[SC-Help] Re: Spamvertised websites not being reported

[John Richards]

"Mike Easter" <MikeE at ster.invalid> wrote in message news:d3glef$rc1$1 at news.spamcop.net...
> Crossposted to .help - f/ups to .help
> 
> John Richards wrote:
>> I have noticed lately that when I submit a spam to SpamCop it
>> finds spamvertised URLs, but makes no attempt to find their host,
>> or to report those hosts. Here is a recent example:
>>
> www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z751591717zfa06fc1f8af24f8dc5f353a1671eae51z
> 
> What does 'host' mean in this context?
> 
> If reported today, reports would be sent to:
> Re: http://pharmacy.hgarcaj.ws/?2q4w4a3rg7feomyhdfjkgh (Administrator of
> network hosting website referenced in spam)
> postmaster at tautel.ru
> abuse at tautel.ru
> Re: http://pharmacy.hgarcaj.ws/fjkghfdjk?yk.ku4tla1... (Administrator of
> network hosting website referenced in spam)
> postmaster at tautel.ru
> abuse at tautel.ru
> 
> Those addresses are derived from DNS pharmacy.hgarcaj.ws
> Resolves to 82.114.48.64
> whois -h whois.ripe.net 82.114.48.64 ...
> inetnum:      82.114.48.0 - 82.114.48.255
> descr:        Taurus Telecom interconnect block #48
> SPAM issues: abuse at tautel.ru
> 
> whois -h whois.abuse.net tautel.ru ...
> abuse at tautel.ru  postmaster at tautel.ru  (for tautel.ru)
> 
> If the nameservice is pokey, then SC can't do the DNS and so it can't go
> to ripe, so you might've seen something different.

Yeah, I saw something different (i.e. analysis failure), which is why I 
included the spamcop URL which documents what I saw.
If there is a problem with pokey nameservice, why doesn't spamcop's
analysis say so, instead of leaving us in the blind. I don't recall this
problem happening prior to a few months ago. Now it happens frequently.
Something has changed.

-- 

Gary VanderMolen