mail which has been accepted and then cannot be delivered. The problem which gets discussed no end in nanae is that that MTA doesn't feel comfortable dropping that item on the floor - so you have the enigma of a server holding good mail along with spam which has already been accepted for delivery by some preceding server. The server admin feels the compunction to 'soft bounce' or belatedly bounce those items - so that the goodmail softbounce will actually 'work'. Unfortunately the softbounce results in abusive mail to those bogus Froms, and you have 'incidentally' stirred that little pot in mcowger's face. His argument is or could be, that if otherwise well run servers end up having to softbounce through no fault of their own; then there really isn't any difference in that from bogus bouncing. He is really defending the soft bounce, rather than the bogus bounce - but he defends the bogus bounce as a useful feature applied properly. However; there is actually quite a lot of difference and you shouldn't have to take on the dilemma of the server problem of the 'need' to soft bounce; because you are arguing against endusers bogus bouncing indiscriminately - that is bogus bouncing spam with bogus Froms. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From masfjorden at spamcop.net Sun Oct 24 01:01:53 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (helge) Date: Sat Oct 23 18:05:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Definitions: Bounce or reject In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > helge wrote: > >>Mike Easter wrote: >> >>>I see a .no heiabrann disparaging bogus bouncing - is that you? > > >>yes snip > You are doing just fine - you're just 'attacking' fm like I attack MW. > Perhaps it would have been better to try to recommend cleaning up the > docs and recommending more people standing up against bogus bouncing in > the forums, like you are. Thanks for the moral support. I have just given my last 'verdict', without replying to the claim that 'both you and Mike are wrong' helge From MikeE at ster.invalid Sat Oct 23 16:22:11 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sat Oct 23 18:20:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Definitions: Bounce or reject References: Message-ID: helge wrote: > Thanks for the moral support. I have just given my last 'verdict', > without replying to the claim that 'both you and Mike are wrong' David and mcowger are both slippery to argue with. They would like to change the argument to something else, slightly different, which they can argue more effectively against/for. They each do it differently from each other and they each have different 'arguments' but they aren't actually arguing against the most defensible elements of your original gripe. Except your original gripe has some weaknesses. That gripe was that since fm chose to have that feature and/or use that bounce language that you couldn't support the pay upgrade [I think that's what you said/meant.]. In that kind of scene of 'them' attacking some slightly 'changed' strawman element, periodically one has to succinctly restate one's argument - and it is 'fair' to tune up and improve from the original language to relieve the burden of ambiguity which some might like to leap through. The gripe is that endusers shouldn't be bogus bouncing spam because it uses bogus Froms who are innocent addresses just like yours or mine. The further gripe is that the fm docs should say it 'like that' instead of saying it in ways that confuse proper 5xx smtp rejections at the time of transaction with something else which sends a newmail to an innocent forged From. And, the still further gripe which you brought up but which I don't know how the construction is for fm compared to MW, is that MW is forging role accounts without any approval from the domainname's owner - whereas it might be possible that since this is a fm 'feature', that perhaps the forged role account has been 'permitted' by fm. so that argument might be also weakened. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From Martin.Edwards5 at btinternet.com Sun Oct 24 10:06:34 2004 From: Martin.Edwards5 at btinternet.com (Martin Edwards) Date: Sun Oct 24 04:00:12 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Definitions: Bounce or reject In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > helge wrote: > >>Thanks for the moral support. I have just given my last 'verdict', >>without replying to the claim that 'both you and Mike are wrong' > > > David and mcowger are both slippery to argue with. They would like to > change the argument to something else, slightly different, which they can > argue more effectively against/for. They each do it differently from > each other and they each have different 'arguments' but they aren't > actually arguing against the most defensible elements of your original > gripe. > > Except your original gripe has some weaknesses. That gripe was that > since fm chose to have that feature and/or use that bounce language that > you couldn't support the pay upgrade [I think that's what you > said/meant.]. > > In that kind of scene of 'them' attacking some slightly 'changed' > strawman element, periodically one has to succinctly restate one's > argument - and it is 'fair' to tune up and improve from the original > language to relieve the burden of ambiguity which some might like to leap > through. > > The gripe is that endusers shouldn't be bogus bouncing spam because it > uses bogus Froms who are innocent addresses just like yours or mine. The > further gripe is that the fm docs should say it 'like that' instead of > saying it in ways that confuse proper 5xx smtp rejections at the time of > transaction with something else which sends a newmail to an innocent > forged From. > > And, the still further gripe which you brought up but which I don't know > how the construction is for fm compared to MW, is that MW is forging role > accounts without any approval from the domainname's owner - whereas it > might be possible that since this is a fm 'feature', that perhaps the > forged role account has been 'permitted' by fm. so that argument might be > also weakened. > I get quite a lot of this on my Nescape Webmail account, though very little anywhere else. If time allows, I parse the header and report it manually whatever the reason. Who needs this crap? From masfjorden at spamcop.net Sun Oct 24 12:22:11 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (helge) Date: Sun Oct 24 05:25:24 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Definitions: Bounce or reject In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > helge wrote: > >>Thanks for the moral support. I have just given my last 'verdict', >>without replying to the claim that 'both you and Mike are wrong' snip > And, the still further gripe which you brought up but which I don't know > how the construction is for fm compared to MW, is that MW is forging role > accounts without any approval from the domainname's owner - whereas it > might be possible that since this is a fm 'feature', that perhaps the > forged role account has been 'permitted' by fm. so that argument might be > also weakened. > Actively discussing the more advanced problems of spamfighting is rather new to me, so I am not surprised that I made false moves like the ones you pointed out. Moderator Jeremy Howard said in the thread, after I finished: "quote:Originally posted by slive You should say "many spammers forge the 'From' address, so it is possible that your bounces will go to an innocent third party rather than the spammer. You shouldn't use bounce unless you are confident that the 'From' address is accurate." Many thanks for the suggestion - I've made that change now." The change is not visible yet, and personally I think the statement is too weak, but the thread has some effect, after all. helge From amp at spamcop.net Sun Oct 24 14:33:23 2004 From: amp at spamcop.net (Ade) Date: Sun Oct 24 08:35:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn Deputies - Report Spam Web Page Bug References: Message-ID: I'm using Outlook Express as my mail reader, but the messages I'm reporting are cut and paste from non-delivery reports (full headers and body) as I'm being joe-jobbed. Ade. "geo_splash_12" wrote in message news:cldkst$hbn$1@news.spamcop.net... > Ade wrote: >> I've identified a problem on http://mailsc.spamcop.net which appears to >> have only started since the website was redesigned recently. I've done a >> quick search of recent messages in the forum and can't see any other >> posts about this. >> >> If I click on the Report Spam 'tab' I can process a spam message as >> normal. The resulting page lists where all the reports were sent to, >> along with a new box for pasting the next spam. It is this second >> reporting page that is broken, because 90% of the time I get the "no data >> / too much data" error page even for messages well below 50 KB in size >> (only very small messages seem to be processed successfully). If I click >> on Report Spam 'tab' and re-process the message from here it gets >> submitted fine. >> >> It's as if this page is only allowing messages below 5 KB in size to be >> processed, not 50 KB! >> >> Can anyone else replicate this error? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Ade. >> >> FYI - I'm running IE 6 under Windows XP Professional SP2, with all the >> latest critical patches. >> >> > > So, what do you submit to spamcop, an e-mail I hope with the complete > header of that e-mail? It looks like you're using outlook or so and that > you're trying to feed something without a header or a body. > > Ejo From e.schrama_NOSPAM at NOSPAM_hccnet.nl Sun Oct 24 15:59:35 2004 From: e.schrama_NOSPAM at NOSPAM_hccnet.nl (geo_splash_12) Date: Sun Oct 24 09:00:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn Deputies - Report Spam Web Page Bug In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ade wrote: > I'm using Outlook Express as my mail reader, but the messages I'm reporting > are cut and paste from non-delivery reports (full headers and body) as I'm > being joe-jobbed. And those no-delivery reports are like e-mails without any other information such as prefix characters (like me quoting you text?) Can you show us an example of a non-delivery report so that we understand what you are talking about? I can't duplicate this problem in outlook express, you can get the full header and body of any e-mail under properties -> message source. Ejo From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Oct 24 12:18:44 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Ellen) Date: Sun Oct 24 11:25:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn Deputies - Report Spam Web Page Bug References: Message-ID: "Ade" wrote in message news:clg7du$dr5$1@news.spamcop.net... > I'm using Outlook Express as my mail reader, but the messages I'm reporting > are cut and paste from non-delivery reports (full headers and body) as I'm > being joe-jobbed. > > Ade. > The SpamCop TOS/AUP do *not* permit those to be reported. I am sorry that you are being forged into spam and getting bounces but you cannot remove the spam from the bounce and report it. Ellen SpamCop From sidewinder at spamcop.net Sun Oct 24 17:05:31 2004 From: sidewinder at spamcop.net (Richard Winder) Date: Sun Oct 24 12:10:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Innocent links Message-ID: I got the following message today: > Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 05:57:16 -0400 > From: Wilbern Cobb > Subject: Spamcop report id:1271044247 > To: 1271044247@reports.spamcop.net > > Hello SpamCop user, > > The spammer has inserted links to various sites here on purpose. This > is not spamvertising, and in fact there is no text between the > and the , so users of HTML-capable MUAs would not even see it. > If you visit this site you'll see that it has nothing to do with > the contents of the spam. > > -- > Please use the link below to review the report in question: > http://www.spamcop.net/mcgi?action=showhistory;slice=reportid;val=12710 > 44247 The report shows: > Submitted: October 22, 2004 5:18:02 PM -0700: > RE: account # 804764V > 1271044251 ( http://www.saxony.org ) To: abuse@schlund.de > 1271044247 ( http://www.landau.org ) To: tech@csoft.net > 1271044245 ( http://www.landau.org ) To: abuse@mci.com > 1271044242 ( http://www.courteous.org ) To: abuse@savvis.net > 1271044239 ( http://www.cinder.org ) To: abuse@interland.net > 1271044236 ( http://arco.quotestore.net/e4/index.php?weo=110 ) To: > abuse@epnetworks.co.kr 1271044231 ( > http://arco.quotestore.net/e4/index.php?weo=110 ) To: > spamcop@kisa.or.kr 1271044230 ( > http://arco.quotestore.net/e4/index.php?weo=110 ) To: > postmaster@nextline.co.kr 1271044229 ( > http://arco.quotestore.net/e4/index.php?weo=110 ) To: > postmaster@epnetworks.co.kr 1271044228 ( > http://arco.quotestore.net/e4/index.php?weo=110 ) To: > abuse@nextline.co.kr 1271044227 ( 66.249.48.26 ) To: > spamcop@imaphost.com 1271044223 ( 66.249.48.26 ) To: > abuse@madisonriver.net I've read the FAQ on reporting links at http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/126.html and agree that ideally, one would carefully read spams before reporting links. I usually try to unclick things that look like obvious innocent bystanders, but given that I am sometimes reporting something like 150-200 spams per day now, I think that reading and analysing each spam in detail would be a substantial waste of time. It would be nice, btw, if I could handle this the other way, by only checking on the ones I wish to report, but I don't see that in reporting preferences. Anyway, my question is: are there any other ways to deal with this issue? -RSW From MikeE at ster.invalid Sun Oct 24 10:39:48 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sun Oct 24 12:40:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Innocent links References: Message-ID: Richard Winder wrote: > I got the following message today: What you posted doesn't give us access to the original spam like the tracker would, and I can't find one that would match the information in the report in sightings. > Anyway, my question is: are there any other > ways to deal with this issue? The deputies have the ability to mark sites as innocent bystanders. Whether that is appropriate in this case isn't determinable without the tracker for the item. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From MikeE at ster.invalid Sun Oct 24 14:57:18 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sun Oct 24 17:00:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Spam Camouflaged as Bounce References: Message-ID: Posted to .spam and .help, followups to .help .spam is only for posting spams, to keep them out of .help and spamcop groups. .help and spamcop are for discussion - no spam allowed. The ideal way to talk about a spam [or an apparent spam] is to put it into the parser and copy the tracker url, then post that tracker into spamcop or .help and we can discuss it there. Then you don't have to post a spam here at all. The tracker for this item looks like this: www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z685384678ze2edbbd3dc11b1faecd29fb866f899ffz Ernst wrote: > Below ist he header of an e-mail camouflaged as a bounce. SpamCop > cannot recognized this. What should one do in such a case? That is a viral propagation 'spawn' - virm spawn. Virms, virm bounces, and virm notifies are not SC reportable. http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/14.html On what type of email should I (not) use SpamCop? -- virus infected emails are not spam regardless of whether you know the originating party or not. -- Bounces: -- Virus Notifications: -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From MikeE at ster.invalid Sun Oct 24 15:17:33 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sun Oct 24 17:20:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Spam Camouflaged as Bounce References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z685384678ze2edbbd3dc11b1faecd29fb866f899ffz > That is a viral propagation 'spawn' - virm spawn. Virms, virm > bounces, and virm notifies are not SC reportable. Unfortunately, the recipient server which generated the soft belated bounce of the virm bogus bounce did not do a good enough job of maintaining the original headers to determine the original source. The triggering item was a viral propagation disguised as a bogus bounce, intended for the recipient f.hodel@hunkeler.ch and with the bogus From of your bluewin.ch addy. When the hunkeler server received the item, it recognized the viral template for the NetskyP and stripped it. That server could not deliver the stripped virm to the recipient, so it belatedly bounced it to the bogus From, namely you - not a good server move - but it failed to retain all of the headers of the original propagation - losing the IP address of the propagator. The uppermost headers are those of a true 'soft' or belated bounce, from the hunkeler server to your bluewin address. The middle partial headers are just part of those from the propagator to the recipient with your address in the From. Those headers lack the source IP. If SC had allowed you to report the bounce, you would have been reporting the IP of the hunkeler server from the top headrs as a spam source. While soft belated bounces of spam and virms are undesirable, they are not SC reportable as spamsources. Also, SC is correct. That /is/ a bounce. It is a bounce of a virm bogus bounce. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From completelyfalse at harrykiri.com Mon Oct 25 09:39:09 2004 From: completelyfalse at harrykiri.com (Harry Kiri) Date: Sun Oct 24 18:40:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Mike Easter, got a sec? References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" wrote in message news:clc3tn$89m$1@news.spamcop.net... > Now let me see how to > dance around this and keep some separation between meatspace and > cyberspace. "Maintaining separation" - you kick the tyres and light the fires privately or for a living, Mike? Regards, Hughy From ube_never at YAHOO.COM Sun Oct 24 17:55:37 2004 From: ube_never at YAHOO.COM (R. Asby Dragon) Date: Sun Oct 24 19:55:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] SC "not parsing" message bodies when spammer inserts large amounts of forged URLS Message-ID: Another "SpamCop-Proof" system?? I've had a number of reports that wouldn't touch the spamvertised websites (mostly mortgage leadsites) because the body was salted with numerous 'valid format' URLs that obviously aren't connected. The URLs are a varying mix of real and phony; I've seen "NAACP.ORG" as well as "SHIRTMAKE.ORG". The placement in JTML varies as well; with a mix of "all in one place" as well as placed between each visible letter. Here's one particularily slimey example (reportid=1272214700) There's no direct action on http://cyan.cash-store.net Hello,

We sent you an email a while ago, because you now qualify for a new mortgage.
You could get $300,000 for as little as $600 a month!
Bad credit is no problem, you can pull cash out or refinance.

Please click on this link for free consultation by a mortgage broker:
Start Saving Here

Best Regards,
Faustino Wise

For email removal, go here.

I can understand why; the implications of a bad SC report are *not good* if these 'joe-jobs' are handled as truely UBE. The parsing engine would take forever trying to deal with the phonies as 404 and trying to keep a lookup table for the "reals" that don't spam (or that DO spam but aren't involved in this instance) . I tried deleting the URLs in the message body when reporting this one; but it breaks the HTML as well as making it not a "true report" . Is there a method to route or sort these to a "live human" parser with a tag to alert for "excess URLs" ? I'm good at spotting this trick (there's nothing new here-- saw same "BSW" (before Sanford Wallace ;} ) I haven't been on spamcop long; it's possible I haven't found it when it's staring me in the pace. I've done my LARTing manually for years and decided that larting by SC saves me time as well as frustration. From ric.gates at bigsleep.org Mon Oct 25 02:31:20 2004 From: ric.gates at bigsleep.org (Blammo) Date: Sun Oct 24 21:35:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: SC "not parsing" message bodies when spammer inserts large amounts of forged URLS References: Message-ID: On 24 Oct 2004 R. Asby Dragon entered spamcop.help and left news:clhf5m$c05$1@news.spamcop.net: > I tried deleting the URLs in the message body when reporting this one; > but it breaks the HTML as well as making it not a "true report" . > > Is there a method to route or sort these to a "live human" parser with > a tag to alert for "excess URLs" ? I'm good at spotting this trick > (there's nothing new here-- saw same "BSW" (before Sanford Wallace ;} > ) > Just view the entire message, open a new browser window to get the SpamCop parsing box (you can use the right-click menu on the "Report Spam" or SpamCop logo links), copy each link you think is a spamvertised site from the full message window, paste that into the Report Spam parser box and submit it. That will give you an abuse address to add to your User Report in the Spam Report window. Make sure you just post a single link, such as http://cyan.cash-store.net/p3/li.php?weo=110 in your example. I think this is a little easier to do in Mozilla Firefox (and Opera) because I can open links in a new tab with the middle mouse button. Of course you need a paid account to get the User Report box, so you'd have to report it the old way in that case. -- | Ric | From ric.gates at bigsleep.org Mon Oct 25 02:44:56 2004 From: ric.gates at bigsleep.org (Blammo) Date: Sun Oct 24 21:45:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Innocent links References: Message-ID: On 24 Oct 2004 Richard Winder entered spamcop.help and left news:Xns958C5C962F818sidewinderspamcopnet@216.154.195.61: > I got the following message today: > > > >> Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 05:57:16 -0400 >> From: Wilbern Cobb >> Subject: Spamcop report id:1271044247 >> To: 1271044247@reports.spamcop.net >> >> Hello SpamCop user, >> >> The spammer has inserted links to various sites here on purpose. This >> is not spamvertising, and in fact there is no text between the >> and the , so users of HTML-capable MUAs would not even see it. >> If you visit this site you'll see that it has nothing to do with >> the contents of the spam. > I would try not to report empty links, and I believe SpamCop is working on a way to skip empty links (I remember it skipping empty links for awhile, but there must've been problems). Bogus links are most likely added to spam to poison filters, they usually aren't visible or clickable. Whether a site has any relation to the spam content is irreverent, you can just View Full Message, no need to waste time examining sites. -- | Ric | From MikeE at ster.invalid Sun Oct 24 19:47:21 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sun Oct 24 21:50:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Mike Easter, got a sec? References: Message-ID: Harry Kiri wrote: > "Mike Easter" >> Now let me see how to >> dance around this and keep some separation between meatspace and >> cyberspace. > > "Maintaining separation" - you kick the tyres and light the fires > privately or for a living, Mike? If you mean this spamfighting and relating to spamfighters new and old and the associated 'technology' -- this is a hobby -- I got interested to have a fun/ enjoyable/ sport/ way to develop some insight and knowledge about the email element of network tech. I also like puzzles. And, I want my nearby chosen clock repair place to let me bring in my perfectly functional pendulum wallclock to his place so he can 'oversee' my minor disassembly and cleaning of it, using his bench and tools and oversight/supervision. I've read a couple of books, now I'm ready to get my hands oily. Great books - one very practical about how to go into the clock cleaning/repairing business - the other one so heavy into horology science it broke/strained my head. And/but, now I also need to become more knowledgeable about security related issues; starting with whatever background I have in those areas which apply to spam, spamvertising, and its spawn. And, find some way to make the security related 'sport' somewhat similar in fun to the spamfighting sport. And stay out of trouble all at the same time. I also like to follow ng/s like alt.locksmithing -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From me at privacy.net Sun Oct 24 22:55:37 2004 From: me at privacy.net (Frog Prince) Date: Sun Oct 24 22:10:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Mike Easter, got a sec? References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" | | And stay out of trouble all at the same time. | | I also like to follow ng/s like alt.locksmithing Chastity belt keys made while you wait? From MikeE at ster.invalid Sun Oct 24 20:42:35 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sun Oct 24 22:45:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Mike Easter, got a sec? References: Message-ID: Frog Prince wrote: > Chastity belt keys made while you wait? I don't know how much you know about the 'history' -- most especially the history of the myths -- of the chastity belt; but it is fascinating. Mostly there is a lot more /reality/ in the history of /male/ chastity belts than female ones. And, the 'best' history of the chastity 'belt' is not what you think; but a simple 'symbol', like a rope tied around the waist to symbolize chastity. The myths include Roman female slaves whose devices were only released for the pleasure of their masters, Roman prostitutes whose devices gave appealing 'nonfunctional' exposure until the money exchange provided access, medieval knight's lady myths, Florentine lady's protection from rape, English and American devices for Victorian era young men to prevent masturbation, and some classy and expensive 20th and 21st century devices fashioned after those Victorian ones. There are currently some shops catering to 'kinky' or 'different' sexual relationships which have a lot of demand for male chastity belts such as those above. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From me at privacy.net Mon Oct 25 00:11:24 2004 From: me at privacy.net (Frog Prince) Date: Sun Oct 24 23:20:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Mike Easter, got a sec? References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" | > Chastity belt keys made while you wait? | | I don't know how much you know about the 'history' -- most especially the | history of the myths -- of the chastity belt; but it is fascinating. | | Mostly there is a lot more /reality/ in the history of /male/ chastity | belts than female ones. | | And, the 'best' history of the chastity 'belt' is not what you think; | but a simple 'symbol', like a rope tied around the waist to symbolize | chastity. | | The myths include Roman female slaves whose devices were only released | for the pleasure of their masters, Roman prostitutes whose devices gave | appealing 'nonfunctional' exposure until the money exchange provided | access, medieval knight's lady myths, Florentine lady's protection from | rape, English and American devices for Victorian era young men to prevent | masturbation, and some classy and expensive 20th and 21st century | devices fashioned after those Victorian ones. | | There are currently some shops catering to 'kinky' or 'different' sexual | relationships which have a lot of demand for male chastity belts such as | those above. I've done a bit of research on the subject. As example the US patent office has granted a patent on a male chastity built. (I found that as a result of undergrad work in a class on IPR. ) I'll see if I can find a link. Regardless the device looks like something out of a middle ages torture chamber. From kfasold at hotmail.com Mon Oct 25 10:07:41 2004 From: kfasold at hotmail.com (Karl Fasold) Date: Mon Oct 25 10:10:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] No ID / Login / Logout links in some browsers? Message-ID: A problem seems to have appeared with the latest 'redo' of the web site -- the User ID and Login/Logout links (i.e. those that appear once you've logged in on all the pages) aren't showing up in Netscape 4.80 (on either Windows or Mac platforms), or in IE 5.1 on the Macintosh. The problem seems to be with the following part of the page code, which I can see in a view source, but isn't rendered on the page:
usernamehere  
Pointed out for information purposes; I know I can delete the login cookie manually & get to the login page -- any direct url's to get there? (of course the 'from' address is a spamtrap -- isn't all of Hotmail? ) If you really need to email, try the same user at spamcop.net From ric.gates at bigsleep.org Mon Oct 25 18:38:11 2004 From: ric.gates at bigsleep.org (Blammo) Date: Mon Oct 25 13:40:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: No ID / Login / Logout links in some browsers? References: Message-ID: On 25 Oct 2004 Karl Fasold entered spamcop.help and left news:vs1qn01tu6g1f7a8u206uma0mv7gn0o4tn@4ax.com: > > The problem seems to be with the following part of the page code, > which I can see in a view source, but isn't rendered on the page: > No, that's not the problem. Works here with a paid account, however if there are ads on the free account, that could effect the page layout. I have a free account, but I forget the password, but try doing a Shift- Reload of the page. > Pointed out for information purposes; I know I can delete the login > cookie manually & get to the login page -- any direct url's to get > there? > http://www.spamcop.net/sc?action=clearcookie -- | Ric From amp at spamcop.net Tue Oct 26 10:23:53 2004 From: amp at spamcop.net (Ade) Date: Tue Oct 26 04:25:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn Deputies - Report Spam Web Page Bug References: Message-ID: I've managed to replicate the problem with IE 5.5 running under W2K SP3, so the bug doesn't seem to be restricted to IE6/XP. FYI - if I paste certain messages onto the "Report Spam" page, process it, then click "Cancel" so that the spam is not reported, then re-paste the same message into the resulting page, I get the "no data / too much data" error. Here's an example of a message that causes the problem: ---------->8---------- Return-Path: x Received: from vega.ssft.net (vega.ssft.net [193.178.190.8]) by gwsat.novocom.te.ua (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA32189 for ; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 00:11:33 +0300 Received: from oficina2.oficinacentral.jvsa.cl (oficina2.oficinacentral.jvsa.cl [200.72.174.41] (may be forged)) by vega.ssft.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with SMTP id i9PLAKaI001044 for ; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 00:10:23 +0300 Received: from [10.0.8.18] by oficina2.oficinacentral.jvsa.cl id 8h8Wn8qJl7Gj; Tue, 26 Oct 2004 05:11:25 -0700 Message-ID: <003501c4bb54$e9f4d480$1208000a@mail.com> Reply-To: x From: x To: x Subject: Çàêoí Óêpaèíû O çaùèòe ïpaâ ïoòðåáèòåëÿ Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 05:11:25 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1251 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Áèçíåñ-Öåíòð
Íàöèîíàëüíûé
ïðåäñòàâëÿåò
ÏÐÀÊÒÈ×ÅÑÊÎÅ ÏÐÈÌÅÍÅÍÈÅ ÇÀÊÎÍÀ ÓÊÐÀÈÍÛ
«Î ÇÀÙÈÒÅ ÏÐÀÂ ÏÎÒÐÅÁÈÒÅËÅÉ»

Ñåìèíàð . 3 íîÿáðÿ, 2004 ã.
ã. Êèåâ . óë. Ìèõàéëîâñêàÿ 1/3 . îòåëü «Êàçàöêèé»

www.bcn-ua.com

ÖÅËÅÂÀß
ÀÓÄÈÒÎÐÈß

Ñåìèíàð ïðåäíàçíà÷åí äëÿ âëàäåëüöåâ è ðóêîâîäèòåëåé òîðãîâûõ ïðåäïðèÿòèé, ðàáîòíèêîâ òîðãîâëè, ìåíåäæåðîâ âûñøåãî è ñðåäíåãî çâåíà.
ÁÈÇÍÅÑ-ÊÎÍÑÓËÜÒÀÍÒ

Åëåíà Ñóêìàíîâà - ïðàêòèêóþùèé þðèñò, èìåþùèé áîëüøîé îïûò ïðàêòè÷åñêîé ðàáîòû ïî òåìàòèêå ñåìèíàðà, äèðåêòîð þðèäè÷åñêîé ôèðìû «Ýëèò - êîíñàëòèíã», ïîñòîÿííûé áèçíåñ-òðåíåð íà ñåìèíàðàõ «Öåíòðà Ýêîíîìèêî-Ïðàâîâûõ Èíèöèàòèâ».

Àëåêñåé Åëèñååâ - ðóêîâîäèòåëü îòäåëà ïî ðàáîòå ñ ôèçè÷åñêèìè ëèöàìè þðèäè÷åñêîé ôèðìû
«Ýëèò - êîíñàëòèíã». Íà÷àëüíèê îòäåëà Êèåâñêîãî óïðàâëåíèÿ êîìèòåòà ïî çàùèòå ïðàâ
ïîòðåáèòåëåé.

ÏÐÎÃÐÀÌÌÀ

1. Çàùèòà ïðàâ ïîòðåáèòåëåé â Óêðàèíå. Àíàëèç çàêîíîäàòåëüñòâà è ïîäçàêîííûõ íîðìàòèâíûõ àêòîâ.
2. Ïðàêòèêà ïðèìåíåíèÿ Ïðàâèë «Ðîçíè÷íîé òîðãîâëè ïðîäîâîëüñòâåííûìè è íåïðîäîâîëüñòâåííûìè ãðóïïàìè òîâàðîâ». Àíàëèç îñíîâíûõ îøèáîê.
3. Ïðàêòè÷åñêèå ðåêîìåíäàöèè ïîâåäåíèÿ ïðè êîíôëèêòå ñ ïîòðåáèòåëåì: ïðàâà è âîçìîæíîñòè ñòîðîí.
4. Êîíòðîëèðóþùèå îðãàíû â îáëàñòè çàùèòû ïðàâ ïîòðåáèòåëåé: ïîäãîòîâêà ê ïðîâåðêå, ïðåâåíòèâíûå ìåðû (ïîðÿäîê îôîðìëåíèÿ òîðãîâîé òî÷êè â ñîîòâåòñòâèè ñ çàêîíîäàòåëüñòâîì î çàùèòå ïðàâ ïîòðåáèòåëåé).
5. Ðåêëàìà ãëàçàìè ïîòðåáèòåëÿ: ïîðÿäîê ïðîâåäåíèÿ ðåêëàìíûõ àêöèé, îòâåòñòâåííîñòü çà íàðóøåíèÿ çàêîíîäàòåëüñòâà î ðåêëàìå.
6. Òðåáîâàíèÿ Çàêîíà Óêðàèíû «Î çàùèòå ïðàâ ïîòðåáèòåëåé» è ïðàêòèêà åãî ïðèìåíåíèÿ:

  • ïðåäîñòàâëåíèå ïîòðåáèòåëþ èíôîðìàöèè î ïðèîáðåòàåìûõ èì òîâàðàõ/ðàáîòàõ/óñëóãàõ;
  • ïðîäàæà òîâàðà ïîòðåáèòåëÿì;
  • âûïîëíåíèå ðàáîò/îêàçàíèå óñëóã ïîòðåáèòåëÿì.

7. Óðåãóëèðîâàíèå êîíôëèêòà ñ ïîòðåáèòåëåì ñ ïîòðåáèòåëåì / äîñóäåáíîå ðàçáèðàòåëüñòâî / ïðåäîòâðàùåíèå ñóäåáíûõ ñïîðîâ.
8. Òîâàðû, íå ïîäëåæàùèå îáìåíó è âîçâðàòó.
9. Îòâåòñòâåííîñòü çà íàðóøåíèÿ çàêîíîäàòåëüñòâà î çàùèòå ïðàâ ïîòðåáèòåëåé.

ÐÅÃËÀÌÅÍÒ
  • 10.00-17.00
  • Ïåðåðûâ 13.30-14.00
  • Ðåãèñòðàöèÿ ñ 9.30 â Êîíôåðåíö-çàëå îòåëÿ «Êàçàöêèé».
  • Çàïîëíåíèå àíêåò è ïîëó÷åíèå áóõãàëòåðñêîãî êîìïëåêòà ïðè ðåãèñòðàöèè.
ÑÒÎÈÌÎÑÒÜ
  • 670.00 ãðí. - çà îäíîãî ó÷àñòíèêà.
  • Äëÿ âòîðîãî è òðåòüåãî ó÷àñòíèêà ñêèäêè - 7% è 10% ñîîòâåòñòâåííî.
  • Â ñòîèìîñòü âõîäèò: èíôîðìàöèîííî-êîíñóëüòàöèîííîå îáñëóæèâàíèå íà ñåìèíàðå, ñáîðíèê ìàòåðèàëîâ, êîôå-áðåéê, îáåä â ðåñòîðàíå, îáñóæäåíèå äîêëàäîâ è îáìåí ìíåíèÿìè ñ ëåêòîðîì.
ÐÅÃÈÑÒÐÀÖÈß
  • Òåë.: (044) 233-4669, 237-9005,
  • Ôàêñ: (044) 290-1044.
  • Email-îòïèñêà.

Êàæäûé ó÷àñòíèê ñåìèíàðà ïîëó÷àåò áóõãàëòåðñêèé êîìïëåêò - îðèãèíàëû äîêóìåíòîâ: äîãîâîð, àêò, îðèãèíàë ñ÷åòà, êîïèè ñâèäåòåëüñòâ.

---------->8---------- "Ellen" wrote in message news:cldsec$sa0$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > "Ade" wrote in message > news:cldjhm$f8i$1@news.spamcop.net... >> I've identified a problem on http://mailsc.spamcop.net which appears to > have >> only started since the website was redesigned recently. I've done a >> quick >> search of recent messages in the forum and can't see any other posts >> about >> this. >> >> If I click on the Report Spam 'tab' I can process a spam message as > normal. >> The resulting page lists where all the reports were sent to, along with a >> new box for pasting the next spam. It is this second reporting page that > is >> broken, because 90% of the time I get the "no data / too much data" error >> page even for messages well below 50 KB in size (only very small messages >> seem to be processed successfully). If I click on Report Spam 'tab' and >> re-process the message from here it gets submitted fine. >> >> It's as if this page is only allowing messages below 5 KB in size to be >> processed, not 50 KB! >> >> Can anyone else replicate this error? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Ade. >> >> FYI - I'm running IE 6 under Windows XP Professional SP2, with all the >> latest critical patches. >> >> > > I tried a couple of emails using MSIE -- one was almost 30K which was the > largest one I could put my hands on at the moment -- and was not able to > recreate your problem. I have not installed SP2 yet altho I do have all > the > other patches installed. I will look for a larger email and see if I can > get > it to fail. I'll also keep an eye out for anyone else reporting the same > problem. > > Ellen > > From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 26 07:59:30 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Ellen) Date: Tue Oct 26 07:05:11 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn Deputies - Report Spam Web Page Bug References: Message-ID: "Ade" wrote in message news:cll1iu$ror$1@news.spamcop.net... > I've managed to replicate the problem with IE 5.5 running under W2K SP3, so > the bug doesn't seem to be restricted to IE6/XP. > > FYI - if I paste certain messages onto the "Report Spam" page, process it, > then click "Cancel" so that the spam is not reported, then re-paste the same > message into the resulting page, I get the "no data / too much data" error. > Here's an example of a message that causes the problem: > I tried the spam you posted with MSIE 6.0 with SP1 plus assorted patches and was not able to reproduce your problem. I tried it a half a dozen times. I also tried it with Firefox. The only error message I consistently got was "could not parse head" when it tried to parse the body. http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z685918701z5681e0b17bc5212cfe724ab6f651ad24z The only random idea that occurs to me is that I have set under temporary internet files/settings to check for new versions of stored pages every time. I am not running thru a proxy and my ISP does not use proxies TTBMK. I am not saying that a proxy is necessarily the problem but that is the only think that comes to mind right now. Ellen From amp at spamcop.net Tue Oct 26 15:22:44 2004 From: amp at spamcop.net (Ade) Date: Tue Oct 26 09:25:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn Deputies - Report Spam Web Page Bug References: Message-ID: Interesting. I've been using SC for 6+ years now and wasn't aware of this. There is no mention of this policy under SpamCop Policies and Disclaimers (http://mailsc.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/400.html), but I can't seem to find a link to the AUP. FYI - since I've been reporting the contents of joe-job bounces my spam has reduced significantly! Thanks, Ade. "Ellen" wrote in message news:clghab$sbj$2@news.spamcop.net... > > > "Ade" wrote in message > news:clg7du$dr5$1@news.spamcop.net... >> I'm using Outlook Express as my mail reader, but the messages I'm > reporting >> are cut and paste from non-delivery reports (full headers and body) as >> I'm >> being joe-jobbed. >> >> Ade. >> > > The SpamCop TOS/AUP do *not* permit those to be reported. I am sorry that > you are being forged into spam and getting bounces but you cannot remove > the > spam from the bounce and report it. > > Ellen > SpamCop > > From amp at spamcop.net Tue Oct 26 15:25:22 2004 From: amp at spamcop.net (Ade) Date: Tue Oct 26 09:30:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn Deputies - Report Spam Web Page Bug References: Message-ID: I know my ISP for my cable connection at home uses transparent proxies, but I'm getting the same problem elsewhere. I'll try playing with the IE settings later to see if that makes any difference. Thanks, Ade. "Ellen" wrote in message > I tried the spam you posted with MSIE 6.0 with SP1 plus assorted patches > and > was not able to reproduce your problem. I tried it a half a dozen times. I > also tried it with Firefox. The only error message I consistently got was > "could not parse head" when it tried to parse the body. > > http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z685918701z5681e0b17bc5212cfe724ab6f651ad24z > > The only random idea that occurs to me is that I have set under temporary > internet files/settings to check for new versions of stored pages every > time. I am not running thru a proxy and my ISP does not use proxies TTBMK. > I > am not saying that a proxy is necessarily the problem but that is the only > think that comes to mind right now. > > Ellen > > From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Tue Oct 26 09:54:22 2004 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (WazoO) Date: Tue Oct 26 09:55:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn Deputies - Report Spam Web Page Bug References: Message-ID: "Ade" wrote in message news:cllj35$lv0$1@news.spamcop.net... > Interesting. I've been using SC for 6+ years now and wasn't aware of this. > There is no mention of this policy under SpamCop Policies and Disclaimers > (http://mailsc.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/400.html), but I can't seem to > find a link to the AUP. http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/14.html From kfasold at hotmail.com Tue Oct 26 10:36:16 2004 From: kfasold at hotmail.com (Karl Fasold) Date: Tue Oct 26 10:40:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: No ID / Login / Logout links in some browsers? References: Message-ID: On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 17:38:11 +0000 (UTC), Blammo wrote: >On 25 Oct 2004 Karl Fasold entered spamcop.help and left >news:vs1qn01tu6g1f7a8u206uma0mv7gn0o4tn@4ax.com: > >> >> The problem seems to be with the following part of the page code, >> which I can see in a view source, but isn't rendered on the page: >> > >No, that's not the problem. Works here with a paid account, however if >there are ads on the free account, that could effect the page layout. >I have a free account, but I forget the password, but try doing a Shift- >Reload of the page. > Paid account(s) also; tried shift-reload, as well as clearing the cache, all to no avail -- only thing that worked was clearing the cookie so the 'login' entry is available in the std. menu. Neither the logon/logoff buttons, nor the font size +-, nor the username appear on my screens -- thus my assumption that's where the problem was in the page... >> Pointed out for information purposes; I know I can delete the login >> cookie manually & get to the login page -- any direct url's to get >> there? >> > >http://www.spamcop.net/sc?action=clearcookie Thanks, that will be very helpful! As I said, problem occurs on Netscape 4.8 on both Windows & Mac platform, and on IE on the Mac as well... but this particular problem doesn't occur on IE/Windows. kf (of course the 'from' address is a spamtrap -- isn't all of Hotmail? ) If you really need to email, try the same user at spamcop.net From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 26 11:25:49 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Ellen) Date: Tue Oct 26 10:50:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn Deputies - Report Spam Web Page Bug References: Message-ID: > "Ellen" wrote in message > >> > > > > The SpamCop TOS/AUP do *not* permit those to be reported. I am sorry that > > you are being forged into spam and getting bounces but you cannot remove > > the > > spam from the bounce and report it. > > > > Ellen > > SpamCop > > > > > "Ade" wrote in message news:cllj35$lv0$1@news.spamcop.net... > Interesting. I've been using SC for 6+ years now and wasn't aware of this. > There is no mention of this policy under SpamCop Policies and Disclaimers > (http://mailsc.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/400.html), but I can't seem to > find a link to the AUP. > > FYI - since I've been reporting the contents of joe-job bounces my spam has > reduced significantly! > > Thanks, > > Ade. You need to stop doing this immediately. It is *clearly* stated in the TOS/AUP that you agreed to when you opened your SC account: http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/14.html Ellen From ric.gates at bigsleep.org Tue Oct 26 16:05:37 2004 From: ric.gates at bigsleep.org (Blammo) Date: Tue Oct 26 11:10:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: No ID / Login / Logout links in some browsers? References: Message-ID: On 26 Oct 2004 Karl Fasold entered spamcop.help and left news:bsnsn0l4thsnv3jtrno53pc50bt8sjojrc@4ax.com: > Paid account(s) also; tried shift-reload, as well as clearing the > cache, all to no avail -- only thing that worked was clearing the > cookie so the 'login' entry is available in the std. menu. > > Neither the logon/logoff buttons, nor the font size +-, nor the > username appear on my screens -- thus my assumption that's where the > problem was in the page... > Hmm, well it all shows here on NC 4.80, but my install is default and I haven't messed with any font sizes or anything. It's always possible font sizes or even screen resolution could have an effect. NC will treat these "divs" as layers and may push them off the screen or hide them in certain cases. If I can duplicate the problem I could find a fix and pass it on to Julian. -- | Ric | From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Tue Oct 26 11:32:31 2004 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (WazoO) Date: Tue Oct 26 11:35:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn Deputies - Report Spam Web Page Bug References: Message-ID: "Ellen" wrote in message news:cllnvd$un6$2@news.spamcop.net... > > You need to stop doing this immediately. It is *clearly* stated in the > TOS/AUP that you agreed to when you opened your SC account: > > http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/14.html Knowing full well of the scars I might end up with here, I would point out that the current page found there (noting that I had pointed to it a half-hour before in the same thread) is definitely not the same page that existed (if it existed at all) way back when. I recall some folks here being a bit surprised when I'd pointed out "recent" changes to that FAQ entry. Dang, that particular page isn't archived for some reason. http://web.archive.org/web/19991013044906/spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/64.html From amp at spamcop.net Tue Oct 26 18:54:16 2004 From: amp at spamcop.net (Ade) Date: Tue Oct 26 12:55:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn Deputies - Report Spam Web Page Bug References: Message-ID: Indeed, I've been using SC for 6+ years and this documentation didn't exist back then. I was also an early beta user of the SC webmail and quick reporting systems and I certainly didn't have to agree to such policies in order to help develop the current systems! Ade. "WazoO" wrote in message news:cllqmf$3m3$1@news.spamcop.net... > Knowing full well of the scars I might end up with here, I > would point out that the current page found there (noting > that I had pointed to it a half-hour before in the same thread) > is definitely not the same page that existed (if it existed at all) > way back when. I recall some folks here being a bit surprised > when I'd pointed out "recent" changes to that FAQ entry. > From MikeE at ster.invalid Tue Oct 26 11:08:33 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Tue Oct 26 13:10:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn Deputies - Report Spam Web Page Bug References: Message-ID: Ade wrote: > Indeed, I've been using SC for 6+ years and this documentation didn't > exist back then. Once upon a time I think there was no specific language against stripping off the bounce header/body and reporting spam attached underneath, but I can't recall how the language about that was then. The problem of course is that that softbounced spam isn't addressed to you; ie it isn't 'your' spam. Also, since the 'veracity' of something 'deteriorates' the further you get from your server's Received tracelines which are way up there on what you are discarding, the greater the possibility of spoofery in what the mail contained. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From DELETE_westes at earthbroadcast.com Tue Oct 26 12:04:32 2004 From: DELETE_westes at earthbroadcast.com (CHANGE USERNAME TO westes) Date: Tue Oct 26 14:05:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] The Woes of Sending E-mail From DSL Addresses Message-ID: We are a business DSL user on the Pacific Bell / SBC DSL network experiencing severe loss of e-mail service because many e-mail servers out there on the Internet are blocking *ALL* IP addresses connected to any DSL network. I would appreciate some suggestions on how we can attempt to make our mail service reliable again. First, can anyone tell me how you can get the IP address of your mail server to give as its reverse IP lookup the hostname of a server that we own? Today, the reverse IP for our mail server is an ADSL hostname on the PacBell network. Many of our mail correspondents use the reverse IP lookup on your mail host to authenticate the sender. I have contacted Pacific Bell on this issue, but their technical support people are really out there. The first level support people don't even understand what a reverse IP lookup is. The second level support people understand, but they say that no one at Pacific Bell gives them that information. That's encouraging. :) Does anyone reading this have a contact at Pacific Bell / SBC who can help us register a hostname to one of our static business DSL IP addresses? Second, is there any public mail server at Pacific Bell / SBC through which we can forward mail using our own e-mail account and identity? The first level support people want to send you to SBC Yahoo, but this is obviously just a consumer-level service not at all geared to business customers. We have our own mail servers to send and receive mail through Lotus Notes, and our own domains and e-mail identities. I don't need what SBC Yahoo offers. Up until recently we were able to forward the occasional message to customers who blocked all SBC DSL IP addresses through a well known Pacific Bell mail server. As of today that mail server says it will not relay. I wouldn't mind paying Pacific Bell for each piece of e-mail we send, and on a given day there might only be 10 such pieces of mail. When I spoke to level 2 service, they expressed their frustration that no one in Pacific Bell bothers to tell them about such issues, so they didn't even know what the company policy was. Finally, if no one at Pacific Bell has their act together, is there any well-known mail provider who we could pay to act as an intelligent MX mail forwarder for less than 20 pieces of e-mail each day, preserving our own e-mail domains and accounts on the MAIL FROM envelope of the e-mail we forward? Spam is shaking the foundations of the Internet e-mail system, by making everyone so paranoid and protective that legitimate users are now trapped into accepting semi-unusable e-mail service. The kinds of roadblocks we are facing here, and the complete ignorance of a major ISP about how these issues are affecting its customer base, are extremely frustrating. Any insights on how to work around these problems are appreciated. -- Will westes AT earthbroadcast.com From DELETE_westes at earthbroadcast.com Tue Oct 26 12:16:34 2004 From: DELETE_westes at earthbroadcast.com (CHANGE USERNAME TO westes) Date: Tue Oct 26 14:15:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: How to Get an ISP to Give You Correct Reverse IP? References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" wrote in message news:cjptku$g4i$1@news.spamcop.net... > > I have several correspondents who - > > unbelievably enough - block all incoming mail from any address that > > reverses to a DSL address. They automatically assume that this is > > spam. > > I wouldn't say it like that. I would say they might use lists which > block all listed IP addresses, and the listed IP addresses might include > dynamic IPs, such as 64.174.48.18 rDNS > adsl-64-174-48-18.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net or similar. All of our IPs are static, not dynamic. And all of the static IPs are getting blocked by many respondents as well. Moreover, many of the blacklists out there seem to arrogantly assume that all DSL addresses are dynamic, because I frequently see rejection lines saying that our static IP is dynamic. > > Since many companies these days use DSL networks, and they run their > > sendmail boxes on a public IP assigned on the a block within those DSL > > networks, such actions as blocking any incoming mail from a DSL > > address means you cannot receive mail from probably 10 to 40% of all > > businesses. > > Smarthost it So whose smarthost are we supposed to forward to? SBC wants you to use Yahoo, which is a toyish consumer service not at all geared toward business customers with their own mail infrastructure. > > I would like our corporate mail servers to correctly identify us to > > receivers using the company's domain. But how do I work through the > > SBC bureaucracy to accomplish this? The DSL support people seem > > completely clueless about the issue. > > That's probably not going to happen. I have had two SBC technicians tell me it is possible, they just don't publish how to do it (and of course neither of those techs knew how to find out). -- Will westes AT earthbroadcast.com From MikeE at ster.invalid Tue Oct 26 12:19:01 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Tue Oct 26 14:20:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: The Woes of Sending E-mail From DSL Addresses References: Message-ID: CHANGE USERNAME TO westes wrote: > First, can anyone tell me how you can get the IP address of your mail > server to give as its reverse IP lookup the hostname of a server that > we own? Here's the gmane archive of the last time we talked about this http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spamcop.help/56061 Here's the SC thread start: From: "CHANGE USERNAME TO westes" Newsgroups: spamcop.help Subject: How to Get an ISP to Give You Correct Reverse IP? Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 14:33:03 -0700 Message-ID: Here's a specific address post from that thread: Michael Wise wrote: > There's no bureaucracy to work through...you simply ask SBC (via email > to desccentraldcc[at]sbis.sbc.com) to delegate inaddr.arpa authority > for your assigned net block to you. > > I have done it several times. CHANGE USERNAME TO westes wrote > Finally, if no one at Pacific Bell has their act together, is there > any well-known mail provider who we could pay to act as an > intelligent MX mail forwarder for less than 20 pieces of e-mail each > day, preserving our own e-mail domains and accounts on the MAIL FROM > envelope of the e-mail we forward? I'll leave it to someone else to name a smarthost. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From MikeE at ster.invalid Tue Oct 26 12:38:07 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Tue Oct 26 14:40:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: How to Get an ISP to Give You Correct Reverse IP? References: Message-ID: CHANGE USERNAME TO westes wrote: >> Smarthost it > > So whose smarthost are we supposed to forward to? SBC wants you to > use Yahoo, which is a toyish consumer service not at all geared > toward business customers with their own mail infrastructure. I was talking about smarthosting your outgoing mail. You sed you don't have much, 20/d in the new thread. You could use a service like cotse or similar for about $6/mol. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From MikeE at ster.invalid Tue Oct 26 12:54:22 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Tue Oct 26 14:55:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: The Woes of Sending E-mail From DSL Addresses References: Message-ID: CHANGE USERNAME TO westes wrote: > Second, is there any public mail server at Pacific Bell / SBC through > which we can forward mail using our own e-mail account and identity? What do you mean here? Why is it 'forward' for your outgoing mail? > The first level support people want to send you to SBC Yahoo, but > this is obviously just a consumer-level service not at all geared to > business customers. What do you mean here? I tho't you had 20 mails/day outgoing. > I don't need what SBC Yahoo offers. Up until recently > we were able to forward the occasional message to customers who > blocked all SBC DSL IP addresses through a well known Pacific Bell > mail server. What about something like smtp.sbcglobal.yahoo.com? ie nomail.yahoo.com ie smtp-sbc.mail.yahoo.com ie 66.163.171.137 -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From glnews030922 at highspot.net Tue Oct 26 21:11:37 2004 From: glnews030922 at highspot.net (Graeme Leith) Date: Tue Oct 26 15:10:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: The Woes of Sending E-mail From DSL Addresses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: CHANGE USERNAME TO westes wrote: > We are a business DSL user on the Pacific Bell / SBC DSL network > experiencing severe loss of e-mail service because many e-mail servers out > there on the Internet are blocking *ALL* IP addresses connected to any DSL > network. I would appreciate some suggestions on how we can attempt to > make our mail service reliable again. Not my experience. I've run mail on several DSL networks without problems, but then I usually select my DSL supplier with care. I check their SPEWS and Spamhaus listings, amongst others. I ask questions like the ones you're having problems with below, before I sign up. > First, can anyone tell me how you can get the IP address of your mail server > to give as its reverse IP lookup the hostname of a server that we own? > Today, the reverse IP for our mail server is an ADSL hostname on the PacBell > network. Many of our mail correspondents use the reverse IP lookup on your > mail host to authenticate the sender. I have contacted Pacific Bell on > this issue, but their technical support people are really out there. The > first level support people don't even understand what a reverse IP lookup > is. The second level support people understand, but they say that no one > at Pacific Bell gives them that information. That's encouraging. :) > Does anyone reading this have a contact at Pacific Bell / SBC who can help > us register a hostname to one of our static business DSL IP addresses? You might try connecting to the news server that they give you access to when you sign up and see if there are SBC specific newsgroups you can ask in. If some of their techs hang out there, they will probably be have more of a clue than the ones in the call center. Make sure you check on the news server belonging to your ISP and not just any old Usenet server as they might not propogate their own groups to Usenet in general. > Second, is there any public mail server at Pacific Bell / SBC through which > we can forward mail using our own e-mail account and identity? The first > level support people want to send you to SBC Yahoo, but this is obviously > just a consumer-level service not at all geared to business customers. We > have our own mail servers to send and receive mail through Lotus Notes, and > our own domains and e-mail identities. I don't need what SBC Yahoo offers. > Up until recently we were able to forward the occasional message to > customers who blocked all SBC DSL IP addresses through a well known Pacific > Bell mail server. As of today that mail server says it will not relay. I > wouldn't mind paying Pacific Bell for each piece of e-mail we send, and on a > given day there might only be 10 such pieces of mail. When I spoke to > level 2 service, they expressed their frustration that no one in Pacific > Bell bothers to tell them about such issues, so they didn't even know what > the company policy was. See my answer above. > Finally, if no one at Pacific Bell has their act together, is there any > well-known mail provider who we could pay to act as an intelligent MX mail > forwarder for less than 20 pieces of e-mail each day, preserving our own > e-mail domains and accounts on the MAIL FROM envelope of the e-mail we > forward? Sorry, I don't have recommendations for an email only supplier, but if you're looking to move your circuit, check out Speakeasy. I used Speakeasy before I moved from the US. They will almost certainly be more expensive than SBC, but they are setup to cater for geeks. They will have no problems in setting up your PTR records or configuring their own mail server to act as a secondary MX for your main MTA. > Spam is shaking the foundations of the Internet e-mail system, by making > everyone so paranoid and protective that legitimate users are now trapped > into accepting semi-unusable e-mail service. The kinds of roadblocks we > are facing here, and the complete ignorance of a major ISP about how these > issues are affecting its customer base, are extremely frustrating. Any > insights on how to work around these problems are appreciated. DSL is pretty much a commodity these days. If you go for the cheaper options, you get cheap call center support. Those that have the cheap support are also pretty much the same ones as those with spam/zombie problems. The various SBC domains are the biggest single source of attacks on my own servers (including spam) outside of China and Korea. Best of luck with your problems. -- Evidence shows Cyveillance abuse internet resources. I recommend unchecking their box in SpamCop reports. Cyveillance are part of the problem. They are not part of the solution. From Merlyn at Spamcop.net Tue Oct 26 16:11:36 2004 From: Merlyn at Spamcop.net (Merlyn) Date: Tue Oct 26 15:15:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: The Woes of Sending E-mail From DSL Addresses References: Message-ID: "CHANGE USERNAME TO westes" wrote in message news:clm3c2$iiu$1@news.spamcop.net... > We are a business DSL user on the Pacific Bell / SBC DSL network > experiencing severe loss of e-mail service because many e-mail servers out > there on the Internet are blocking *ALL* IP addresses connected to any DSL > network. I would appreciate some suggestions on how we can attempt to > make our mail service reliable again. [snipped] We have a few email servers on DSL lines and none of them are blocked. Not sure what you mean. If you are on Dynamic DSL lines then you should expect to be blocked but If you are on static IP's then you should have no problem. What IP are you talking about? -- Regards, Merlyn A Spamcop advocate No emails this account is for newsgroups only People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoided From amp at spamcop.net Tue Oct 26 21:29:05 2004 From: amp at spamcop.net (Ade) Date: Tue Oct 26 15:30:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn Deputies - Report Spam Web Page Bug References: Message-ID: Ellen, The temporary internet files setting doesn't work for me. I'm seeing the "couldn't parse head" error with the munged spam I pasted on the newsgroup. The unmunged message still gives me the original error. Can you let me know your email address so that I can send the unmunged message to you? Thanks, Ade. "Ellen" wrote in message news:cllarn$9dj$3@news.spamcop.net... > > > "Ade" wrote in message > news:cll1iu$ror$1@news.spamcop.net... > > I've managed to replicate the problem with IE 5.5 running under W2K SP3, > so > > the bug doesn't seem to be restricted to IE6/XP. > > > > FYI - if I paste certain messages onto the "Report Spam" page, process it, > > then click "Cancel" so that the spam is not reported, then re-paste the > same > > message into the resulting page, I get the "no data / too much data" > error. > > Here's an example of a message that causes the problem: > > > > > I tried the spam you posted with MSIE 6.0 with SP1 plus assorted patches and > was not able to reproduce your problem. I tried it a half a dozen times. I > also tried it with Firefox. The only error message I consistently got was > "could not parse head" when it tried to parse the body. > > http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z685918701z5681e0b17bc5212cfe724ab6f651ad24z > > The only random idea that occurs to me is that I have set under temporary > internet files/settings to check for new versions of stored pages every > time. I am not running thru a proxy and my ISP does not use proxies TTBMK. I > am not saying that a proxy is necessarily the problem but that is the only > think that comes to mind right now. > > Ellen > > From dkona7b02 at sneakemail.com Tue Oct 26 16:32:20 2004 From: dkona7b02 at sneakemail.com (Spam Hater) Date: Tue Oct 26 15:32:23 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: The Woes of Sending E-mail From DSL Addresses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20041026153220.01475008@loki.fstrf.org> Unless Pacific Bell / SBC doesn't make that distinction when it makes its DSL IP list available to the outside world... Then the OP would have this problem! At 03:11 PM 10/26/2004 -0400, Merlyn typed: >[snipped] > >If you are on Dynamic DSL lines then you should expect to be blocked but If >you are on static IP's then you should have no problem. From MikeE at ster.invalid Tue Oct 26 13:44:56 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Tue Oct 26 15:45:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn Deputies - Report Spam Web Page Bug References: Message-ID: Ade wrote: You are 'topposting'. That means that your comments do not fall inline, in a conversational manner. It also means that you are not doing any trimming, but simply 'pushing' everything down below you, including sigs and everything else. If you notice, Ellen does not post like that. The better way to post is trimmed and contextualized. You trim away everything you aren't replying to and put your new comments just under exactly what you are responding. Topposting also very often has the adverse side effect of interfering with your ability to read exactly what you are responding to. You get something in your head about what you want to say, and when you hit reply and start typing at the top, you can no longer see exactly what it is you are talking about or to. Neither can we. Here is a nice description designed for new users of newsgroups of posting structure. http://members.fortunecity.com/nnqweb/nquote.html Quoting Style in Newsgroup Postings -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From DELETE_westes at earthbroadcast.com Tue Oct 26 13:56:20 2004 From: DELETE_westes at earthbroadcast.com (CHANGE USERNAME TO westes) Date: Tue Oct 26 15:55:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: How to Get an ISP to Give You Correct Reverse IP? References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" wrote in message news:clm5dv$n9s$1@news.spamcop.net... > I was talking about smarthosting your outgoing mail. You sed you don't > have much, 20/d in the new thread. You could use a service like cotse or > similar for about $6/mol. We have smarthosts already on our network. Our outgoing mail volume per day is much more than 20. 20 represents the maximum number of bounce messages that we have to deal with each day, coming from people whose mail servers are blocking our smarthosts, because they reside on static DSL IP addresses. For those 20 aberrant mail hosts, we would like to be able to manually send the mail upstream to a mailhost that would not be seen as on the DSL IP network, so we could get past their mail blocks. -- Will westes AT earthbroadcast.com From DELETE_westes at earthbroadcast.com Tue Oct 26 14:00:16 2004 From: DELETE_westes at earthbroadcast.com (CHANGE USERNAME TO westes) Date: Tue Oct 26 16:00:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: The Woes of Sending E-mail From DSL Addresses References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" wrote in message news:clm6ce$p2k$1@news.spamcop.net... > What do you mean here? Why is it 'forward' for your outgoing mail? > What do you mean here? I tho't you had 20 mails/day outgoing. We have a Lotus Notes e-mail infrastructure that receives about 3000 messages per day and sends about 200 to 300 outgoing messages per day, probably more than 1000 if you include bounce messages. Of those thousands of messages not more than 20 are bouncing from recipients with messages that they don't accept mail from a very wide range of DSL static IP addresses. Often these host rejections incorrectly classify our address as dynamic. I'm simply looking for a way to get mail to those 20 recipients, while maintaining our standard e-mail address identitites. Of course I could set up a hotmail account, but that is a giant pain. -- Will westes AT earthbroadcast.com From DELETE_westes at earthbroadcast.com Tue Oct 26 14:03:34 2004 From: DELETE_westes at earthbroadcast.com (CHANGE USERNAME TO westes) Date: Tue Oct 26 16:00:11 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: The Woes of Sending E-mail From DSL Addresses References: Message-ID: "Merlyn" wrote in message news:clm7h9$r7d$1@news.spamcop.net... > We have a few email servers on DSL lines and none of them are blocked. How would you know this? You personally inspect the headers of each piece of mail you get back as a bounce? How many of your correspondents are in Europe and Asia? > If you are on Dynamic DSL lines then you should expect to be blocked but If > you are on static IP's then you should have no problem. One of the smart hosts that is getting rejected is 68 dot 127 dot 22 dot 145. Yes, I already know we had a mail virus on that host a month ago. No need to rehash that. We hopefully closed that door. -- Will westes AT earthbroadcast.com From Merlyn at Spamcop.net Tue Oct 26 17:01:28 2004 From: Merlyn at Spamcop.net (Merlyn) Date: Tue Oct 26 16:05:06 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: The Woes of Sending E-mail From DSL Addresses References: Message-ID: "CHANGE USERNAME TO westes" wrote in message news:clma52$a4$1@news.spamcop.net... > > "Mike Easter" wrote in message > news:clm6ce$p2k$1@news.spamcop.net... > >> What do you mean here? Why is it 'forward' for your outgoing mail? > >> What do you mean here? I tho't you had 20 mails/day outgoing. > > We have a Lotus Notes e-mail infrastructure that receives about 3000 > messages per day and sends about 200 to 300 outgoing messages per day, > probably more than 1000 if you include bounce messages. > Bounced???????????? What are you bouncing and where are you bouncing them too? I hope not to the "From" or "Reply-To" address. That alone will get you into every blocklist on the internet. -- Regards, Merlyn A Spamcop advocate No emails this account is for newsgroups only People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoided From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Tue Oct 26 16:03:49 2004 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (Cat) Date: Tue Oct 26 16:05:12 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn Deputies - Report Spam Web Page Bug In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > Ade wrote: > > You are 'topposting'. That means that your comments do not fall inline, > in a conversational manner. It also means that you are not doing any > trimming, but simply 'pushing' everything down below you, including sigs > and everything else. If you notice, Ellen does not post like that. You also forgot "don't post spam here" since Ade ignored the "no spam posting" rule on the forum page as well. ;-) From Merlyn at Spamcop.net Tue Oct 26 17:18:33 2004 From: Merlyn at Spamcop.net (Merlyn) Date: Tue Oct 26 16:20:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: The Woes of Sending E-mail From DSL Addresses References: Message-ID: "CHANGE USERNAME TO westes" wrote in message news:clmabh$hv$1@news.spamcop.net... > > "Merlyn" wrote in message > news:clm7h9$r7d$1@news.spamcop.net... >> We have a few email servers on DSL lines and none of them are blocked. > > How would you know this? You personally inspect the headers of each > piece > of mail you get back as a bounce? How many of your correspondents are > in > Europe and Asia? > > >> If you are on Dynamic DSL lines then you should expect to be blocked but > If >> you are on static IP's then you should have no problem. > > One of the smart hosts that is getting rejected is 68 dot 127 dot 22 dot > 145. > > Yes, I already know we had a mail virus on that host a month ago. No > need > to rehash that. We hopefully closed that door. > That IP is not blocked in any dynamic lists but it is in one blocklist for sending spam. I do not believe many are using that list either. -- Regards, Merlyn A Spamcop advocate No emails this account is for newsgroups only People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoided From MikeE at ster.invalid Tue Oct 26 14:29:45 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Tue Oct 26 16:30:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: The Woes of Sending E-mail From DSL Addresses References: Message-ID: CHANGE USERNAME TO westes wrote: > I'm simply looking for a way to get mail to those 20 recipients, while > maintaining our standard e-mail address identitites. Of course I > could set up a hotmail account, but that is a giant pain. If the answer isn't within the sbc yahoo suggestion I made earlier, and if you want the mail to 'look like' your own, you won't be able to get that free, and I think the cotse deal at $6/mo is about as cheap as it gets and I'm pretty sure you can do what you need to with cotse. That will also buy you a lot of other neat functionality which would be nice to have for your own 'purposes'. Just think how much more 'handsome' you would be in some other suit than "CHANGE USERNAME TO westes" wrote in ;-) -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From DELETE_westes at earthbroadcast.com Tue Oct 26 14:46:02 2004 From: DELETE_westes at earthbroadcast.com (CHANGE USERNAME TO westes) Date: Tue Oct 26 16:45:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: The Woes of Sending E-mail From DSL Addresses References: Message-ID: "Merlyn" wrote in message news:clmaeo$11j$1@news.spamcop.net... > Bounced???????????? > > What are you bouncing and where are you bouncing them too? I hope not to the > "From" or "Reply-To" address. That alone will get you into every blocklist > on the internet. Our smarthost is contacting the recipient and the recipient's MX host immediately denies service to our smart host with a 5xx fatal error. The message therefore never leaves our network, as our mail server cannot even transmit to the recipient's MX host. Our mail server then sends the mail back to the end user who sent it, which the end user sees as a "bounce", but let's not get into semantics over what bounce means. The problem is hopefully clear even if my terminology isn't always clear. -- Will westes AT earthbroadcast.com From Merlyn at Spamcop.net Tue Oct 26 17:51:55 2004 From: Merlyn at Spamcop.net (Merlyn) Date: Tue Oct 26 16:55:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: The Woes of Sending E-mail From DSL Addresses References: Message-ID: "CHANGE USERNAME TO westes" wrote in message news:clmcqs$5i2$1@news.spamcop.net... > > "Merlyn" wrote in message > news:clmaeo$11j$1@news.spamcop.net... >> Bounced???????????? >> >> What are you bouncing and where are you bouncing them too? I hope not to > the >> "From" or "Reply-To" address. That alone will get you into every >> blocklist >> on the internet. > > Our smarthost is contacting the recipient and the recipient's MX host > immediately denies service to our smart host with a 5xx fatal error. > > The message therefore never leaves our network, as our mail server cannot > even transmit to the recipient's MX host. > > Our mail server then sends the mail back to the end user who sent it, > which > the end user sees as a "bounce", but let's not get into semantics over > what > bounce means. The problem is hopefully clear even if my terminology > isn't > always clear. > I wanted to be sure you were not sending email back to the From address as most spam and virus use invalid from addresses. :-) -- Regards, Merlyn A Spamcop advocate No emails this account is for newsgroups only People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoided From MikeE at ster.invalid Tue Oct 26 14:54:46 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Tue Oct 26 16:55:13 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: The Woes of Sending E-mail From DSL Addresses References: Message-ID: CHANGE USERNAME TO westes wrote: > Our mail server then sends the mail back to the end user who sent it, > which the end user sees as a "bounce", but let's not get into > semantics over what bounce means. The problem is hopefully clear > even if my terminology isn't always clear. I think the concept of the 'hard bounce' from the perspective of the good sender, which is what you are describing, is perfectly clear. Bounce is definitely a messy word - since it gets used all over the place from some other perspectives badly. People running servers rejecting as above. People running servers and accepting something and then creating a newmail to 'somewhere' in the form of the 'belated' or 'softbounce' - which can be quite abusive when associated with the myriad bogus froms of spams and virms. And then we have bogus bounces, on top of everything else -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From DELETE_westes at earthbroadcast.com Tue Oct 26 15:28:12 2004 From: DELETE_westes at earthbroadcast.com (CHANGE USERNAME TO westes) Date: Tue Oct 26 17:25:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: The Woes of Sending E-mail From DSL Addresses References: Message-ID: "Merlyn" wrote in message news:clmbep$2ro$1@news.spamcop.net... > That IP is not blocked in any dynamic lists but it is in one blocklist for > sending spam. I do not believe many are using that list either. Here are two typical rejections we see: 550 rejected because of RBL: direct deliveries from this dynamic/dialup ip refused, use your ISP's smarthost. Hence my earlier question: where can I get access to a smart host so I can get through to this server.... PacBell had a server, then apparently took it away. Now they recommend Yahoo, which is simply not a good solution to this problem because it requires you to give up your mail identity. 550-direct deliveries from this dynamic/dialup ip refused, use your ISP's smarthost. The above one we see in Europe quite a bit. -- Will westes AT earthbroadcast.com From DELETE_westes at earthbroadcast.com Tue Oct 26 15:30:42 2004 From: DELETE_westes at earthbroadcast.com (CHANGE USERNAME TO westes) Date: Tue Oct 26 17:30:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: The Woes of Sending E-mail From DSL Addresses References: Message-ID: When I go to cotse, they have so many links and there About Us pages are so long-winded I actually have problems understanding exactly what it is they do. -- Will westes AT earthbroadcast.com "Mike Easter" wrote in message news:clmbv9$3op$1@news.spamcop.net... > CHANGE USERNAME TO westes wrote: > > I'm simply looking for a way to get mail to those 20 recipients, while > > maintaining our standard e-mail address identitites. Of course I > > could set up a hotmail account, but that is a giant pain. > > If the answer isn't within the sbc yahoo suggestion I made earlier, and > if you want the mail to 'look like' your own, you won't be able to get > that free, and I think the cotse deal at $6/mo is about as cheap as it > gets and I'm pretty sure you can do what you need to with cotse. That > will also buy you a lot of other neat functionality which would be nice > to have for your own 'purposes'. From MikeE at ster.invalid Tue Oct 26 15:41:15 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Tue Oct 26 17:40:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: The Woes of Sending E-mail From DSL Addresses References: Message-ID: CHANGE USERNAME TO westes wrote: > When I go to cotse, they have so many links and there About Us pages > are so long-winded I actually have problems understanding exactly > what it is they do. I can't be very helpful from experience, as I'm not a cotse. But here's a good place to start. http://www.cotse.net/services.html Right now you are just interested in a smtp service - most of that other stuff is all about anonymizing, which is what they are tho't of. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From MikeE at ster.invalid Tue Oct 26 15:51:47 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Tue Oct 26 17:50:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: The Woes of Sending E-mail From DSL Addresses References: Message-ID: CHANGE USERNAME TO westes wrote: > When I go to cotse, they have so many links and there About Us pages > are so long-winded I actually have problems understanding exactly > what it is they do. What was wrong with the other suggestion? Sometimes I forget that people who toppost often aren't capable of 'getting' everything which was written in the stuff they push down underneath. Mike Easter wrote: > What about something like smtp.sbcglobal.yahoo.com? ie > nomail.yahoo.com ie smtp-sbc.mail.yahoo.com ie 66.163.171.137 That's what everyone who posts over in alt.online-provider.pacbell talks about using - as opposed to mail.pacbell.net -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Oct 26 16:50:36 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Ellen) Date: Tue Oct 26 19:15:20 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn Deputies - Report Spam Web Page Bug References: Message-ID: "Ade" wrote in message news:clm8i5$t3d$1@news.spamcop.net... > Ellen, > > The temporary internet files setting doesn't work for me. I'm seeing the > "couldn't parse head" error with the munged spam I pasted on the newsgroup. > The unmunged message still gives me the original error. Can you let me know > your email address so that I can send the unmunged message to you? > > Thanks, > > Ade. > > You can send it to deputies spamcop.net and put attn ellen in the subject line -- include a note as to what the problem is as we are handling lots of mail and if a spam shows up without a note we will probably report it :-) Of course I can only try the spam as you send it, I can't tell what your unmung setting does to it or not. E From kfasold at hotmail.com Wed Oct 27 09:42:05 2004 From: kfasold at hotmail.com (Karl Fasold) Date: Wed Oct 27 09:45:21 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: No ID / Login / Logout links in some browsers? References: Message-ID: On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 15:05:37 +0000 (UTC), Blammo wrote: >On 26 Oct 2004 Karl Fasold entered spamcop.help and left >news:bsnsn0l4thsnv3jtrno53pc50bt8sjojrc@4ax.com: > >> Paid account(s) also; tried shift-reload, as well as clearing the >> cache, all to no avail -- only thing that worked was clearing the >> cookie so the 'login' entry is available in the std. menu. >> >> Neither the logon/logoff buttons, nor the font size +-, nor the >> username appear on my screens -- thus my assumption that's where the >> problem was in the page... >> > >Hmm, well it all shows here on NC 4.80, but my install is default and I >haven't messed with any font sizes or anything. It's always possible font >sizes or even screen resolution could have an effect. NC will treat these >"divs" as layers and may push them off the screen or hide them in certain >cases. >If I can duplicate the problem I could find a fix and pass it on to Julian. Thx, I'll try resetting to default -- the NS's in question have been around a long time w/multiple upgrades, etc... Unfortunately, (or fortunately, depending on your frame of reference!) I'm in the middle of changing jobs & probably won't have time to try & figure it out in the immediate future -- but good to know it's something local! kf (of course the 'from' address is a spamtrap -- isn't all of Hotmail? ) If you really need to email, try the same user at spamcop.net From conor.joyce at oceanfree.net Wed Oct 27 09:08:54 2004 From: conor.joyce at oceanfree.net (Conor Joyce) Date: Wed Oct 27 11:10:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] need for anti-spam Message-ID: <8a925a06.0410270708.570d8678@posting.google.com> would someone be so kind as to recommend a relatively simple anti-spam software suitable for use on a home pc that I download free? Thank you. From DELETE_westes at earthbroadcast.com Wed Oct 27 09:50:24 2004 From: DELETE_westes at earthbroadcast.com (CHANGE USERNAME TO westes) Date: Wed Oct 27 11:50:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: The Woes of Sending E-mail From DSL Addresses References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" wrote in message news:clmgp2$com$1@news.spamcop.net... > > What about something like smtp.sbcglobal.yahoo.com? ie > > nomail.yahoo.com ie smtp-sbc.mail.yahoo.com ie 66.163.171.137 > > That's what everyone who posts over in alt.online-provider.pacbell talks > about using - as opposed to mail.pacbell.net I had already addressed this, but I'll try to tie it together. The SBC Yahoo service appears to be a hosted mail service. You get N e-mail accounts that have POP3 mailboxes and web-based access through SBC-Yahoo. Yahoo in its wisdom will *not* allow SBC customers to send mail through its servers unless the From address matches one of their pre-reserved account names. It is therefore impossible to preserve your e-mail domain / identity using SBC Yahoo as your mail forwarder. -- Will westes AT earthbroadcast.com From MikeE at ster.invalid Wed Oct 27 10:44:38 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Wed Oct 27 12:45:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: need for anti-spam References: <8a925a06.0410270708.570d8678@posting.google.com> Message-ID: Conor Joyce wrote: Posted to SC.help from Googlegroups, so she may never see any replies. If someone who is more prone to email respond than I am wants to get involved, go for it. That looks like a real addy. > would someone be so kind as to recommend a relatively simple anti-spam > software suitable for use on a home pc that I download free? Thank > you. The concept of 'simple' is not always so simple. An extremely popular, multilingual, powerful, well documented and well supported free spamfilter is SpamPal http://www.spampal.org It is for Windows users, but you haven't described your operating system, nor is it apparent from your post to google groups which isn't a good place to access this newsgroup. You should use a newsreader and point it at news://news.spamcop.net/spamcop.help -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From flippetyfloo at fake.com Thu Oct 28 00:56:08 2004 From: flippetyfloo at fake.com (RandallW) Date: Thu Oct 28 03:00:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] not enough data in received header Message-ID: The Spamcop parser doesn't like spam I tried to report. Here's the link: http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z686508505z3c38100388d8ab7d03cb43ebdb494884z From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Oct 28 06:45:25 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Ellen) Date: Thu Oct 28 07:40:18 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: not enough data in received header References: Message-ID: "RandallW" wrote in message news:clq567$6vm$1@news.spamcop.net... > The Spamcop parser doesn't like spam I tried to report. > > Here's the link: > http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z686508505z3c38100388d8ab7d03cb43ebdb494884z > > The system likes the headers OK -- it finds the injection which is 216.150.7.58 These are all forged: Received: from accrual.bookend.com ([]) by pl34-u04.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6824); Wed, 27 Oct 2004 07:45:55 -0100 Received: from bgl7-aquatic2.T6wgt.com (bolo1 []) by broach.j9.com (3.99.7/7.44.3) with ESMTP id q7XV8rg87501 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 10:48:55 +0200 GMT Received: (from g2ambiguous@localhost) by xss8-carve5.x5tkm.com (6.43.8/0.05.0) id r6UE4od51007; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 03:42:55 -0500 GMT The comment in red -- "Not enough data in received header" indicates that the second received header doesn't have an IP in the "from" clause, all it has is ([]) ... spammmer who couldn't manage to get his ratware set up right to include some random forged IP. Ellen From e.schrama_NOSPAM at NOSPAM_hccnet.nl Thu Oct 28 16:45:39 2004 From: e.schrama_NOSPAM at NOSPAM_hccnet.nl (geo_splash_12) Date: Thu Oct 28 09:50:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: need for anti-spam In-Reply-To: References: <8a925a06.0410270708.570d8678@posting.google.com> Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > Conor Joyce wrote: > Posted to SC.help from Googlegroups, so she may never see any replies. > If someone who is more prone to email respond than I am wants to get > involved, go for it. That looks like a real addy. > > >>would someone be so kind as to recommend a relatively simple anti-spam >>software suitable for use on a home pc that I download free? Thank >>you. > > > The concept of 'simple' is not always so simple. > > An extremely popular, multilingual, powerful, well documented and well > supported free spamfilter is SpamPal http://www.spampal.org > > It is for Windows users, but you haven't described your operating system, > nor is it apparent from your post to google groups which isn't a good > place to access this newsgroup. > > You should use a newsreader and point it at > news://news.spamcop.net/spamcop.help > You forgot to mention mailwasher. From MikeE at ster.invalid Thu Oct 28 08:51:54 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Thu Oct 28 10:50:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: need for anti-spam References: <8a925a06.0410270708.570d8678@posting.google.com> Message-ID: geo_splash_12 wrote: > You forgot to mention mailwasher. If those MW dudes will straighten out their app and their act, I might recommend it for something. People like being able to delete things from the server; and while there are other ways to do it besides MW, that is a popular feature that SpamPal doesn't have. Until they do, I'm at war with them. I just got into a big fight with someone in an EL support group who was touting MW by pasting its front page's MW features into the group. Naturally that page sez all kinds of 'good things' about bogus bouncing, so I went into a little rant and made him mad. Well, a medium sized rant. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From e.schrama_NOSPAM at NOSPAM_hccnet.nl Thu Oct 28 18:52:36 2004 From: e.schrama_NOSPAM at NOSPAM_hccnet.nl (geo_splash_12) Date: Thu Oct 28 11:55:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: need for anti-spam In-Reply-To: References: <8a925a06.0410270708.570d8678@posting.google.com> Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > geo_splash_12 wrote: > >>You forgot to mention mailwasher. > > > If those MW dudes will straighten out their app and their act, I might > recommend it for something. People like being able to delete things from > the server; and while there are other ways to do it besides MW, that is > a popular feature that SpamPal doesn't have. Until they do, I'm at war > with them. > > I just got into a big fight with someone in an EL support group who was > touting MW by pasting its front page's MW features into the group. > Naturally that page sez all kinds of 'good things' about bogus bouncing, > so I went into a little rant and made him mad. Well, a medium sized > rant. > LOL From ric.gates at bigsleep.org Fri Oct 29 02:37:48 2004 From: ric.gates at bigsleep.org (Blammo) Date: Thu Oct 28 21:40:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: need for anti-spam References: <8a925a06.0410270708.570d8678@posting.google.com> Message-ID: On 28 Oct 2004 geo_splash_12 entered spamcop.help and left news:clqt64$a2o$1@news.spamcop.net: >> You should use a newsreader and point it at >> news://news.spamcop.net/spamcop.help >> > > You forgot to mention mailwasher. > Didn't mention Mozilla Thunderbird either. I don't know how much "antispam" Conor wants, but it at least does a good job of filtering / sorting / deleting. http://www.mozilla.org -- | Ric | From flippetyfloo at fake.com Fri Oct 29 00:46:18 2004 From: flippetyfloo at fake.com (RandallW) Date: Fri Oct 29 02:50:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: not enough data in received header References: Message-ID: Here's another spam....parses ok but the spamvertised addy isn't detected; do I have to change the content type manually? http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z686809025zea8696b5d555600b439db930adc82e10z I haven't been reporting much lately....forgot how the content-type specifications work. From nobody at devnull.spamcop.net Fri Oct 29 02:54:58 2004 From: nobody at devnull.spamcop.net (WazoO) Date: Fri Oct 29 02:55:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: not enough data in received header References: Message-ID: "RandallW" wrote in message news:clsovo$9ri$1@news.spamcop.net... > Here's another spam....parses ok but the spamvertised addy isn't detected; > do I have to change the content type manually? > > http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z686809025zea8696b5d555600b439db930adc82e10z > > I haven't been reporting much lately....forgot how the content-type > specifications work. Personally, I'd rather suggest that you try to run this through the two-part submittal form. It's this "I read it somewhere and I think somebody said I could do it" kind of thing that got some rules tightened up and Ellen on the warpath. No, you can not just "change the content type" and continue with using SpamCop parsing and reporting. Especially now that you've drawn attention to yourself and fuzzy knowledge .... From MikeE at ster.invalid Fri Oct 29 06:11:18 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Fri Oct 29 08:10:16 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: not enough data in received header References: Message-ID: WazoO wrote: > "RandallW" >> Here's another spam....parses ok but the spamvertised addy isn't >> detected; do I have to change the content type manually? Here is where we are supposed to say that's against the rules, you would need to change the header's content type and boundary information, both of which are wrong. www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z686809025zea8696b5d555600b439db930adc82e10z That's the original parse of Randall's which fails to find the body links which are in a plaintext body, whereas the header content type sez multipart alternative with boundary. >> I haven't been reporting much lately....forgot how the content-type >> specifications work. > Personally, I'd rather suggest that you try to run this through > the two-part submittal form. That sounds like a nifty way of gaming the system that helps me/us 'argue about' this problem of refusing to let Randall help spamcop parse the item by fixing the header discrepancy while /permitting/ the OL/Eudora submission and parsing process to do whatever it likes to about changing the body and ignoring the header information. www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z686870650z4864fc208b8a6e54fa2a0f8b0e34a36dz That tracker is the successful body parse performed on the separate header and body in the OL/Eudora hack. No changes were necessary in the header content type. > It's this "I read it somewhere and > I think somebody said I could do it" kind of thing that got > some rules tightened up and Ellen on the warpath. I'm glad you brought it up. It needs to get discussed. > No, > you can not just "change the content type" and continue > with using SpamCop parsing and reporting. The rules say you can't change the content type, but the rules permit 'loose' management of both body and content type by providing OL/Eudora users with a hack. So, non-OL/Eudora users ought to get to use the same hack. ?Es verdad? > Especially > now that you've drawn attention to yourself and fuzzy > knowledge .... Attention here is a good way to get these issues hashed out. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From bblackmoor at blackgate.net Fri Oct 29 12:27:45 2004 From: bblackmoor at blackgate.net (Brandon Blackmoor) Date: Fri Oct 29 11:30:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Everything's fine Message-ID: Like most people, I typically only post here when something is amiss. I just wanted to take a moment to say that SpoamCop has been working for me without a hitch for months. Many thanks to all who make that happen. bblackmoor 2004-10-29 From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Oct 29 13:18:24 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Ellen) Date: Fri Oct 29 12:25:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Everything's fine References: Message-ID: "Brandon Blackmoor" wrote in message news:cltnhi$20j$1@news.spamcop.net... > Like most people, I typically only post here when something is amiss. I > just wanted to take a moment to say that SpoamCop has been working for > me without a hitch for months. Many thanks to all who make that happen. > > bblackmoor > 2004-10-29 :-) Thanks Ellen From tthibodeau at openlinksw.com Fri Oct 29 13:30:39 2004 From: tthibodeau at openlinksw.com (Ted Thibodeau Jr) Date: Fri Oct 29 12:35:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Attn deputies: SpamCop can't do math... Message-ID: <291020041230393243%tthibodeau@openlinksw.com> I submitted a bunch of spam by email submission, and went to process it, but too many messages are saying `Nothing to do` because they're too old... BUT they're not really too old! > Sorry, this email is too old to file a spam report. You must report spam > within 3 days of receipt. This mail was received on Wed, 27 Oct 2004 > 01:39:14 -0400 > Message is 2.4 days old > > Nothing to do. I must report with 3 days of receipt... it's now 2.4 days post-receipt. 2.4 is less than 3 Why is this message to old to report? Frustrating! -- A: Yes. http://learn.to/attribute | Q: Are you sure? | | A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. | | | Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? Ted Thibodeau, Jr. // voice +1-781-273-0900 x32 Evangelism & Support // mailto:tthibodeau@openlinksw.com OpenLink Software, Inc. // http://www.openlinksw.com/ http://www.openlinksw.com/weblogs/uda/ OpenLink Blogs http://www.openlinksw.com/weblogs/virtuoso/ http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen/ Universal Data Access and Virtual Database Technology Providers From Merlyn at Spamcop.net Fri Oct 29 13:32:28 2004 From: Merlyn at Spamcop.net (Merlyn) Date: Fri Oct 29 12:35:12 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn deputies: SpamCop can't do math... References: <291020041230393243%tthibodeau@openlinksw.com> Message-ID: "Ted Thibodeau Jr" wrote in message news:291020041230393243%tthibodeau@openlinksw.com... >I submitted a bunch of spam by email submission, and went to process it, > but too many messages are saying `Nothing to do` because they're too > old... > > BUT they're not really too old! > >> Sorry, this email is too old to file a spam report. You must report spam >> within 3 days of receipt. This mail was received on Wed, 27 Oct 2004 >> 01:39:14 -0400 >> Message is 2.4 days old >> >> Nothing to do. > > I must report with 3 days of receipt... it's now 2.4 days post-receipt. > > 2.4 is less than 3 > > Why is this message to old to report? > > Frustrating! > Spamcop uses the topmost received header to get the time. -- Regards, Merlyn A Spamcop advocate No emails this account is for newsgroups only People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoided From MikeE at ster.invalid Fri Oct 29 10:38:51 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Fri Oct 29 12:40:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn deputies: SpamCop can't do math... References: <291020041230393243%tthibodeau@openlinksw.com> Message-ID: Merlyn wrote: > Spamcop uses the topmost received header to get the time. Currently my testing for another thread is showing rejections at about 2d 7h. I don't know if that change is intentional or accidental. The words still say 3d. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From notabene at spamcop.net Fri Oct 29 21:14:53 2004 From: notabene at spamcop.net (Nico Bartels) Date: Fri Oct 29 14:15:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn deputies: SpamCop can't do math... References: <291020041230393243%tthibodeau@openlinksw.com> Message-ID: <1bcb95a701af2c2718736cf94cbd9639@nbartels.net> On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 09:38:51 -0700, Mike Easter wrote: >I don't know if that change is intentional or accidental. The words >still say 3d. I read the following on http://mailsc.spamcop.net/ ------------------------------------------------------------ News:(Last modified:Friday, 29-Oct-2004 09:40:50 PDT) (Email-account news) 2-day-old spam no longer accepted SpamCop and the ISPs who receive reports from it need fresh spam. Previously, SpamCop would accept spam up to 72 hours old. However, this old spam was essentially useless. SpamCop now requires that spam being reported be less than 48 hours old. Furthermore, we recommend that users not bother reporting spam that is more than 24 hours old. Usually, sources of spam over 24 hours old have already been dealt with one way or another. As always, the fresher your spam, the better. ------------------------------------------------------------ From Merlyn at Spamcop.net Fri Oct 29 15:21:19 2004 From: Merlyn at Spamcop.net (Merlyn) Date: Fri Oct 29 14:25:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn deputies: SpamCop can't do math... References: <291020041230393243%tthibodeau@openlinksw.com> <1bcb95a701af2c2718736cf94cbd9639@nbartels.net> Message-ID: "Nico Bartels" wrote in message news:1bcb95a701af2c2718736cf94cbd9639@nbartels.net... > On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 09:38:51 -0700, Mike Easter wrote: [snipped] Sounds good to me. -- Regards, Merlyn A Spamcop advocate No emails this account is for newsgroups only People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoided From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Oct 29 16:49:19 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Ellen) Date: Fri Oct 29 15:50:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn deputies: SpamCop can't do math... References: <291020041230393243%tthibodeau@openlinksw.com> Message-ID: "Ted Thibodeau Jr" wrote in message news:291020041230393243%tthibodeau@openlinksw.com... > I submitted a bunch of spam by email submission, and went to process it, > but too many messages are saying `Nothing to do` because they're too > old... > > BUT they're not really too old! > > > Sorry, this email is too old to file a spam report. You must report spam > > within 3 days of receipt. This mail was received on Wed, 27 Oct 2004 > > 01:39:14 -0400 > > Message is 2.4 days old > > > > Nothing to do. > A recent change to the algorithm now allows only spam less than 2 days (<48 hrs) to be parsed. The notice just went up on the website. The change to the parser message will follow shortly. Sorry that all the info didn't get posted/changed at the same time. Ellen From diespammer at spamthis.net Fri Oct 29 22:51:58 2004 From: diespammer at spamthis.net (die spammer) Date: Sat Oct 30 00:50:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] blank spam Message-ID: why am I unable to send reports from bodyless and subjectless spam ? From diespammer at spamthis.net Fri Oct 29 22:54:28 2004 From: diespammer at spamthis.net (die spammer) Date: Sat Oct 30 00:50:13 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: not enough data in received header In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: thats very interesting... your report says that you have to report spam within two days... I always get 3 days. veeery interesting .......... RandallW wrote: > The Spamcop parser doesn't like spam I tried to report. > > Here's the link: > http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z686508505z3c38100388d8ab7d03cb43ebdb494884z > > From diespammer at spamthis.net Fri Oct 29 23:21:11 2004 From: diespammer at spamthis.net (die spammer) Date: Sat Oct 30 01:20:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: Attn deputies: SpamCop can't do math... In-Reply-To: References: <291020041230393243%tthibodeau@openlinksw.com> Message-ID: > A recent change to the algorithm now allows only spam less than 2 days (<48 > hrs) to be parsed. The notice just went up on the website. The change to the > parser message will follow shortly. Sorry that all the info didn't get > posted/changed at the same time. ok point taken... I guess I have been too quick lately in reporting to see any messages like this From ric.gates at bigsleep.org Sat Oct 30 06:15:44 2004 From: ric.gates at bigsleep.org (Blammo) Date: Sat Oct 30 01:20:12 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: blank spam References: Message-ID: On 29 Oct 2004 die spammer entered spamcop.help and left news:clv6ar$c39$1@news.spamcop.net: > why am I unable to send reports from bodyless and subjectless spam ? > > I think it's refused because it's considered an error (which it is). But my question is how do you know it's spam, if there's no content? BTW: the empty subject makes no difference, it's just often aborted at that point. -- | Ric | From MikeE at ster.invalid Fri Oct 29 23:55:41 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sat Oct 30 01:55:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: not enough data in received header References: Message-ID: die spammer wrote: > thats very interesting... your report says that you have to report > spam within two days... I always get 3 days. veeery interesting The 'language' still sez 3 days, but the calculator will now prevent reporting shortly after 2 days. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From diespammer at spamthis.net Fri Oct 29 23:59:12 2004 From: diespammer at spamthis.net (die spammer) Date: Sat Oct 30 01:55:13 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: blank spam In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: because the email has a header and "from adsl-68-92-32-50.dsl.hstntx.swbell.net ([68.92.32.50])" is in the header ... if this is not spam what is the purpose of this email ? I seem to get one of the blank emails once a day. Blammo wrote: > On 29 Oct 2004 die spammer entered spamcop.help and left > news:clv6ar$c39$1@news.spamcop.net: > > >>why am I unable to send reports from bodyless and subjectless spam ? >> >> > > > I think it's refused because it's considered an error (which it is). > But my question is how do you know it's spam, if there's no content? > > BTW: the empty subject makes no difference, it's just often aborted at that > point. > From MikeE at ster.invalid Sat Oct 30 00:06:03 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sat Oct 30 02:05:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: blank spam References: Message-ID: Blammo wrote: > die spammer >> why am I unable to send reports from bodyless and subjectless spam ? > > I think it's refused because it's considered an error (which it is). > But my question is how do you know it's spam, if there's no content? > > BTW: the empty subject makes no difference, it's just often aborted > at that point. If there is no body, the parser starts with the assumption that the reporter has failed to perform hir role properly and include the body with its attached header. If the item is really an empty spambody, the traditional lore [not supported by the faq] is that it is OK to add some text like 'no body text' or somesuch so that the parser will report the empty spam. The 'spam' concept on an empty body spam is that it was unsolicited, most likely bulk, and was 'intended' to be commercial or spamvertising. Some other broken spams which also have other different ineffective spamvertisement deliveries but not an empty body are also reported. Spammer error or ineffectiveness doesn't relieve them of being notified about spamming. IMO. A subjectless spam, where subjectless might mean no subject field at all, including the fieldname, might fail a parse because of insufficient elements in the header. A header needs a Received and some more elements, like Subject, From, or Message-ID. If it has too few of those, it won't parse, but doesn't give a very informative verbose about why. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin From ric.gates at bigsleep.org Sat Oct 30 07:32:55 2004 From: ric.gates at bigsleep.org (Blammo) Date: Sat Oct 30 02:35:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: blank spam References: Message-ID: On 29 Oct 2004 die spammer entered spamcop.help and left news:clva8t$ibd$1@news.spamcop.net: > because the email has a header and "from > adsl-68-92-32-50.dsl.hstntx.swbell.net ([68.92.32.50])" is in the > header ... > That could be an indication. > > if this is not spam what is the purpose of this email ? I seem to get > one of the blank emails once a day. > Probably an error, I'm sure spamware is unreliable. If you think it's from a spammer you can probably report it (as Mike mentioned), but I never expect any abuse desk to consider it seriously, but perhaps some do. -- | Ric From Martin.Edwards5 at btinternet.com Sat Oct 30 09:24:12 2004 From: Martin.Edwards5 at btinternet.com (Martin Edwards) Date: Sat Oct 30 03:15:09 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: blank spam In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > Blammo wrote: > >> die spammer > > >>>why am I unable to send reports from bodyless and subjectless spam ? >> >>I think it's refused because it's considered an error (which it is). >>But my question is how do you know it's spam, if there's no content? >> >>BTW: the empty subject makes no difference, it's just often aborted >>at that point. > > > If there is no body, the parser starts with the assumption that the > reporter has failed to perform hir role properly and include the body > with its attached header. If the item is really an empty spambody, the > traditional lore [not supported by the faq] is that it is OK to add some > text like 'no body text' or somesuch so that the parser will report the > empty spam. > > The 'spam' concept on an empty body spam is that it was unsolicited, > most likely bulk, and was 'intended' to be commercial or spamvertising. > Some other broken spams which also have other different ineffective > spamvertisement deliveries but not an empty body are also reported. > Spammer error or ineffectiveness doesn't relieve them of being notified > about spamming. IMO. > > A subjectless spam, where subjectless might mean no subject field at > all, including the fieldname, might fail a parse because of insufficient > elements in the header. A header needs a Received and some more > elements, like Subject, From, or Message-ID. If it has too few of > those, it won't parse, but doesn't give a very informative verbose about > why. > You get "Would report to". I report them manually. From agent01413 at my-deja.com Sat Oct 30 02:23:51 2004 From: agent01413 at my-deja.com (Socks the white house cat) Date: Sat Oct 30 03:20:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: blank spam References: Message-ID: Pausing only once for breath, Blammo said: > > On 29 Oct 2004 die spammer entered spamcop.help and left > news:clv6ar$c39$1@news.spamcop.net: > >> why am I unable to send reports from bodyless and subjectless spam ? >> >> > > I think it's refused because it's considered an error (which it is). > But my question is how do you know it's spam, if there's no content? > > BTW: the empty subject makes no difference, it's just often aborted at > that point. > spam isn't about content, it's about consent. My expereince, or at least suspicion, is that it is being caused by someone testing a newly 'owned' machine. Filing a spamcop report alerts the ISP to get the customer notified and repaired. It was unsolicited it was email it was almost definitely sent in bulk (and if it wasnt, spamcop wont list it because they won't get multiple reports) -- I AM SPEWS (SLAPP PREVENTION ELECTRONIC WHITENOISE SYSTEM) "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the day that they start making vacuum cleaners."--Doc in alt.privacy From ric.gates at bigsleep.org Sat Oct 30 19:02:45 2004 From: ric.gates at bigsleep.org (Blammo) Date: Sat Oct 30 14:05:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: blank spam References: Message-ID: On 30 Oct 2004 Socks the white house cat entered spamcop.help and left news:Xns9592E37A7C3Evotekerry2004@216.154.195.61: > spam isn't about content, it's about consent. > Don't you think that depends on the person/ account? I have accounts that often get eMail from people I don't know, these could be targeted eMails, or just some kind of query. There a many reasons why you could get a blank message, though I agree it's probably a spam attempt. My point being that if there is no body to determine it's spamminess, you have to base it on something. An ISP may wonder why a blank message was reported (especially a clueless one), but then if there are many reports from that IP it could be additional evidence. I still hold on to the dreamy idea that eMail is free and open. I don't see why we can't be free to try and contact people we don't know (or even people we think we might know?), spam is destroying this freedom, it's abusive, and that's why I'm fighting it. -- | Ric | From h9vzc2i02 at sneakemail.com Sat Oct 30 14:59:49 2004 From: h9vzc2i02 at sneakemail.com (Anon_) Date: Sat Oct 30 17:00:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: blank spam References: Message-ID: "Blammo" wrote in message news:Xns95927066A364Dblammo@216.154.195.61... > On 30 Oct 2004 Socks the white house cat entered spamcop.help and left > news:Xns9592E37A7C3Evotekerry2004@216.154.195.61: > > > spam isn't about content, it's about consent. > > > > Don't you think that depends on the person/ account? I have accounts that > often get eMail from people I don't know, these could be targeted eMails, > or just some kind of query. There a many reasons why you could get a blank > message, though I agree it's probably a spam attempt. > My point being that if there is no body to determine it's spamminess, you > have to base it on something. An ISP may wonder why a blank message was > reported (especially a clueless one), but then if there are many reports > from that IP it could be additional evidence. ** The best criterion to use is when you get an e-mail from someone you do not know or did not request information from - you can consider it as *spam* - (blank body or not and whether you can determine that it is 'mass mailing' or not is beside the point.) -- A SpamCop user and forum reader, Not Admin *** > > I still hold on to the dreamy idea that eMail is free and open. I don't see > why we can't be free to try and contact people we don't know (or even > people we think we might know?), spam is destroying this freedom, it's > abusive, and that's why I'm fighting it. > -- > | Ric > | From 79ytka802 at sneakemail.com Sat Oct 30 23:29:32 2004 From: 79ytka802 at sneakemail.com (Aviatrix) Date: Sat Oct 30 17:30:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: blank spam In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Anon_ wrote: > ** > The best criterion to use is when you get an e-mail from someone you do not > know or did not request information from - you can consider it as *spam* - > (blank body or not and whether you can determine that it is 'mass mailing' > or not is beside the point.) Using your definition any product enquiry would have to be considered spam... surely that's not what you meant? From h9vzc2i02 at sneakemail.com Sat Oct 30 15:38:00 2004 From: h9vzc2i02 at sneakemail.com (Anon_) Date: Sat Oct 30 17:40:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: blank spam References: Message-ID: "Aviatrix" <79ytka802@sneakemail.com> wrote in message news:cm113r$5ej$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > Anon_ wrote: > > > > ** > > The best criterion to use is when you get an e-mail from someone you do not > > know or did not request information from - you can consider it as spam* - > > (blank body or not and whether you can determine that it is 'mass mailing' > > or not is beside the point.) > > > Using your definition any product enquiry would have to be considered > spam... surely that's not what you meant? ** Yes - you are correct. If you did not request it - it is spam! I get a lot of these from sites that I have purchased something from - they assume that I want to receive more product information just because I purchased something and gave an e-mail address for the confirmation letter. I report every one as spam - I did not ask for more info. and do not want more info. Since I did not request the mail (subscribe), I do no need to 'unsubscribe' from their 'junk mail'. -- A SpamCop user and forum reader, Not Admin *** -- A SpamCop user and forum reader, Not Admin *** From 79ytka802 at sneakemail.com Sat Oct 30 23:42:28 2004 From: 79ytka802 at sneakemail.com (Aviatrix) Date: Sat Oct 30 17:45:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: blank spam In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >>Using your definition any product enquiry would have to be considered >>spam... surely that's not what you meant? > > > ** > Yes - you are correct. > > If you did not request it - it is spam! > > I get a lot of these from sites that I have purchased something from - they > assume that I want to receive more product information just because I > purchased something and gave an e-mail address for the confirmation letter. > I report every one as spam - I did not ask for more info. and do not want > more info. That's not what I meant. I meant people that email me, at my company address, enquiring about my company's products. By your definition that would be spam because I didn't ask them to email me. Or, take a different example (one that's maybe not quite as clear-cut). Someone sends me an email because they're looking for an old friend who shares my name and they're wondering if I am the person they are looking for. In my opinion that's a perfectly legitimate reason for emailing me - yet by your definition that would be spam. From ric.gates at bigsleep.org Sat Oct 30 23:02:57 2004 From: ric.gates at bigsleep.org (Blammo) Date: Sat Oct 30 18:05:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: blank spam References: Message-ID: On 30 Oct 2004 Anon_ entered spamcop.help and left news:cm0vc9$2ir$1@news.spamcop.net: > The best criterion to use is when you get an e-mail from someone you > do not know or did not request information from - you can consider it > as *spam* That criteria does not work for me, nor does it work for many people I know. Most of us have to look more deeply into the message. If that works for you, fine, you may as well just block everything, and whitelist those you know. I can't use bl.spamcop.net to block spam, because of indiscriminate reporting. -- | Ric | From h9vzc2i02 at sneakemail.com Sat Oct 30 16:44:47 2004 From: h9vzc2i02 at sneakemail.com (Anon_) Date: Sat Oct 30 18:45:02 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: blank spam References: Message-ID: "Aviatrix" <79ytka802@sneakemail.com> wrote in message news:cm11s2$6lt$1@news.spamcop.net... > > >>Using your definition any product enquiry would have to be considered > >>spam... surely that's not what you meant? > > > > > > ** > > Yes - you are correct. > > > > If you did not request it - it is spam! > > > > I get a lot of these from sites that I have purchased something from - they > > assume that I want to receive more product information just because I > > purchased something and gave an e-mail address for the confirmation letter. > > I report every one as spam - I did not ask for more info. and do not want > > more info. > > > That's not what I meant. > > I meant people that email me, at my company address, enquiring about my > company's products. By your definition that would be spam because I > didn't ask them to email me. ** My criteria is based on a non-business home computer mailbox. If you can determine that the e-mail is a legitimate business query (without opening the (possible) spam, then even by my definition if would not be spam (not bulk e-mail.) Remember that some spam LOOKS like a business query even though they are trying to sell YOU something. ** > > Or, take a different example (one that's maybe not quite as clear-cut). > Someone sends me an email because they're looking for an old friend who > shares my name and they're wondering if I am the person they are looking > for. In my opinion that's a perfectly legitimate reason for emailing me > - yet by your definition that would be spam. ** Again, some virus and some spam also looks like someone trying to contact 'a long lost friend' (some legitimate ones may also 'almost' be bulk) so you still have to determine (without opening the mail) whether it IS legitimate.) -- A SpamCop user and forum reader, Not Admin *** From 79ytka802 at sneakemail.com Sun Oct 31 00:59:18 2004 From: 79ytka802 at sneakemail.com (Aviatrix) Date: Sat Oct 30 19:00:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: blank spam In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Anon_ wrote: > My criteria is based on a non-business home computer mailbox. > > If you can determine that the e-mail is a legitimate business query (without > opening the (possible) spam, then even by my definition if would not be spam > (not bulk e-mail.) What's the problem with opening an email? As long as you use a decent mail client (i.e., one that allows you to view mail securely - in plain text) you can't do any harm by opening an email. It's only when you have HTML enabled that you get taken to web sites that you don't want to go to, or that your computer will send back cookies to tell the spammer you have opened his mail. I won't open email with certain words in the subject line (to save time more than anything), but if there is even the remotest chance that something is genuine I will have a quick look - as I said, SECURELY, i.e., with HTML disabled (which is my default setting) > Again, some virus and some spam also looks like someone trying to contact 'a > long lost friend' (some legitimate ones may also 'almost' be bulk) so you > still have to determine (without opening the mail) whether it IS > legitimate.) And again, a virus can only harm you if (a) you open an infected ATTACHMENT or (b) it is embedded in an HTML message and you have HTML enabled. Opening an email in plain text mode is safe. If your mail client won't let you disable HTML I strongly suggest you switch to one that does! From h9vzc2i02 at sneakemail.com Sat Oct 30 20:10:29 2004 From: h9vzc2i02 at sneakemail.com (Anon_) Date: Sat Oct 30 22:15:03 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: blank spam References: Message-ID: "Aviatrix" <79ytka802@sneakemail.com> wrote in message news:cm16c4$eo6$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > Anon_ wrote: > > > My criteria is based on a non-business home computer mailbox. > > > > If you can determine that the e-mail is a legitimate business query (without > > opening the (possible) spam, then even by my definition if would not be spam > > (not bulk e-mail.) > > What's the problem with opening an email? > > As long as you use a decent mail client (i.e., one that allows you to > view mail securely - in plain text) you can't do any harm by opening an > email. It's only when you have HTML enabled that you get taken to web > sites that you don't want to go to, or that your computer will send back > cookies to tell the spammer you have opened his mail. > > I won't open email with certain words in the subject line (to save time > more than anything), but if there is even the remotest chance that > something is genuine I will have a quick look - as I said, SECURELY, > i.e., with HTML disabled (which is my default setting) > ** I understand that there are now some e-mails that can infect a computer just by being opened (not necessary to open an attachment.) When I wish to inspect an e-mail, I look at the 'message source', that way I am guaranteed of not communicating back to the source or opening something that will affect my computer. Sometimes I will display the source, copy and paste it into a word processor (or notepad) and look at it (or print it out) from there especially when it is a large body. -- A SpamCop user and forum reader, Not Admin *** > > > Again, some virus and some spam also looks like someone trying to contact 'a > > long lost friend' (some legitimate ones may also 'almost' be bulk) so you > > still have to determine (without opening the mail) whether it IS > > legitimate.) > > And again, a virus can only harm you if (a) you open an infected > ATTACHMENT or (b) it is embedded in an HTML message and you have HTML > enabled. Opening an email in plain text mode is safe. > > If your mail client won't let you disable HTML I strongly suggest you > switch to one that does! > From 79ytka802 at sneakemail.com Sun Oct 31 09:14:01 2004 From: 79ytka802 at sneakemail.com (Aviatrix) Date: Sun Oct 31 04:20:04 2004 Subject: [SC-Help] Re: blank spam In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Anon_ wrote: > I understand that there are now some e-mails that can infect a computer just > by being opened (not necessary to open an attachment.) Only if you open them insecurely - i.e., with HTML enabled. It is physically impossible to be infected from opening a piece of plain ASCII text. I don't know what mailer you use - if you use Mozilla and set it up to view messages in plain text then you are safe. I believe other good mail clients have a similar facility; there were rumours that this feature was going to be introduced into Outlook but I'm not sure if it actually has. > When I wish to inspect an e-mail, I look at the 'message source', that way I > am guaranteed of not communicating back to the source or opening something > that will affect my computer. > Sometimes I will display the source, copy and paste it into a word processor > (or notepad) and look at it (or print it out) from there especially when it > is a large body. No need for any of this fiddling-around if you use a good mail client - see above.