[SpamCop-List] Re: New Spam Fighting Tool Development
nobody at spamcop.net
Fri Apr 30 14:22:29 EDT 2004
"Wayne P." <infinite at nospam-totalink.net> wrote in message
news:c6t39t$3i5$1 at news.spamcop.net...
> I'm not trying to sell anyone anything...and I certainly am not
> concepts and knowledge solely off of MailWasher. If I liked the
> that much, I would use it. Again, you do have a vaid point about the
> path, however the concept of bounce messages do work - I have used
> software that has this capability (Group Mail Pro,
> is one example that does this very thing). It is not a myth or a
> not all spammers use software that supports it.
Bounce messages will not work because every spamcop report goes to the
correct address. If a spammer wanted to listwash (take names off the
list because they reported - a much more compelling reason to do so
since reports add to the blocklist), they could very easily do so.
However, the experience of most spamcop users is that their spam load
does not diminish. The theory is that the spammer may listwash the
email address, but then sells it to a competitor for a good price as an
"active" email address. And some of those reports are from domain
owners who report spam to non-existent addresses. Spammers do not
really care if the address bounces. One person started using an
account again after 5 years of shutting it down so for five years,
emails to that address bounced. It was still getting spam. The cost
of sending spam is so little, it is not worth it to 'clean' a list.
In addition, a great deal of spam nowadays comes through open proxies
and trojanized machines. It does no good to bounce those spam. They
don't return any where near the spammer. And if most spammers wanted
bounces to 'clean' their list, why, then, do most spam have forged
return-paths? Duh! Because spammers don't want the bounces!!!!
Do try to do a little more research before you propose a plan.
More information about the SpamCop-List