From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Thu Jan 1 00:07:37 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Wed Dec 31 18:10:04 2003 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Topica.com, discussion lists and BL References: Message-ID: On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 12:21:39 -0500, B McDonald wrote: > Topica uses opt-in for all their lists to my knowledge Trouble with topica is that their idea of "confirmed opt-in" is 1) We opted you in - that's the "opt-in" part. 2) The first marketing mail didn't bounce and thus "confirmed" the validity of the address we found on that millions CD. Voil?: "confirmed opt-in". topica is block on sight. As is everything else in the same 38/8 netblock come to think of it. -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- Let's call it an accidental feature. -- Larry Wall From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 00:07:18 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Wed Dec 31 19:11:09 2003 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: How to get your post read: top posting/bottom posting/inline posting References: <01c3cbd2$25968ce0$LocalHost@default> <01c3cd68$b05291c0$LocalHost@default> <5O$4aNe2YfEW@eisner.encompasserve.org> Message-ID: John Malmberg wrote in news:bsvlfk$9c6$1@news.spamcop.net: > Some word processors will on request try to rephrase a sentence for > better clarity, and some of their results have been posted on various > internet forums for amusement. Ah, really!? I've never heard of word processors that do that (but I only _very_ rarely use one anyway). Any references to forums where I might read such results? -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com Thu Jan 1 04:20:04 2004 From: michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com (Michael Lefevre) Date: Wed Dec 31 23:26:07 2003 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Outlook Express works, Outlook 2002 does not References: Message-ID: Jeff wrote: [snip] > Outlook 2002 doesn't have the "forward as attachment" option, so I have to > select all my spam emails and copy & paste them to a new message. The spam > emails are then listed as attachments. When I send it to spamcop, I get the > following error: > > SpamCop encountered errors while saving spam for processing: > SpamCop could not find your spam message in this email: > > Does anyone know what this happens? I'd like to move to Outlook 2002, but > I'll have to continue using Outlook Express to forward my emails to spamcop > for now. Outlook Express stores emails in their original format, and forwards them like that. Outlook 2002 (also other Outlook versions) is a completely different program, and because of its non-internet origins as an email client, it doesn't store messages in their internet format - it stores the header, various properties of the message, the message body in rich text format, and any attachments, separately in its own format. When you attach a message with Outlook 2002, it constructs a new message based on the various bits it has stored - the result looks roughly the same to the user, but in fact the text source of the message can be very different. In particular, the attached message won't have any of the "Received" headers from the original message, which show where the message came from. Without those, Spamcop can't parse the spam usefully. Outlook does actually store the original header. To report spam from Outlook, you either need to use Spamcop's "Outlook workaround form", and paste the header and body (insofar as you have the message body, after it's been converted to Outlook's format and back again) separately, or you can use one of the VBA macros that are available (linked from the FAQ entry which someone else mentioned). -- Michael From jeffg at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 00:05:37 2004 From: jeffg at spamcop.net (Jeff G.) Date: Thu Jan 1 00:10:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: "internet.abuse@sjrb.ca" References: Message-ID: Bo Briggs organized electrons in article news:bt08ss$3e8$1@news.spamcop.net that appeared as follows: > Jeff G. wrote: >> I got the following back from them after an auto-ack. > DYM 'after' an auto-ack or does _after_ meaning 'after' the receipt > of the auto-ack itself? I got an auto-ack for this report on the 13th at 15:55, and the message I quoted on the 14th at 13:12 (all times -0500 EST). > http://news.spamcop.net/pipermail/spamcop-list/2002-June/005474.html > > PS: > I had to requote from your reply because it is in your sig. ;) Sorry about that. OBTW, HAPPY NEW YEAR! -- Happy Holidays, Jeff G. Long time SpamCop Customer. Please reply via group/list only. From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Thu Jan 1 06:54:07 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Thu Jan 1 00:56:58 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Replacement for Mailwasher? References: <3FF043C3.3AD42628@Tulaweb.net> <7687vvkiloqgse6c0ruup14pra881k6221@4ax.com> Message-ID: "weAponX" a ?crit dans le message de news:7687vvkiloqgse6c0ruup14pra881k6221@4ax.com [...] > Jon > Just wants to report SPAM without clicking 500 buttons per SPAM. Oh, I don't hit 300 buttons per spam. Let's count: In OE, where spampal neatly groups my spam in an auxiliary inbox, select 20 or so spams using Shift-Mouse (2 clicks). Right-click, Forward as attachment (2 clicks). My SC submit address in in the clipboard. Press Ctrl-V, Tab, Tab, Tab, spam (8 keypresses). Click "Send". That's 5 clicks and 8 keypresses per 20 spams so far. In the browser: for each spam: click "Report now". Click "Skip to reports". (Visually check that is is spam). Click "Send reports". Voil?. Just slightly more than 3 clicks per spam. Nothing to worry about. Happy New Year, Tony. From jeffg at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 00:51:22 2004 From: jeffg at spamcop.net (Jeff G.) Date: Thu Jan 1 01:16:19 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Replacement for Mailwasher? References: Message-ID: weAponX organized electrons in article news:hk87vvkecal8pj574b3e7jp0l2vkh08kem@4ax.com that appeared as follows: > If I can redirect ALL my mail to it, then I would be extremely > interested. Cos I got 7 cox accounts, 3 Hotmail accounts, and two > Yahoo Accounts. Then you're one over the limit. I'm a few over myself (7 Hotmail, 1 MSN, and 2 POP), and I have to let OE grab the rest. None of those accounts' providers are willing to forward for free; I've already got a whole bunch forwarding. -- Happy Holidays, Jeff G. Long time SpamCop Customer. Please reply via group/list only. From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 01:34:34 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (sol) Date: Thu Jan 1 01:36:20 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Hotmail In-Reply-To: References: <3FF35C13.4030302@spamcop.net> Message-ID: TheWanderer wrote: > Hotmail spam is down but my spam to my ISP has gone up since then to make up > for the loss at hotmail. > > > "Tim McGraw" wrote in message > news:3FF35C13.4030302@spamcop.net... > >>Joe wrote: >> >>>John Marion wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Wow! I've gone from 30 spams a day to 1 a day! Whatever they are now >>>>doing at Hotmail is way overdue but it seems to be working. >>> >>>My understanding is that the spam load got so great that the sysadmins >>>were finally able to overcome the legal department's fears. They've >>>instituted a proprietary blocklist. I'm getting all this second and >>>third-hand, so it may not be correct. >> >>A nanae poster tagged it to Ralsky's statement in yesterday's NYT >>article that he hasn't sent any spam since 12/16, which puts it in about >>the same timeframe as the drop in hm spam. >> >>Of course, that's a lie and your story, Joe, is probably closer to the >>truth. >> > > > My Hotmail spam has decreased tremendously over the past several days. Usually I get 5 to 20 spams a day in my spam-compromised Hotmail address; I've had zero or one spams a day in it lately. -- Sol slips beneath the waves and fades away amid majestic colors. From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 00:41:12 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (TheWanderer) Date: Thu Jan 1 01:46:35 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Hotmail References: Message-ID: "Joe" wrote in message news:bsvjlv$6nr$1@news.spamcop.net... > John Marion wrote: > > Wow! I've gone from 30 spams a day to 1 a day! Whatever they are now > > doing at Hotmail is way overdue but it seems to be working. > > > > My understanding is that the spam load got so great that the sysadmins > were finally able to overcome the legal department's fears. They've > instituted a proprietary blocklist. I'm getting all this second and > third-hand, so it may not be correct. If this is true then doe this mean Hotmail block list is better than Spamcop's? From ben.de+SCnews at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 00:03:57 2004 From: ben.de+SCnews at spamcop.net (Ben) Date: Thu Jan 1 03:07:13 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] New U.S. Laws now apparently apply to spam Message-ID: Now that the new U.S. (Federal) laws now apparently apply to spam, I wonder if they will help. Or will it me more of the same, or worse? -- Attention all bulk advertisers! Get fast action with your email campaigns! Send your MLM, mortgage and credit plans to uce@ftc.gov Copy health aids & enhancement pill programs to otcfraud@cder.fda.gov African generals and ex-ministers please reply to 419.fcd@usss.treas.gov Enforcement@sec.gov is most interested in your secret stock tips. Webmaster@bsa.org can take care of your software sales needs. From ben.de+SCnews at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 00:07:53 2004 From: ben.de+SCnews at spamcop.net (Ben) Date: Thu Jan 1 03:11:15 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? Message-ID: Now that the new U.S. (Federal) laws now apparently apply to spam, I wonder if they will help. Or will it be more of the same, or worse? -- Attention all bulk advertisers! Get fast action with your email campaigns! Send your MLM, mortgage and credit plans to uce@ftc.gov Copy health aids & enhancement pill programs to otcfraud@cder.fda.gov African generals and ex-ministers please reply to 419.fcd@usss.treas.gov Enforcement@sec.gov is most interested in your secret stock tips. Webmaster@bsa.org can take care of your software sales needs. From agent01413 at my-deja.com Thu Jan 1 01:43:25 2004 From: agent01413 at my-deja.com (Socks the Whitehouse Cat) Date: Thu Jan 1 03:47:59 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: since Ben is not a troll, he had the following to say that was worth commenting on: > Now that the new U.S. (Federal) laws now apparently apply to spam, I > wonder if they will help. Or will it be more of the same, or worse? > According to a Washington Post poll, 76% of American think the problem will stay the same or get worse. I think there is proof again that you can usually fool 20% or so of any given pool of Americans into believing anything, no matter how foolish. -- tired of reading posts from morphing kooks? get a real news reader - http://xnews.newsguy.com From ben.de+SCnews at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 01:35:50 2004 From: ben.de+SCnews at spamcop.net (Ben) Date: Thu Jan 1 04:45:37 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Socks the Whitehouse Cat wrote: > since Ben is not a troll, he had the following to say that was worth > commenting on: Hey, I try ;> >>Now that the new U.S. (Federal) laws now apparently apply to spam, I >>wonder if they will help. Or will it be more of the same, or worse? I don't have a lot of faith. I suppose I was attempting to be sarcastic. > According to a Washington Post poll, 76% of American think the problem will > stay the same or get worse. I think there is proof again that you can > usually fool 20% or so of any given pool of Americans into believing > anything, no matter how foolish. Yeah, I tend to agree; Eleven extra things I would have really liked to have seen - 1. More restrictive State laws still supercede the federal law. 2. Right of private action, individuals can sue the spammer in local court; just like with FAX in 47 USC 227 at $500.00 with trebled damages for repeat offenders. 3. Specific Tagging requirements in body and header. (Feed those hungry filters) 4. No obfuscation what so ever. (More filter food) 5. Three-strikes rule with felony capital level sentencing for repeat violators. (Not tough enough yet.) 6. Immunity from liability for personal vigilante actions against the (repeat) spammer if other avenues fail to stop him. (Just a dream, becides it's an excuse to kick some a$$.) 7. A true do-not-call list with right of action (see #2, #5, and #6) 8. Trebled penalties for exploiting open relay, violating TOS/AUP or using any third party system to send w/o permission 9. Both the company/person who used/contracted the spammer and the spammer them selves are together liable. 10. They can not claim bankruptcy to get out of a suit and they can be held liable in their personal capacity, not just their corporate capacity. 11. Must post a bond sufficient to cover any action (all above) From redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com Thu Jan 1 09:46:43 2004 From: redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com (Redstone) Date: Thu Jan 1 04:52:59 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Microsoft not taking anti-piracy submissions any longer? References: <3FEDFF0D.93A422B@nowhere.com> <3FEFB1A2.3EA87ED8@nowhere.com> Message-ID: John Malmberg wrote in news:bst8d3$ufs$1@news.spamcop.net: > > It also helps to let the underpaid abuse e-mail handler know that > they can make some cash for reporting their spamming customers > through the web form at www.bsa.org. > > BSA.ORG is interested in much more than Microsoft piracy. They > cover Adobe, AutoCad, Symantec... > > I saw a video produced to educate comptrollers and companies on > the necessity of making sure all software was properly licenced. > It showed how the a software audit was done. > > The representative of the copyright holder shows up at the place > of business with a court order and enough police and private > security to back them up. > > They secure the phone and communications system, and prohibit > anyone from making any changes on any computers until the > examination is done. > > The only communication allowed is for contacting the companies > legal staff for advice. But the site is effectively shutdown > until the audit is complete. > > It is a worse case scenario dramatization, but it's point was to > the division management that if they would be held resposible by > the company if a copyright raid disrupted the division. > > -John > wb8tyw@qsl.network > Personal Opinion Only > It appears something is going on.. I was getting a bunch of those spams each day. Now there is nothing to this day. (Good riddance.) :-) From redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com Thu Jan 1 09:51:24 2004 From: redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com (Redstone) Date: Thu Jan 1 05:06:06 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Hotmail References: <3FF35C13.4030302@spamcop.net> Message-ID: sol wrote in news:bt0f1n$has$1@news.spamcop.net: > My Hotmail spam has decreased tremendously over the past several > days. Usually I get 5 to 20 spams a day in my spam-compromised > Hotmail address; I've had zero or one spams a day in it lately. > Same here. The hotmail account I manage has not received a spam for a few weeks save for a few sporadic ones. (Last one dated 12/26) Looks like Hotmail is no longer going to be much of a target for spammers to hammer any more. Though the spam bombarding Yahoo has increased dramatically. (Wonder if Yahoo will institute something similar Hotmail has eventually.) From redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com Thu Jan 1 09:59:09 2004 From: redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com (Redstone) Date: Thu Jan 1 05:06:14 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Hotmail References: <3FF35C13.4030302@spamcop.net> Message-ID: sol wrote in news:bt0f1n$has$1@news.spamcop.net: > My Hotmail spam has decreased tremendously over the past several > days. Usually I get 5 to 20 spams a day in my spam-compromised > Hotmail address; I've had zero or one spams a day in it lately. > Same here. The hotmail account I manage has not received a spam for a few weeks save for a few sporadic ones. (Last one dated 12/26) Looks like Hotmail is no longer going to be much of a target for spammers to hammer any more. Though the spam bombarding Yahoo has increased dramatically. (Wonder if Yahoo will institute something similar Hotmail has eventually.) From redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com Thu Jan 1 10:27:34 2004 From: redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com (Redstone) Date: Thu Jan 1 05:38:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Topica.com, discussion lists and BL References: Message-ID: "B McDonald" wrote in news:bsv0j6$m2e$1@news.spamcop.net: > A club I belong is looking for free discussion list service since > the person who was hosting our list is quitting. I have been > checking into http://www.topica.com but they are listed in the > SpamCopBL ( 38.113.200.21). Needless to say this could make msg > delivery problematic. > > Topica uses opt-in for all their lists to my knowledge and > subjects reported seem to be opt-in messages. Are people spamming > with customized opt-in messages? or are people just reporting > these opt-ins as spam? If so, then I suspect that all free list > services would have a high probabiliity of being on the BL. > > Any suggestions - maybe for other services? Thanks > > B McDonald > > > Topica using opt-in.. ha. Funny. They used to spam the hell out of me, signing my address up for about half-a-dozen of their "opt-in" spamlists. It didn't stop until I began forwarding their garbage to their then-ISP Verio. It took a LONG while before Verio gave them the boot. (They couldn't come up with any evidence of my "opting in"..) Take a pass on Topica. From mikegray at avoidpsamdsl.pipex.com Thu Jan 1 10:35:24 2004 From: mikegray at avoidpsamdsl.pipex.com (Mike Gray) Date: Thu Jan 1 05:38:09 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: > Now that the new U.S. (Federal) laws now apparently apply to spam, I wonder if they will > help. Or will it be more of the same, or worse? Well, the profile of my morning's spam looks the same. Only one with any reference to the new law. Seeing as I'm in the UK and it therefore doesn't presumably apply, I LARTed them anyway and will continue to do so. I'm right to do so, no? Mike From MikeE at ster.invalid Thu Jan 1 02:40:25 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Thu Jan 1 05:52:14 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: Tim Boyer wrote: > This is one of the very few times that I can say I know something for > certain. > > The Department of Transportation declares that the first week of the > year is the first _full_ week - i.e., starts on Monday; ends on > Sunday. So the first week of 2004 starts on 1/5/2004. > > Tires have a date code on the side - week/year, so the tires we're > making this week are dated 5203. > > For what it's worth. Somewhere I read that the US [in this specific case, US DOT] doesn't use the same system we are describing, which is ISO 8601 - so your information is an answer to Marjolein's 'original' question about what method is 'used in the US', namely that the US DOT and the tire industry, which have a lot of regulations, use the 'first full Mo-Su week' system. -- Mike Easter From redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com Thu Jan 1 10:43:50 2004 From: redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com (Redstone) Date: Thu Jan 1 05:52:24 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] anti-Spamcop trick.. http:\\ Message-ID: Appears to be a new anti-Spamcop trick. I've been receiving an increasing number of spams using "http:\\" (as opposed to the correct "http://") for the spamvertised scamsites. The new browsers we use today makes the proper correction automaticly when the URL is clicked upon (rather than respond with an error.) The problem is that Spamcop does not see this trick and fails to see the URL. I usually correct this manually before parsing, but I'm figuring that there is alot more people who don't have the time searching this trick out. So it appears a good number of scamsites isn't being reported when it should be. Maybe a modification in the parsing algorithm is in order? From masfjorden at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 11:52:19 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (masfjorden@spamcop.net) Date: Thu Jan 1 05:55:43 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > Tim Boyer wrote: > >>This is one of the very few times that I can say I know something for >>certain. >> >>The Department of Transportation declares that the first week of the >>year is the first _full_ week - i.e., starts on Monday; ends on >>Sunday. So the first week of 2004 starts on 1/5/2004. >> >>Tires have a date code on the side - week/year, so the tires we're >>making this week are dated 5203. >> >>For what it's worth. > > > Somewhere I read that the US [in this specific case, US DOT] doesn't use > the same system we are describing, which is ISO 8601 - so your > information is an answer to Marjolein's 'original' question about what > method is 'used in the US', namely that the US DOT and the tire > industry, which have a lot of regulations, use the 'first full Mo-Su > week' system. > I receive the headlines of the New York Times. Here is what they do: As of the first day of this week (Monday, I mean), they set their clock to 2004: Received: from annuncio3.prvt.nytimes.com (10.5.101.124) by content119b.lga2.nytimes.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id <78.00003748@content119b.lga2.nytimes.com>; Mon, 29 Dec 2003 3:07:28 -0500 From: "NYTimes.com" Reply-To: nytdirect@nytimes.com Date: Mon, 29 Dec *2004* 03:07:27 -0500 To: x Subject: Today's Headlines: Monday, December 29, 2003 The date in future brings the SpamAssassin score up to 3.4. Happy New Year Godt Nytt ?r to everyone (except the spammers lurking here). helge From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 10:52:53 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Thu Jan 1 05:55:48 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: Steve McGarrett wrote in news:bsvvbi$ld4$1@news.spamcop.net: [snipped fascinating historical expose] > Then there is the Islamic calendar, where the "weekend" is Thursday > and Friday. This gives rise to the famous phrase commonly abbreviated > P.A.I.W. And what "famous" phrase might that be? I've never seen that abbreviation. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 10:53:59 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Thu Jan 1 05:55:48 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: <3FF393FF.5070705@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Tim McGraw wrote in news:3FF393FF.5070705@spamcop.net: >> Jewish Christians > > Um, define that, please ;) That was my first thought, but re-reading made it clear: "etnically" Jewish people who had converted to Christianity. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 10:56:17 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Thu Jan 1 06:03:59 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Topica.com, discussion lists and BL References: Message-ID: Redstone wrote in news:Xns946318DE28713lumbercartel@216.154.195.61: > Topica using opt-in.. ha. Funny. Yes they do. They just don't _always_ do. And don't care whether their clients do. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From MikeE at ster.invalid Thu Jan 1 02:57:25 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Thu Jan 1 06:05:21 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Outlook Express works, Outlook 2002 does not References: Message-ID: Jeff G. wrote: > Outlook, hereafter OL, is a completely *completely* different program > functionally than Outlook Express, hereafter OE. To make a long story > short, reporting spam with OE is very easy; reporting spam with OL is > not so easy. Some people actually use OE for reporting spam even tho' > they've started using OL for their 'normal' mail. I don't want to argue copyright issues here, but more a 'customary' and netiquette consideration. What I do when I paste one of Larry Kilgallen's previous boilerplates or 'would send' messages in as a response to a similar question that prompted his reply in the first place is to attribute the original to him. I think you should do that when you use one of Merlyn's or mine. When you use it 'as yours' when it is someone else's pasted in, the representation isn't quite correct. -- Mike Easter From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 11:07:22 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Thu Jan 1 06:12:20 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: anti-Spamcop trick.. http:\\ References: Message-ID: Redstone wrote in news:Xns94631B9FD9607lumbercartel@216.154.195.61: > I've been receiving an increasing number of spams using "http:\\" (as > opposed to the correct "http://") for the spamvertised scamsites. The > new browsers we use today makes the proper correction automaticly when > the URL is clicked upon (rather than respond with an error.) See my post on 26 December, Message-ID: There was no reaction to that one, though. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From MikeE at ster.invalid Thu Jan 1 03:11:20 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Thu Jan 1 06:15:27 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: masfjorden@spamcop.net wrote: > I receive the headlines of the New York Times. Here is what they do: > As of the first day of this week (Monday, I mean), they set their clock > to 2004: > Date: Mon, 29 Dec *2004* 03:07:27 -0500 Whatever they want to do about their /weeks/ and year designations, such as 2004-W01 or 04W01, they are distinctly in error if they use a day month year 24hrclock UTCoffset configuration with the year 2004 like that. -- Mike Easter From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 11:27:45 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Thu Jan 1 06:33:17 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Replacement for Mailwasher? References: <2087vvgdla86eb8s3m842i9sl73gfseqjq@4ax.com> Message-ID: weAponX wrote in news:2087vvgdla86eb8s3m842i9sl73gfseqjq@4ax.com: > Well it downloads it in the sense that I can view, and ONLY view, the > full headers. The program blocks things like HTML and Images and > malicious code. If it is a text only message, I can read, the first > TWENTY lines of it ONLY. But in order to do that, it cannot *download* the headers and twentyy lines. It has to download the whole message; then decide how much of it to show to you. So those 20 lines don't reduce anything in terms of bandwidth use - the whole message still travels over the network to your computer. (All 178K of it, if that's what it is - the size of a spam I recently had the privilege of receiving.) -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Thu Jan 1 12:35:12 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Thu Jan 1 06:35:58 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Replacement for Mailwasher? References: <2087vvgdla86eb8s3m842i9sl73gfseqjq@4ax.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 11:27:45 +0000, Marjolein Katsma wrote: > But in order to do that, it cannot *download* the headers and twentyy > lines. It has to download the whole message; then decide how much of it to > show to you. Actually, it doesn't. The 'TOP' command in the POP3 protocol allows the client to retrieve the headers plus the first 'n' lines of the body. Example: TOP 1 20 will download the headers and the first 20 lines of message #1. -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- genius, n: A chemist who discovers a laundry additive that rhymes with "bright". From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 11:35:35 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Thu Jan 1 06:43:41 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Cleaning a list References: <3FF393AC.9000306@spamcop.net> <3FF39732.6020508@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Merlyn wrote in news:bt05op$utg$1@news.spamcop.net: > I am going to quit smoking in an hour :0( And then reporting in your sig how many days, hours and seconds since you stopped smoking? (Please don't.) But good for you! Folle lok en seine! -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From MikeE at ster.invalid Thu Jan 1 03:36:37 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Thu Jan 1 06:43:47 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > Somewhere I read that the US [in this specific case, US DOT] doesn't > use the same system we are describing, which is ISO 8601 - so your > information is an answer to Marjolein's 'original' question about what > method is 'used in the US', namely that the US DOT and the tire > industry, which have a lot of regulations, use the 'first full Mo-Su > week' system. Here's a little snippet from a discussion of the capabilities of 8 different db apps. DOT & the tire industry are using option 4 below, & ISO 8601 is option 2. Week of the Year The Big Eight DBMSs have five different ways to calculate a week number: The first day of the first week is January 1. This has the advantage of avoiding weeks that are split across years, but it doesn't correspond to the "first day of the week" possibilities that we've just discussed. Supporters include Oracle. Weeks start on Monday, and the first week of the year is the first week that has a Thursday in it. This has the advantage that all weeks have seven days. On the other hand, this can mean that days between January 1 and January 3 are counted as being part of a week in the previous year. Supporters include ISO, DB2, Ingres, and Oracle. Weeks start on Sunday, and the first week starts wherever the first Sunday is. This has the same advantages and disadvantages as the previous method. Weeks start on Monday, and the first week starts wherever the first Monday is. Any days before the first Monday are Week 0. This has nearly the same advantages and disadvantages as methods two and three. Supporters include Ingres. Weeks start on Sunday, and the first week (Week 1) is the Sunday that begins the week of January 1. Values are from 1 to 54. Supporters include DB2. Option 2 is what the ISO 8601 standard requires. DB2, Ingres, and Oracle each have two "week" functions: one for a proprietary calculation, and one for the option 2 calculation. ODBC requires a WEEK function but is vague about the requirements. http://www.informit.com/isapi/product_id~%7B0693C0B7-3A4B-4AA3-8376-BD85 0E151430%7D/element_id~%7B2A548584-B97A-4296-9FF6-933FB41E090B%7D/st~%7B EB8229F9-B493-4F48-8B1B-C4864B9E6505%7D/content/articlex.asp or http://snipurl.com/3m0t -- Mike Easter From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Thu Jan 1 12:37:46 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Thu Jan 1 06:43:52 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: WTF is happening at cox.net now? References: <8067vvgpjlq6h6avva4vo464lrbhc3f6be@4ax.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 20:16:58 -0800, weAponX wrote: > HMMM: I think it *is* a fake account. Mind if I contact you privately? Thanks for the offer but there's little point now. Anyway, fake account or not, the mail *did* come from cox IP space. The problem was, however, taken care of by SpamCop admins a few days ago. -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- Seen in the classified ads: COMPLETE SET OF ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA. 45 VOLUMES. EXCELLENT CONDITION. $1000 OR BEST OFFER. NO LONGER NEEDED. MARRIED. WIFE KNOWS EVERYTHING. From spamcop001 at bellsouth.net Thu Jan 1 05:47:28 2004 From: spamcop001 at bellsouth.net (Bo Briggs) Date: Thu Jan 1 06:56:30 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Replacement for Mailwasher? In-Reply-To: References: <2087vvgdla86eb8s3m842i9sl73gfseqjq@4ax.com> Message-ID: Godwin Stewart wrote: > On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 11:27:45 +0000, Marjolein Katsma wrote: > > >>But in order to do that, it cannot *download* the headers and twentyy >>lines. It has to download the whole message; then decide how much of it to >>show to you. > > > Actually, it doesn't. > > The 'TOP' command in the POP3 protocol allows the client to retrieve the > headers plus the first 'n' lines of the body. > > Example: > > TOP 1 20 > > will download the headers and the first 20 lines of message #1. > Actually, it (Mailwasher) does. If you never view the message source or preview the message, then you are correct. It uses the TOP command to get the headers, including 'x' number of lines. I don't know what x=. However, if you load the message in mailwasher, it will fetch the entire message. If it is a virus, or a message over 64K, it will only show the 1st 64K, but it has fetched the full monte. One thing to remember about Mailwasher is that it is an email client - exactly the same as Outlook Express. It just lacks the full rendering engine that OE has (good) and the ability to use the TOP command (good), but a broken scheme to generate fake bounces (bad). -- Bo Briggs From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 11:49:39 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Thu Jan 1 06:57:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Replacement for Mailwasher? References: <2087vvgdla86eb8s3m842i9sl73gfseqjq@4ax.com> Message-ID: Godwin Stewart wrote in news:pan.2004.01.01.11.35.10.916425@loopback.sgms- centre.com: > The 'TOP' command in the POP3 protocol allows the client to retrieve the > headers plus the first 'n' lines of the body. > > Example: > > TOP 1 20 I sit corrected. Thanks for pointing that out! -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From me at privacy.net Thu Jan 1 11:55:34 2004 From: me at privacy.net (John McLusky) Date: Thu Jan 1 07:01:07 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: "Mike Gray" wrote in message news:bt0t56$vev$1@news.spamcop.net... > > Now that the new U.S. (Federal) laws now apparently apply to spam, I > wonder if they will > > help. Or will it be more of the same, or worse? > > Well, the profile of my morning's spam looks the same. Only one with any > reference to the new law. Seeing as I'm in the UK and it therefore doesn't > presumably apply, I LARTed them anyway and will continue to do so. I'm right > to do so, no? You would be right to LART them even if you're in the USA. Just because something's nominally legal doesn't mean that it's allowed by the ISP's TOS. For example, chatrooms are legal, but my hosting company don't want me hosting one on my website. John. From MikeE at ster.invalid Thu Jan 1 03:57:37 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Thu Jan 1 07:05:41 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: The trivia continues to pop up. The year 2012 has a Wed Feb 29. So what? Well somehow that spools into the fact that if you 'line up' weeks of Mon-Sun, the ISO week, then you have 54 'lines' or partial lines. Or, I prefer to think of it as that year having some 'days' in 3 different ISO years, 2011, 2012, and 2013. In case you're wondering what the calendar looks like, Jan 1 is Sun, so that Sun belongs to 2011, and Dec 31 is Mon, so that Mon belongs to 2013, and 52 weeks for 2012. I suppose we could wonder how often that happens, and I guess the key would be to use one of those gizmos that tells what years have Wed Feb 29. Those who like to line up their weeks Su-Sa, could play the same game with that calendar as well. I think 2000 did that. Oh, I see, it works at 28 day intervals for Tue Feb 29. Eek. -- Mike Easter From spamcop001 at bellsouth.net Thu Jan 1 06:03:46 2004 From: spamcop001 at bellsouth.net (Bo Briggs) Date: Thu Jan 1 07:05:49 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Gray wrote: >>Now that the new U.S. (Federal) laws now apparently apply to spam, I > > wonder if they will > >>help. Or will it be more of the same, or worse? My personal opinion is that it will help at first - there will be a deterrent effect, but that spam is on the increase anyway, so in the long run it will look like somewhere between no effect and an increase in spam. You always notice posters here saying that their spam increased - that's probably because the total amount of spam is increasing faster than the decrease from using spamcop. I don't think that the open proxy spammers will be stopped at all. > > > Well, the profile of my morning's spam looks the same. Only one with any > reference to the new law. Seeing as I'm in the UK and it therefore doesn't > presumably apply, I LARTed them anyway and will continue to do so. I'm right > to do so, no? > Of course. I don't expect any major differences here (US). Just looking at my mailserver logs from midnight on, it seems about the same. But nothing's getting through the blocklists that I use, so I should report that all is quiet here on the western front. The spam that I get is from scraped email addies on websites (before I knew better about hiding the mailto: stuff). I'm sure that YMMV. -- Bo Briggs From masfjorden at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 13:20:32 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (masfjorden@spamcop.net) Date: Thu Jan 1 07:31:26 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > The trivia continues to pop up. The year 2012 has a Wed Feb 29. So > what? Well somehow that spools into the fact that if you 'line up' > weeks of Mon-Sun, the ISO week, then you have 54 'lines' or partial > lines. Or, I prefer to think of it as that year having some 'days' in 3 > different ISO years, 2011, 2012, and 2013. In case you're wondering > what the calendar looks like, Jan 1 is Sun, so that Sun belongs to 2011, > and Dec 31 is Mon, so that Mon belongs to 2013, and 52 weeks for 2012. > > I suppose we could wonder how often that happens, and I guess the key > would be to use one of those gizmos that tells what years have Wed Feb > 29. It happened in 1984, and I guess it happens every 28th year, disturbed only by those leap years that are unleaped, like 1900, 2100. I got to look up my almanac arhive, which goes back to 1973. That little booklet cost me NOK 1,25. This year's edition costs NOK 40. eek. Perhaps I should start using the old ones, once their date info is valid ? No, I want to know about the eclipses. We had a wonderful solar eclipse on 20030531, and then a lunar on nov 9. OOOT Did you read http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=17442 and interview with Gore Vidal about paper trail voting and much else? helge From spamcop001 at bellsouth.net Thu Jan 1 06:19:52 2004 From: spamcop001 at bellsouth.net (Bo Briggs) Date: Thu Jan 1 07:33:38 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Hotmail In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: TheWanderer wrote: > "Joe" wrote in message > news:bsvjlv$6nr$1@news.spamcop.net... > >>John Marion wrote: >> >>>Wow! I've gone from 30 spams a day to 1 a day! Whatever they are now >>>doing at Hotmail is way overdue but it seems to be working. >>> >> >>My understanding is that the spam load got so great that the sysadmins >>were finally able to overcome the legal department's fears. They've >>instituted a proprietary blocklist. I'm getting all this second and >>third-hand, so it may not be correct. > > > > If this is true then doe this mean Hotmail block list is better than > Spamcop's? > No, not necessarily. But any blocklist is better than none at all - spamreaders will not be able to read the junk or click the links. Is Hotmail filtering the Swen virus? I've been slightly curious about Hotmail's spam volume going up and down. I can only wonder that they'll send some email out that states: On some days do you notice very little spam in your hotmail? We've been testing our spam filters and now you can switch to a paid account and you'll never see it again ... -- Bo Briggs From antoine.mechelynck at belgacom.net Thu Jan 1 14:07:24 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at belgacom.net (Tony Mechelynck) Date: Thu Jan 1 08:16:50 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: a ?crit dans le message de news:bsv2ho$pci$1@news.spamcop.net > Marjolein Katsma wrote: > > > Mike Easter wrote in news:bsv0an$lks$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > > > > > The/our/ my/ most popular calendars are designed for > > > Sunday-Saturday format. > > > > > > Any idea where this strange habit comes from? > > > > > If memory serves me (no reason to believe that i'm afraid), I grew up > in the fifties with a Norwegian Sunday to Saturday calendar. Do you > have resources to find out it it was true for Europe too until say > 1955 or 1960, or am I way out? > > helge The seven-day week was one of those things which the Jews learned from the inhabitants of the Tigris-Euphrates region, then wrote into their Thorah as if it had existed forever. (The Egiptians, IIUC, hadn no week). They didn't name the days of the week after holy or celestial bodies, they simply counted them: "first", "second", etc. "Sabbath" comes from a semitic root meaning "seven", so that "the day of Sabbath" and "the seventh day" are expressed identically in Hebrew. The Graeco-Romans also had a seven-day week, but they named the week days after the celestial "planets", i.e., the celestial "roaming" lights visible by the naked eye, which move by respect to the "fixed stars". Later, the Germans adopted that system, giving the days the names of Germanic gods more or less equivalent to the Roman gods homonymous with the celestial bodies. So we get, starting with the two brightest and proceeding more or less arbitrarily thereafter: (I give the names in: English, German, Dutch, and also Latin, French, Italian, Spanish. Helge, you're welcome to add the Norwegian names.) 1. The Sun (Sunday - Sonntag - Zondag, etc.) later "renamed" by Christians as "the Lord's day" (dies dominicus / dimanche / domenica / domingo) 2. The Moon (Monday - Montag - Maandag) (Lunae dies / lundi / lunedi / lunes) 3. Mars, equated with -- i'm not sure who, Odin maybe? (But I thought Odin and Wotan were one and the same?) (Tuesday / Dienstag / Dinsdag) (Martis dies / mardi / martedi / martes) 4. Mercury, equated to Wotan (Wednesday / Woensdag) (german Mittwoch, "midweek") (Mercurii dies / mercredi / mercoledi / mi?rcoles) 5. Jupiter, equated to Thor (Thursday) or Thunder (Donnerstag / Donderdag) (Jovis dies / jeudi / giovedi / joves) 6. Venus, equated with Freya (Friday / Freitag / Vrijdag) (Veneris dies / vendredi / venerdi / viernes) 7. Saturn, also the Jewish Sabbath (Saturday / Samstag / Zaterdag) (Saturni dies / samedi / sabato / s?bado) (Depending on the region, in German also Sonnabend, "Sunday's eve") IIUC, some Christians re-numbered it all when they made Sunday their own "day of rest" and moved away from Jewish customs. In Arabic, Saturday is still "es-Sebt" (the seventh, cognate with Hebrew "shabbet") even though the Muslims' "holy day" is Friday (al-Jem`aa). Happy New Year, Tony. From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Thu Jan 1 14:26:51 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Thu Jan 1 08:33:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: "Marjolein Katsma" a ?crit dans le message de news:Xns946378DD42CD7homesitehelp@216.154.195.61 > Steve McGarrett wrote in news:bsvvbi$ld4$1@news.spamcop.net: > > [snipped fascinating historical expose] > > Then there is the Islamic calendar, where the "weekend" is Thursday > > and Friday. This gives rise to the famous phrase commonly > > abbreviated P.A.I.W. > > And what "famous" phrase might that be? I've never seen that > abbreviation. Must be some kinda smartass joke on T.G.I.F. (Thank God It's Friday) so -- let me guess -- wait -- maybe -- er -- gotcha! -- Praise Allah It's Wednesday (though even non-Arab speaking Muslims say "Hamdullah" for "Praise God"). > > > -- > Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ > Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. > Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. > The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. > http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html Happy New Year, Tony http://users.skynet.be/antoine.mechelynck/ From masfjorden at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 14:36:03 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (masfjorden@spamcop.net) Date: Thu Jan 1 08:42:56 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Tony Mechelynck wrote: snip > The seven-day week was one of those things which the Jews learned from > the inhabitants of the Tigris-Euphrates region, then wrote into their > Thorah as if it had existed forever. (The Egiptians, IIUC, hadn no > week). They didn't name the days of the week after holy or celestial > bodies, they simply counted them: "first", "second", etc. "Sabbath" > comes from a semitic root meaning "seven", so that "the day of Sabbath" > and "the seventh day" are expressed identically in Hebrew. > > The Graeco-Romans also had a seven-day week, but they named the week > days after the celestial "planets", i.e., the celestial "roaming" > lights visible by the naked eye, which move by respect to the "fixed > stars". Later, the Germans adopted that system, giving the days the > names of Germanic gods more or less equivalent to the Roman gods > homonymous with the celestial bodies. > > So we get, starting with the two brightest and proceeding more or less > arbitrarily thereafter: (I give the names in: English, German, Dutch, > and also Latin, French, Italian, Spanish. Helge, you're welcome to add > the Norwegian names.) > > 1. The Sun (Sunday - Sonntag - Zondag, etc.) later "renamed" by > Christians as "the Lord's day" (dies dominicus / dimanche / domenica / > domingo) > > 2. The Moon (Monday - Montag - Maandag) (Lunae dies / lundi / lunedi / > lunes) > > 3. Mars, equated with -- i'm not sure who, Odin maybe? (But I thought > Odin and Wotan were one and the same?) (Tuesday / Dienstag / Dinsdag) > (Martis dies / mardi / martedi / martes) > > 4. Mercury, equated to Wotan (Wednesday / Woensdag) (german Mittwoch, > "midweek") (Mercurii dies / mercredi / mercoledi / mi?rcoles) > > 5. Jupiter, equated to Thor (Thursday) or Thunder (Donnerstag / > Donderdag) (Jovis dies / jeudi / giovedi / joves) > > 6. Venus, equated with Freya (Friday / Freitag / Vrijdag) (Veneris dies > / vendredi / venerdi / viernes) > > 7. Saturn, also the Jewish Sabbath (Saturday / Samstag / Zaterdag) > (Saturni dies / samedi / sabato / s?bado) (Depending on the region, in > German also Sonnabend, "Sunday's eve") > > > IIUC, some Christians re-numbered it all when they made Sunday their > own "day of rest" and moved away from Jewish customs. > > In Arabic, Saturday is still "es-Sebt" (the seventh, cognate with Hebrew > "shabbet") even though the Muslims' "holy day" is Friday (al-Jem`aa). > > > Happy New Year, > Tony. Thanks, Tony There are two Norwegian languages, one that is strongly influenced by Danish ('home Danish' or officially bokm?l) and nynorsk that traces its origins to the medieval norwegian. For that reason some of the weekdays have two spellings (bokm?l/nynorsk), and we don't capitalize mandag/m?ndag: the moon's day tirsdag/tysdag the wargod Ty onsdag the chief god Odin torsdag the second-in-command Tor fredag the siblings god Fr?y or goddess Fr?ya of reproduction and love respectively l?rdag/laurdag: this is the deviant day. the first part is a corruption of *laugar*, which means to have a bath, so it is the day of personal hygiene. s?ndag/sundag The sun's day. It may be difficult to compare gods in different beliefs. have you noticed that in Latin and related languages the sun is masculine and the moon is feminine, whereas in (most? all?) germanic languages it is the opposite, That says something, I don't know what, about the quality of those deities, don't you think? I believe Dutch, like bergensk, has lost the grammatical difference between feminine and masculine nouns. helge From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 13:39:42 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Thu Jan 1 08:44:35 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: Antoine J. Mechelynck wrote in news:bt176s$l87$1@news.spamcop.net: >> > Then there is the Islamic calendar, where the "weekend" is Thursday >> > and Friday. This gives rise to the famous phrase commonly >> > abbreviated P.A.I.W. >> >> And what "famous" phrase might that be? I've never seen that >> abbreviation. > > Must be some kinda smartass joke on T.G.I.F. (Thank God It's Friday) > so -- let me guess -- wait -- maybe -- er -- gotcha! -- Praise Allah > It's Wednesday (though even non-Arab speaking Muslims say "Hamdullah" > for "Praise God"). Aaah, I believe you may be right. Good one! Now, of course, the question is whether Muslims _actually_ use such an expression (and if so, where). -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 13:43:48 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Thu Jan 1 08:45:47 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote in news:bt125n$7e5$1@news.spamcop.net: > Those who like to line up their weeks Su-Sa, could play the same game > with that calendar as well. I think 2000 did that. Oh, I see, it works > at 28 day intervals for Tue Feb 29. Eek. Except, of course, that 2000 was _not_ a leap year. ;-) Leap years are every year that's divisible by four, except if the centuries are divisible by four. So 1900 was a leap year, 2000 was not. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 13:44:07 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Mathew Hendry) Date: Thu Jan 1 08:45:54 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Hotmail References: <3FF35C13.4030302@spamcop.net> Message-ID: On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 20:00:48 -0600, "TheWanderer" wrote: >Hotmail spam is down but my spam to my ISP has gone up since then to make up >for the loss at hotmail. Not enough to make up for it here - 300 fewer spam in December than in November. Doesn't go in that direction very often. :) -- Mat. From JohnJBurnessAT at ieeDOT.org Thu Jan 1 13:49:08 2004 From: JohnJBurnessAT at ieeDOT.org (John J. Burness) Date: Thu Jan 1 08:52:10 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Marjolein Katsma wrote: > Mike Easter wrote in news:bt125n$7e5$1@news.spamcop.net: > > >>Those who like to line up their weeks Su-Sa, could play the same game >>with that calendar as well. I think 2000 did that. Oh, I see, it works >>at 28 day intervals for Tue Feb 29. Eek. > > > Except, of course, that 2000 was _not_ a leap year. ;-) > > Leap years are every year that's divisible by four, except if the > centuries are divisible by four. So 1900 was a leap year, 2000 was not. > > I think you have got your Centuries mixed up!! 2000 *was* a leap Year & 1900 (1800, 1700, etc) were not!! (check back on a Calendar for 2000!! Regards, John From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 08:51:51 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Thu Jan 1 08:52:16 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Hotmail References: Message-ID: "Bo Briggs" wrote in message > Is Hotmail > filtering the Swen virus? No. I have received several since the drop in total spam. Miss Betsy, an almost new internet user From masfjorden at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 14:50:07 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (masfjorden@spamcop.net) Date: Thu Jan 1 08:55:12 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Marjolein Katsma wrote: > Except, of course, that 2000 was _not_ a leap year. ;-) > > Leap years are every year that's divisible by four, except if the > centuries are divisible by four. So 1900 was a leap year, 2000 was not. No, the other way round: 2000 was a leap year, but 1900, 1800 were not.. helge From spamcop001 at bellsouth.net Thu Jan 1 07:49:53 2004 From: spamcop001 at bellsouth.net (Bo Briggs) Date: Thu Jan 1 08:55:18 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Marjolein Katsma wrote: > > Except, of course, that 2000 was _not_ a leap year. ;-) > > Leap years are every year that's divisible by four, except if the > centuries are divisible by four. So 1900 was a leap year, 2000 was not. > > I think you have that backwards. Divisible by 100 is NOT a leap year, unless divisible by 400. So 1900 was not a leap year, 2000 was. -- Bo Briggs From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 13:59:51 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Thu Jan 1 09:01:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: wrote in news:bt17o6$mdp$1@news.spamcop.net: > I believe Dutch, like bergensk, has lost > the grammatical difference between feminine and masculine nouns. In word form, yes. But not quite in grammar and concept, although that's now in the process of being lost. For instance, abstractions are always female. You won't see the difference in noun or participle, but you do (should) in possessives. But living languages change all the time, and ours is being heavily influenced by so many people living here and speaking Dutch but not as their native language. Some dsay teh language is "simplifying" but that's not quite true - new concepts (and words) are being imported into it as well, making it conceptually richer, even if (maybe) simpler in form. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From masfjorden at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 15:01:28 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (masfjorden@spamcop.net) Date: Thu Jan 1 09:05:21 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Marjolein Katsma wrote: > wrote in news:bt17o6$mdp$1@news.spamcop.net: > > >>I believe Dutch, like bergensk, has lost >>the grammatical difference between feminine and masculine nouns. > > > In word form, yes. But not quite in grammar and concept, although that's > now in the process of being lost. For instance, abstractions are always > female. You won't see the difference in noun or participle, but you do > (should) in possessives. snip But what is the gender of the moon and the sun? helge From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 14:02:01 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Thu Jan 1 09:05:28 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: wrote in news:bt18ij$o70$1@news.spamcop.net: > No, the other way round: 2000 was a leap year, but 1900, 1800 were not.. > helge Maybe I should go back to bed. Yes, you're right. (damn, I actually programmed leap year routines into business software, I should know better!) -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 08:03:40 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Thu Jan 1 09:05:35 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: (media) Ralsky in action References: <3FF162AC.3030408@yahoo.com> <01c3cfe7$5e9c4340$LocalHost@default> Message-ID: <75a8vv8p2f7jgh8dr2nob33c88vtrf2f0e@4ax.com> On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 23:48:24 +0000 (UTC), "Michael R N Dolbear" wrote: >> >Anybody thought of trying a private prosecution? >> >> As of Thursday, you won't be able to do so in the U.S. The >> recently-passed CAN-SPAM act prohibits private action on the part of >> citizens... > >"Private prosecution" in British English means "Private Criminal >Prosecution", not a civil case but one where the defendant can found >guilty and fined or jailed. > >This is allowed in England & Wales and theoretically in Scotland (so a >store can prosecute shoplifters), but AFAIK US states uniformly hold >that only officials can prosecute. That is my understand (the way I read) the new CAN-SPAM act... From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 08:07:42 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Thu Jan 1 09:10:17 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: (media) Ralsky in action References: <3FF162AC.3030408@yahoo.com> Message-ID: <86a8vv867dapor2uud2pqno0dfok2isiqg@4ax.com> On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 16:23:15 -0600, r5 wrote: >> As of Thursday, you won't be able to do so in the U.S. The >> recently-passed CAN-SPAM act prohibits private action on the part of >> citizens... > >Doesn't the law have a way for ISPs to pursue the spammers? Could >I register myself as an ISP and then go after any spammers whose >junk hits my MX server? Under the California law, yes, but it was just superseded by the U.S. Federal law, which does not allow ISPs to prosecute. Of course, they can ask the local AG to do it for them... (which is allowed). Of course, U.S. Citizens can do the same thing. If the AG of any given state (NY is a good example) wants to run for a political office, this activism against any and all types of crimes is a good way to make a name for yourself. Since a moderately large part of the population now has e-mail (certainly not everyone who could vote), going after spammers would be one arena that would get a lot of attention. As bad as the new law is, political agendas could work in our favor... From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 08:10:25 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Thu Jan 1 09:15:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: (media) real spam solution References: <3FF24F58.9060206@yahoo.com> Message-ID: <5ha8vvo5ahjb0fj71v37gel0j2mf2k5gqp@4ax.com> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 20:23:52 -0800, caroljean52 wrote: >... the real spam solution: a formal registry of legitimate >marketers, and a screening system that lets service providers >boot the bad guys, without also getting rid of ... all the other >e-mails that recipients actually want to read. > > > >Optimistic but clueless, I guess... Or being set up by Ralsky... After all, he is "rethinking" his business. Who knows what flim-flam method of e-mailing he's going to start... From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 14:13:50 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Thu Jan 1 09:15:08 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: wrote in news:bt197t$p9v$1@news.spamcop.net: > But what is the gender of the moon and the sun? Hmmm. Female (I think). I was going to say heavenly bodies are, but I think a comet is male. Still, like I was saying, such distinctions are being lost. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Thu Jan 1 15:14:26 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Thu Jan 1 09:15:11 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: a ?crit dans le message de news:bt17o6$mdp$1@news.spamcop.net [...] > It may be difficult to compare gods in different beliefs. have you > noticed that in Latin and related languages the sun is masculine and > the moon is feminine, whereas in (most? all?) germanic languages it > is the opposite, That says something, I don't know what, about the > quality of those deities, don't you think? I believe Dutch, like > bergensk, has lost the grammatical difference between feminine and > masculine nouns. > > helge Yeah, I know. Sol / Luna vs. die Sonne / der Mond etc. But in Slavic languages (well, at least in Russian, the only Slavic language I know anything about) it's even weirder: there Luna (the Moon) is feminine, but Solnce (pron. sontse), the Sun, is... neutral! Actually Dutch consists of several varieties. Some of them have only two genders ("de" gender, masculine-feminine, and "het" gender, neutral). In those, and therefore in official Dutch (ABN, "algemeen beschaafd Nederlands", "generally civilised Dutch") it's admissible to use "hij" (he) for inanimate nouns which require the article "de". But some other varieties of Dutch (including most of Flemish) staunchly maintain the difference between masculine and feminine, even though that difference is only marked in the language by which personal pronouns (hij=he or zij=she) can replace which "de"-word. "Het"-words of course (which take a different article and with which adjactive agree slightly differently), including all diminutives, even of persons like "meisje" (girl) are of course always neutral (and the personal pronoun is "het"=it -- unless you want to use the pronoun from the meaning: I'm not sure which is better: "het meisje -- het" or "het meisje -- zij" -- hm, I guess the latter). (When I was in high school in the early Sixties, some of my Dutch teachers insisted on the distinction and others explicitly taught that any inanimate de-word could be regarded as masculine.) All that to say that in Flemish (southern variety of Dutch) the Moon is masculine (de maan -- hij) but the Sun is feminine (de zon -- zij) though I suppose that in Hollands one might say "de zon -- hij" but I'm not sure, ask Marjolein about that. Happy New Year, Tony. From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Thu Jan 1 15:17:27 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Thu Jan 1 09:20:08 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: "Marjolein Katsma" a ?crit dans le message de news:Xns94639AEF012A2homesitehelp@216.154.195.61 > wrote in news:bt197t$p9v$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > But what is the gender of the moon and the sun? > > Hmmm. Female (I think). I was going to say heavenly bodies are, but I > think a comet is male. > > Still, like I was saying, such distinctions are being lost. > > > -- > Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ > Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. > Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. > The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. > http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html Not in Flemish (see my nearest post): de maan, hij (mannelijk). De zon, zij (vrouwelijk). Happy New Year Tony. From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 08:23:15 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Thu Jan 1 09:25:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 00:07:53 -0800, Ben wrote: >Now that the new U.S. (Federal) laws now apparently apply to spam, I wonder if they will >help. Or will it be more of the same, or worse? Little, if any impact. Will try to adhere by doing the unforgivable of requesting opt out and keeping logs. Will then take results to local rep and ask why the new law isn't having any effect... (Note to self- get more toner cartridges and buy more paper). From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 08:36:30 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Thu Jan 1 09:40:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 01:35:50 -0800, Ben wrote: >>>Now that the new U.S. (Federal) laws now apparently apply to spam, I >>>wonder if they will help. Or will it be more of the same, or worse? > > I don't have a lot of faith. I suppose I was attempting to be sarcastic. legitimate question, though. > >Eleven extra things I would have really liked to have seen - > >1. More restrictive State laws still supercede the federal law. One of the major shortcomings of the new law. >2. Right of private action, individuals can sue the spammer in local court; just like >with FAX in 47 USC 227 at $500.00 with trebled damages for repeat offenders. Even if this was left in, the fact that ISPs cannot take independent action (i.e., AOL, MSN, etc.) under the law is a problem. >3. Specific Tagging requirements in body and header. (Feed those hungry filters) Porn falls under this requirement... I don't know if anything else does or not... >4. No obfuscation what so ever. (More filter food) Some of this in the new law. >5. Three-strikes rule with felony capital level sentencing for repeat violators. (Not >tough enough yet.) Agreed. Nice "wish" on the list... >6. Immunity from liability for personal vigilante actions against the (repeat) spammer if >other avenues fail to stop him. (Just a dream, becides it's an excuse to kick some a$$.) Of all the ideas, this is the least likely to receive support. However, it is still something to go after - an automatic restraining order, so-to-speak. >7. A true do-not-call list with right of action (see #2, #5, and #6) We will have to see on this one. Date for response is nine months from now... >8. Trebled penalties for exploiting open relay, violating TOS/AUP or using any third >party system to send w/o permission Since ISPs cannot seek action within the scope of the new law, that would be the first thing to seek. The second would have to do with damages... While on this subject of stated policies, I would love to see some standardization requirement for privacy statements... what they can and cannot allow. Most of them are jokes, at best. >9. Both the company/person who used/contracted the spammer and the spammer them selves >are together liable. The second major item left out of the new law. This must/needs to be corrected before the law has any real hope of being effective. Take away the reason to provide e-mailing services and a lot of e-mailers will simply go away. >10. They can not claim bankruptcy to get out of a suit and they can be held liable in >their personal capacity, not just their corporate capacity. I haven't studied the law enough, so I don't know if seizure of "corporate" property is part and parcel of bankruptcy proceedings, but I would think that any corporate entity seeking escape from criminal penalties through bankruptcy would lose its assets. Therefore, the equipment would need to be replaced before a spammer could go back into business under a new corporate identity. >11. Must post a bond sufficient to cover any action (all above) There is a major problem with this one, mostly became many private individuals e-mail and to more than one person. If they, in any way, say (and I'm one of these guys) or advertise a website asking their "friends" (acquaintances) to let them know what they think... and they send it out in bulk (only once) to a cc or bcc list... The second problem is that if I (and I have this) have a private list of participants in an e-mail list sending messages posted to my site, a little like belonging to the e-mail list for this newsgroup, then I would have to post a bond. Something of this nature would truly prohibit me from "doing my thing," which I enjoy. Of course, I only have four people involved and they know me personally and the site has a form of "role-playing" feel to it... But there are a lot of similar sites that have nothing to do with anything but a hobby (and don't require any $$) to join or participate... And I'm rambling, so I'll go away now... From agent01413 at my-deja.com Thu Jan 1 07:43:11 2004 From: agent01413 at my-deja.com (Socks the Whitehouse Cat) Date: Thu Jan 1 09:45:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: I can't believe that Mike Gray really had the following to say that was worth commenting on: >> Now that the new U.S. (Federal) laws now apparently apply to spam, I > wonder if they will >> help. Or will it be more of the same, or worse? > > Well, the profile of my morning's spam looks the same. Only one with > any reference to the new law. Seeing as I'm in the UK and it therefore > doesn't presumably apply, I LARTed them anyway and will continue to do > so. I'm right to do so, no? I just reported a spam from excite.com that I got at 0330. Besides the fact that I had carefully unchecked all their 'please spam me' links when I signed up, their unsub link failed to work both times I tried to use it (once on 12/20 and once today). As of this morning, that's illegal. I wasn't first though. A guy on NANAE whose nomme de guerre is Giblet reports an attempted proxy hijacking by some pill pusher at 1 second after midnight his local time. That isn't just illegal - it is a felony with 5 years prison time. As soon as I figure out the appropriate place to file a complaint, mine goes in. -- tired of reading posts from morphing kooks? get a real news reader - http://xnews.newsguy.com From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 10:15:36 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Ellen) Date: Thu Jan 1 10:45:09 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: anti-Spamcop trick.. http:\\ References: Message-ID: "Marjolein Katsma" wrote in message news:Xns94637B51BB6E3homesitehelp@216.154.195.61... > Redstone wrote in news:Xns94631B9FD9607lumbercartel@216.154.195.61: > > > I've been receiving an increasing number of spams using "http:\\" (as > > opposed to the correct "http://") for the spamvertised scamsites. The > > new browsers we use today makes the proper correction automaticly when > > the URL is clicked upon (rather than respond with an error.) > > See my post on 26 December, Message-ID: 216.154.195.61> > ooops must have missed that -- so someone send a complete copy/paste with headers of a spam and I'll get it put on the fix list Ellen From MikeE at ster.invalid Thu Jan 1 07:43:09 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Thu Jan 1 10:50:06 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > Here's a little snippet from a discussion of the capabilities of 8 > different db apps. DOT & the tire industry are using option 4 below, > & ISO 8601 is option 2. > > > Week of the Year > The Big Eight DBMSs have five different ways to calculate a week > number: Besides those, we have UNIX week numbers, "The week number of the current year as a decimal number, range 00 to 53, starting with the first Sunday as the first day of week 01." Microsoft weeks "Microsoft defines the first week in the year as the week that contains 1 January". also UK Inland Revenue Tax Weeks, US Internal Revenue Service Weeks, "The US IRS evidently clusters weeks into monthly 4/5-week Report Cycles, numbering the weeks as YYYYWW from Jan 1 or near that; details are unknown". Here's a big chart http://www.pjh2.de/datetime/weeknumber/wnc.php?l=en showing all [rather a really lot] of the countries, which is the first day of the week, how they figger the first week of the year, and how that is handled in 4 different versions of Windows for that country. One thing that is 'nice' about that chart is that it puts the ISO 8601 'acceptance' into perspective. -- Mike Easter From RobertTaylor at SpamCop.net Thu Jan 1 10:47:22 2004 From: RobertTaylor at SpamCop.net (Robert Taylor) Date: Thu Jan 1 10:50:10 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: In news:Xns946398EEA183Dhomesitehelp@216.154.195.61, Marjolein Katsma sent: > wrote in news:bt18ij$o70$1@news.spamcop.net: > >> No, the other way round: 2000 was a leap year, but 1900, 1800 were not.. >> helge > > Maybe I should go back to bed. Yes, you're right. > > (damn, I actually programmed leap year routines into business software, I > should know better!) I think we may safely forego publishing your error on page-1 of the Sunday New York Times. :) Regards, Robert -- eMail: RobertTaylor@SpamCop.net Web-Address: http://users.rcn.com/robertt.nh.ultranet/Web-SitePg1.htm NOTARY SOJAC (Dizzy Gillespie, Prop.) From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 16:03:34 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Thu Jan 1 11:05:23 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: anti-Spamcop trick.. http:\\ References: Message-ID: Ellen wrote in news:bt1f33$5qt$1@news.spamcop.net: > ooops must have missed that -- so someone send a complete copy/paste > with headers of a spam and I'll get it put on the fix list No problem Ellen, I noted it was kind of busy at that time; I'd just let it rest to see if if someone came back to it, otherwise "refresh". Sample posted in spamcop.spam with same subject as _this_ thread. BTW, it's not necessarily always a "trick", it can be simple ignorance/DOS bias as well, I think. Searching my Eudora reported spam folder, I also got three 'hits' on http:\\ in 2001 - though not as heavily obfuscated as the recent example. Lokkich nijjier! -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa Thu Jan 1 11:05:41 2004 From: a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa (John Malmberg) Date: Thu Jan 1 11:10:06 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: How to get your post read: top posting/bottom posting/inline posting In-Reply-To: References: <01c3cbd2$25968ce0$LocalHost@default> <01c3cd68$b05291c0$LocalHost@default> <5O$4aNe2YfEW@eisner.encompasserve.org> Message-ID: Marjolein Katsma wrote: > John Malmberg wrote in news:bsvlfk$9c6$1@news.spamcop.net: > >>Some word processors will on request try to rephrase a sentence for >>better clarity, and some of their results have been posted on various >>internet forums for amusement. > > Ah, really!? I've never heard of word processors that do that (but I only > _very_ rarely use one anyway). Any references to forums where I might read > such results? It is a feature of recent Microsoft Word. I forget the exact phrases, and the invocation of the feature. A http://www.google.com may help find some examples. -John wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only From MikeE at ster.invalid Thu Jan 1 08:11:53 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Thu Jan 1 11:20:05 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: masfjorden@spamcop.net wrote: > Did you read http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=17442 > and interview with Gore Vidal about paper trail voting and much else? Yow! Gore the Vidal goring vitally. Give that man an interview about his book on the constitutional fathers and he springs to the pulpit in all his anti- Bush/Ashcroft glory. I'm sending that one to a couple of my friends, a retired much decorated Viet Nam USAF fighter jock Bushie and a young writer and househusband of a lady gynecologist anti-Bushie. Thanks for the link. -- Mike Easter From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 16:20:53 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Thu Jan 1 11:25:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: Antoine J. Mechelynck wrote in news:bt1a5o$s34$1@news.spamcop.net: > Not in Flemish (see my nearest post): de maan, hij (mannelijk). De > zon, zij (vrouwelijk). Heck, now I don't even know any more. Maybe my classical education is getting in the way - in this context I think "moon" = "Luna", which is, of course, the name of a goddess. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 16:24:16 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Thu Jan 1 11:25:07 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: Robert Taylor wrote in news:bt1fea$6e4$1@news.spamcop.net: > I think we may safely forego publishing your error on page-1 of the > Sunday New York Times. :) That's a relief! Thank you, thank you! ...en lokkich nijjier! -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 16:29:12 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Thu Jan 1 11:30:08 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote in news:bt1fcj$6c7$1@news.spamcop.net: > Here's a big chart http://www.pjh2.de/datetime/weeknumber/wnc.php?l=en > showing all [rather a really lot] of the countries, which is the first > day of the week, how they figger the first week of the year, and how > that is handled in 4 different versions of Windows for that country. Splendid! Thanks. Goes straight into my collection of standards bookmarks. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From masfjorden at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 17:56:00 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (masfjorden@spamcop.net) Date: Thu Jan 1 12:00:36 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Yow! Gore the Vidal goring vitally. Give that man an interview about > his book on the constitutional fathers and he springs to the pulpit in > all his anti- Bush/Ashcroft glory. > > I'm sending that one to a couple of my friends, a retired much decorated > Viet Nam USAF fighter jock Bushie and a young writer and househusband of > a lady gynecologist anti-Bushie. > > Thanks for the link. Tell me then: how du you say that surname? Does it rhyme with bridle? helge From MikeE at ster.invalid Thu Jan 1 09:03:56 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Thu Jan 1 12:10:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: masfjorden@spamcop.net wrote: > Tell me then: how du you say that surname? Does it rhyme with bridle? Not for me. I say vee-doll' or, I think that is written 'vee-DAHL' -- Mike Easter From MikeE at ster.invalid Thu Jan 1 09:08:38 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Thu Jan 1 12:15:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > I say vee-doll' or, I think that is written 'vee-DAHL' Like Vidal Blanc, vee-DAHL BlahN, the crisp, dry, white wine. Watch out for the piney ones. -- Mike Easter From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Thu Jan 1 18:16:22 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Thu Jan 1 12:20:10 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: a ?crit dans le message de news:bt0u50$142$1@news.spamcop.net [...] > I receive the headlines of the New York Times. Here is what they do: > As > of the first day of this week (Monday, I mean), they set their clock > to 2004: > Received: from annuncio3.prvt.nytimes.com (10.5.101.124) by > content119b.lga2.nytimes.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id > <78.00003748@content119b.lga2.nytimes.com>; Mon, 29 Dec 2003 3:07:28 > -0500 From: "NYTimes.com" > Reply-To: nytdirect@nytimes.com > Date: Mon, 29 Dec *2004* 03:07:27 -0500 > To: x > Subject: Today's Headlines: Monday, December 29, 2003 > The date in future brings the SpamAssassin score up to 3.4. > > Happy New Year Godt Nytt ?r to everyone (except the spammers lurking > here). > > helge Uh? Do you mean tomorrow's (Friday's) NY Times will be dated January.2, 2003 ? Or December 33, 2003 ? Or that yesterday's (Wednesday's) paper was dated December 31, 2004 ? (I assume there is no paper on New Year's day.) I can't believe it. Happy New Year, Gelikkig Nieuwjaar, Bonne ann?e, Gutes Neuen Jahr, Godt Nytt Aar (sorry, I don't have an A-ball on this keyboard), S Novym Godom, Feliz A?o Nuevo, Buon Anno, Felichan Novan Jaron :-) Tony, Toone, Antoine, Anton, Ton(?), Tonya, Ant?n, Tonio, Antono From masfjorden at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 18:19:21 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (masfjorden@spamcop.net) Date: Thu Jan 1 12:20:15 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > Mike Easter wrote: > >>I say vee-doll' or, I think that is written 'vee-DAHL' > > > Like Vidal Blanc, vee-DAHL BlahN, the crisp, dry, white wine. Watch out > for the piney ones. > So it is the way I have pronunced it myself, sort of frenchlike. Actually Vidal is a placename here in Norway (perhaps meaning the wide valley), only we would pronounce it VEE-dahl. Thanks helge From someone at microsoft.com Thu Jan 1 12:31:04 2004 From: someone at microsoft.com (hello) Date: Thu Jan 1 12:35:10 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: anti-Spamcop trick - Part II: � References: Message-ID: "Redstone" wrote in message news:Xns94631B9FD9607lumbercartel@216.154.195.61... > Appears to be a new anti-Spamcop trick. > > I've been receiving an increasing number of spams using "http:\\" (as > opposed to the correct "http://") for the spamvertised scamsites. The > new browsers we use today makes the proper correction automaticly when > the URL is clicked upon (rather than respond with an error.) > > The problem is that Spamcop does not see this trick and fails to see > the URL. I usually correct this manually before parsing, but I'm > figuring that there is alot more people who don't have the time > searching this trick out. So it appears a good number of scamsites > isn't being reported when it should be. > > Maybe a modification in the parsing algorithm is in order? I get this too, but Spamcop seems to handle it fine. Here is an example of latest: http:\\CAm.asksfor222.com�qdebttTVW034c2wj.tB.com I repeatedly get spam from this source (Chinanet), the particular URL is different each time, but the slashes are always reversed. In my case, Spamcop reverses the slashes correctly. However, Spmacop repeatedly misses this bit in the middle: � which should resolve to "/?" Spamcop misses it every time, and I have to manually parse it to get Spamcop to find the correct host. The spammer uses endless variations on this encoding: � � � � � � With Internet Explorer, each of these resolves to "/?", but Spamcop never gets it right, and returns "host not found" From s_brook.nothere at not.here.for.spam.all.stream.net.invalid Thu Jan 1 12:37:05 2004 From: s_brook.nothere at not.here.for.spam.all.stream.net.invalid (S B) Date: Thu Jan 1 12:35:16 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: <3FF45AC1.99BCABA4@not.here.for.spam.all.stream.net.invalid> Ben wrote: > > Now that the new U.S. (Federal) laws now apparently apply to spam, I wonder if they will > help. Or will it be more of the same, or worse? Hasn't changed so far ... and even the spams sent today don't conform to can-spam even if they're obviously from the US. From masfjorden at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 18:35:34 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (masfjorden@spamcop.net) Date: Thu Jan 1 12:40:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Antoine J. Mechelynck wrote: > a ?crit dans le message de > news:bt0u50$142$1@news.spamcop.net > [...] > >>I receive the headlines of the New York Times. Here is what they do: >>As >>of the first day of this week (Monday, I mean), they set their clock >>to 2004: >>Received: from annuncio3.prvt.nytimes.com (10.5.101.124) by >>content119b.lga2.nytimes.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1b) with SMTP id >><78.00003748@content119b.lga2.nytimes.com>; Mon, 29 Dec 2003 3:07:28 >>-0500 From: "NYTimes.com" >>Reply-To: nytdirect@nytimes.com >>Date: Mon, 29 Dec *2004* 03:07:27 -0500 >>To: x >>Subject: Today's Headlines: Monday, December 29, 2003 >>The date in future brings the SpamAssassin score up to 3.4. >> >>Happy New Year Godt Nytt ?r to everyone (except the spammers lurking >>here). >> >>helge > > > Uh? > > Do you mean tomorrow's (Friday's) NY Times will be dated January.2, 2003 ? Or > December 33, 2003 ? Or that yesterday's (Wednesday's) paper was dated December > 31, 2004 ? (I assume there is no paper on New Year's day.) > > I can't believe it. > > Happy New Year, Gelikkig Nieuwjaar, Bonne ann?e, Gutes Neuen Jahr, Godt Nytt Aar > (sorry, I don't have an A-ball on this keyboard), S Novym Godom, Feliz A?o > Nuevo, Buon Anno, Felichan Novan Jaron > > :-) > > Tony, Toone, Antoine, Anton, Ton(?), Tonya, Ant?n, Tonio, Antono Of course there are newspapers in the big apple on New Year's day. Not in Norway, not in Belgium, but over there in the western hemisphere What I mean is that the programme that emails the NYT headlines changed its timesetting from 2003 to 2004 three days prematurely. I have now got five emails sitting in the NYT folder, and they are dated 28.12.03, 29.12.04, 30.12.04, 31.12.04, and today's, which is only 09.07; mozilla doesn't give the date for today's msgs, sits between 29.12.03 and 29.12.04. Today's spamassasinscore is therefore only one (LINES OF YELLING, as you would expect from the NYT) helge From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Thu Jan 1 18:36:39 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Thu Jan 1 12:40:08 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: a ?crit dans le message de news:bt13ae$9qb$1@news.spamcop.net > Mike Easter wrote: > > > The trivia continues to pop up. The year 2012 has a Wed Feb 29. So > > what? Well somehow that spools into the fact that if you 'line up' > > weeks of Mon-Sun, the ISO week, then you have 54 'lines' or partial > > lines. Or, I prefer to think of it as that year having some 'days' > > in 3 different ISO years, 2011, 2012, and 2013. In case you're > > wondering what the calendar looks like, Jan 1 is Sun, so that Sun > > belongs to 2011, and Dec 31 is Mon, so that Mon belongs to 2013, > > and 52 weeks for 2012. > > > > I suppose we could wonder how often that happens, and I guess the > > key would be to use one of those gizmos that tells what years have > > Wed Feb > > 29. > It happened in 1984, and I guess it happens every 28th year, disturbed > only by those leap years that are unleaped, like 1900, 2100. Exactly. For it to happen, you need a year with 52 full weeks, plus a Jan 1st belonging to the last week of the previous year and a Dec. 31 belonging to the first week of the next year. Therefore it must be a leap year starting on the last day of the week (Sunday, if you start weeks on a Monday). So it would happen once every 28 years if every 4th year was leap (as in the Julian calendar IIRC). The average is slightly less than 1/28 due to the fact that years ending in 00 arent't leap unless they are multiple of 400, which removes three leap years per 400 years. (I'm leaving out for the moment the question of years multiple of 4000, since there may be a calendar reform before then.) [...] Happy New Year Tony From Merlyn at Spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 12:37:51 2004 From: Merlyn at Spamcop.net (Merlyn) Date: Thu Jan 1 12:40:16 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Cleaning a list References: <3FF393AC.9000306@spamcop.net> <3FF39732.6020508@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Marjolein Katsma" wrote in message news:Xns9463801AA41FBhomesitehelp@216.154.195.61... > Merlyn wrote in news:bt05op$utg$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > I am going to quit smoking in an hour :0( > > And then reporting in your sig how many days, hours and seconds since you > stopped smoking? (Please don't.) > > But good for you! > > Folle lok en seine! > > I wouldn't do that :-) Thanks -- Regards, Merlyn A Spamcop advocate All replies will be made specifically to the newsgroup From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 17:38:32 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Thu Jan 1 12:40:18 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: wrote in news:bt1krt$em5$1@news.spamcop.net: >> Like Vidal Blanc, vee-DAHL BlahN, the crisp, dry, white wine. Watch >> out for the piney ones. >> > So it is the way I have pronunced it myself, sort of frenchlike. Yeah, me too. Trouble is, I have _absolutely_ no idea why I pronounce it like that... -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 17:39:23 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Thu Jan 1 12:40:25 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: Antoine J. Mechelynck wrote in news:bt1kl5$edi$1@news.spamcop.net: > Tony, Toone, Antoine, Anton, Ton(?), Tonya, Antn, Tonio, Antono Toon -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From MikeE at ster.invalid Thu Jan 1 09:38:56 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Thu Jan 1 12:45:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: masfjorden@spamcop.net wrote: > What I mean is that the programme that emails the NYT headlines > changed its timesetting from 2003 to 2004 three days prematurely. > I have now got five emails sitting in the NYT folder, and they are > dated > 28.12.03, 29.12.04, 30.12.04, 31.12.04, and today's, which is only > 09.07; mozilla doesn't give the date for today's msgs, sits between > 29.12.03 and 29.12.04. Today's spamassasinscore is therefore only one > (LINES OF YELLING, as you would expect from the NYT) OE allows me to sort on Sent /or/ Received defined for each folder. Use the Received. -- Mike Easter From masfjorden at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 18:43:02 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (masfjorden@spamcop.net) Date: Thu Jan 1 12:45:08 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Antoine J. Mechelynck wrote: > a ?crit dans le message de > news:bt13ae$9qb$1@news.spamcop.net > >>Mike Easter wrote: >> >> >>>The trivia continues to pop up. The year 2012 has a Wed Feb 29. So >>>what? Well somehow that spools into the fact that if you 'line up' >>>weeks of Mon-Sun, the ISO week, then you have 54 'lines' or partial >>>lines. Or, I prefer to think of it as that year having some 'days' >>>in 3 different ISO years, 2011, 2012, and 2013. In case you're >>>wondering what the calendar looks like, Jan 1 is Sun, so that Sun >>>belongs to 2011, and Dec 31 is Mon, so that Mon belongs to 2013, >>>and 52 weeks for 2012. >>> >>>I suppose we could wonder how often that happens, and I guess the >>>key would be to use one of those gizmos that tells what years have >>>Wed Feb >>>29. >> >>It happened in 1984, and I guess it happens every 28th year, disturbed >>only by those leap years that are unleaped, like 1900, 2100. > > > Exactly. For it to happen, you need a year with 52 full weeks, plus a Jan 1st > belonging to the last week of the previous year and a Dec. 31 belonging to the > first week of the next year. Therefore it must be a leap year starting on the > last day of the week (Sunday, if you start weeks on a Monday). So it would > happen once every 28 years if every 4th year was leap (as in the Julian calendar > IIRC). The average is slightly less than 1/28 due to the fact that years ending > in 00 arent't leap unless they are multiple of 400, which removes three leap > years per 400 years. (I'm leaving out for the moment the question of years > multiple of 4000, since there may be a calendar reform before then.) > [...] > > Happy New Year > Tony > There is a superstition here (and elswhere I guess) about friday the thirteenth. I ask the superstious ones how often they think the thirteenth is a friday. There is at least one each year, of course, and at most three, but what is the exact frequency? helge From MikeE at ster.invalid Thu Jan 1 09:43:04 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Thu Jan 1 12:50:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: masfjorden@spamcop.net wrote: > There is a superstition here (and elswhere I guess) about friday the > thirteenth. I ask the superstious ones how often they think the > thirteenth is a friday. There is at least one each year, of course, > and at most three, but what is the exact frequency? I saw a comprehensive article once upon a time about why the 'expected' frequency was completely outawhack compared to 'reality'. I'll have to find that dude. -- Mike Easter From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Thu Jan 1 18:48:38 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Thu Jan 1 12:50:09 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: a ?crit dans le message de news:bt1lqc$g3v$1@news.spamcop.net [...] > What I mean is that the programme that emails the NYT headlines > changed > its timesetting from 2003 to 2004 three days prematurely. > I have now got five emails sitting in the NYT folder, and they are > dated > 28.12.03, 29.12.04, 30.12.04, 31.12.04, and today's, which is only > 09.07; mozilla doesn't give the date for today's msgs, sits between > 29.12.03 and 29.12.04. Today's spamassasinscore is therefore only one > (LINES OF YELLING, as you would expect from the NYT) > helge I see. So it's not the headings of the "paper" paper which have been wrong, it's only that the headings of their e-mails have been wrong for 3 days. Can't their program reset the year at 00:00 on January 1 like everyone else? Well, apparently not. Happy New Year Tony. From someone at microsoft.com Thu Jan 1 12:49:18 2004 From: someone at microsoft.com (hello) Date: Thu Jan 1 12:50:12 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: "Ben" wrote in message news:bt0kgp$dkc$1@news.spamcop.net... > Now that the new U.S. (Federal) laws now apparently apply to spam, I wonder if they will > help. Or will it be more of the same, or worse? It will be interesting to see. One scenario I can easily envision is that the federal authorities are looking at a few major US spammers and waiting for a chance to use the new law to pounce if the spammers screw up. I am sure this is why Ralsky is announcing he is not spamming these days ....... I expect to see a series of major spam busts sometime this year. On the other hand, I am sure it will not reduce the amount of spam overall in the longer term. Spammers will move all their operations overseas, and increasingly use proxies, trojans, etc. to disguise their identities. I think this will result in renewed pressure for tougher legislation. So even if the current law turns out to be ineffective, I think it is still a step forward, and will probably be the first in a series of evolving laws that will be tougher. In fact, I think it might even turn out to be a good thing for the anti-spam camp that a weak law was passed in the beginning, because the backlash that it will create once it is clear that the initial law was inadequate may persuade legislators to consider much tougher laws than they would have in the first place. From MikeE at ster.invalid Thu Jan 1 10:04:07 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Thu Jan 1 13:10:35 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > I saw a comprehensive article once upon a time about why the > 'expected' frequency was completely outawhack compared to 'reality'. > I'll have to find that dude. Well, 'completely outawhack' isn't exactly true, but it does turn out that there are 'slightly' more Fridays the 13th than any other day of the week. This article http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~rbell/Friday13.html emphasizes how 'normal' everything should be: - Friday the Thirteenth: when it happens This article http://www.furrfu.com/magpies/friday_13.html shows how it isn't exactly normal. Some snippages therefrom: Claim: The 13th of the month is more likely to fall on a Friday than on any other day of the week. Truth: That's true or false, depending on what you mean. But there are times when the normal cycling of years is disrupted When a timeframe crosses one of these, the frequency of the calendar repetitions gets skewed, and the distribution is no longer even. This is because replacing that single leap year with a non leap year not only replaces that year. It also disrupts the cycle of years such that an entire section of the sequence is omitted. Crunching the numbers for a 400 year segment yields this distribution: Sunday 687 Monday 685 Tuesday 685 Wednesday 687 Thursday 684 Min Friday 688 Max Saturday 684 Min The expected number for each day with an even distribution would be 400 years * 12 months / 7 calendar days = 685.714 -- Mike Easter From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Thu Jan 1 19:13:56 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Thu Jan 1 13:15:15 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: "Marjolein Katsma" a ?crit dans le message de news:Xns9463BDC8A3173homesitehelp@216.154.195.61 > Antoine J. Mechelynck wrote in news:bt1kl5$edi$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > Tony, Toone, Antoine, Anton, Ton(?), Tonya, Ant?n, Tonio, Antono > > Toon > > > -- > Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ > Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. > Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. > The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. > http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html Dank je, Marjolein, maar Toone (Brussels dialect) blijft (als met de beroemde poppentheater -- de stichter had Antoine als voornaam, al zijn nagangers niet, maar ze hielden "Toone" als een soort handelsmerk, het is nu Toone VII of Toone VIII, ik ben er niet zeker van). Het vraagteken was over hoe het in Noors zou zijn. Als je van "Toone" niet houdt, mag je me "Toontje" noemen (zo was min groot-grootvader in zijn familie bekend). Gelikkig nieuwjaar Toone. From michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com Thu Jan 1 18:31:38 2004 From: michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com (Michael Lefevre) Date: Thu Jan 1 13:35:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: Tom wrote: > On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 01:35:50 -0800, Ben > wrote: > >>>>Now that the new U.S. (Federal) laws now apparently apply to spam, I [snip] >>2. Right of private action, individuals can sue the spammer in local court; just like >>with FAX in 47 USC 227 at $500.00 with trebled damages for repeat offenders. > > Even if this was left in, the fact that ISPs cannot take independent > action (i.e., AOL, MSN, etc.) under the law is a problem. As I understand it, ISPs can take action, although individuals cannot. ISPs can take action over misleading from/received headers, dictionary attacks, harvesting, automatically signing up for accounts, abuse of relays/proxies or failure to label porn spam, and also for "patterns or practices" that would violate the provisions about not emailing people who have opted-out, or not giving them an option to opt-out. [snip] >>3. Specific Tagging requirements in body and header. (Feed those hungry filters) > > Porn falls under this requirement... I don't know if anything else > does or not... Sexually oriented UCE has to be labelled in the header, by some prescribed means that the FTC will specify within 120 days of today (i.e. by some means that a machine can easily filter when given the header) Other UCE has to identify itself as such in some way, but there's no prescribed means of doing that. The sender can choose to put a tag in the subject or header, or some words in the body (i.e. it has to be possible for a human reading the whole message to identify it as UCE, but it doesn't have to be machine-readable) >>4. No obfuscation what so ever. (More filter food) > > Some of this in the new law. Yes, it's maybe not as tough as it could be, but it does make it unlawful to obfuscate anything about who the sender is, or where the message was transmitted from (no relays, proxies, or faked Received lines), which outlaws the techniques used for the majority of current spam. [snip] >>7. A true do-not-call list with right of action (see #2, #5, and #6) > > We will have to see on this one. Date for response is nine months from > now... I can't see this going anywhere. They've clearly listened to enough already to know that it would either be technically totally unworkable, or it would result in very wide use which wouldn't be satisfactory for the DMA-member type marketers. [snip] >>9. Both the company/person who used/contracted the spammer and the spammer them selves >>are together liable. > > The second major item left out of the new law. This must/needs to be > corrected before the law has any real hope of being effective. Take > away the reason to provide e-mailing services and a lot of e-mailers > will simply go away. [snip] There is a provision for this in the law. I don't know how it will work out, but "procuring" the origination or transmission of a message in the law counts as "initiating" a message, just the same as if you actually originate or transmit the message yourself. I'm not sure if that would stick if someone hires someone to do marketing but doesn't know the details of what the marketer is doing. -- Michael From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 18:33:19 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Thu Jan 1 13:35:13 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: Toone wrote in news:bt1o13$nql$1@news.spamcop.net: > Dank je, Marjolein, maar Toone (Brussels dialect) blijft (als met de > beroemde poppentheater -- de stichter had Antoine als voornaam, al > zijn nagangers niet, maar ze hielden "Toone" als een soort > handelsmerk, het is nu Toone VII of Toone VIII, ik ben er niet zeker > van). Het vraagteken was over hoe het in Noors zou zijn. Als je van > "Toone" niet houdt, mag je me "Toontje" noemen (zo was min > groot-grootvader in zijn familie bekend). Beste Toon(tje), Ik wilde alleen nog een extra alternatief toevoegen. Teun kan ook nog. ;-) Toone klinkt ook goed... -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From MikeE at ster.invalid Thu Jan 1 10:36:46 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Thu Jan 1 13:45:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: Antoine J. Mechelynck wrote: > Dank je, Marjolein, maar Toone (Brussels dialect) blijft (als met de > beroemde poppentheater -- de stichter had Antoine als voornaam, al > zijn nagangers niet, What is a 'naganger'? -- Mike Easter From masfjorden at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 19:54:47 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (masfjorden@spamcop.net) Date: Thu Jan 1 14:00:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > Mike Easter wrote: > >>I saw a comprehensive article once upon a time about why the >>'expected' frequency was completely outawhack compared to 'reality'. >>I'll have to find that dude. > > > Well, 'completely outawhack' isn't exactly true, but it does turn out > that there are 'slightly' more Fridays the 13th than any other day of > the week. > > This article http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~rbell/Friday13.html > emphasizes how 'normal' everything should be: - Friday the Thirteenth: > when it happens That looks like the analysis I made myself some years ago > This article http://www.furrfu.com/magpies/friday_13.html shows how it > isn't exactly normal. Some snippages therefrom: > > Claim: > The 13th of the month is more likely to fall on a Friday than on any > other day of the week. > Truth: > That's true or false, depending on what you mean. > > But there are times when the normal cycling of years is disrupted > > When a timeframe crosses one of these, the frequency of the calendar > repetitions gets skewed, and the distribution is no longer even. This is > because replacing that single leap year with a non leap year not only > replaces that year. It also disrupts the cycle of years such that an > entire section of the sequence is omitted. > > Crunching the numbers for a 400 year segment yields this distribution: > > Sunday 687 > Monday 685 > Tuesday 685 > Wednesday 687 > Thursday 684 Min > Friday 688 Max > Saturday 684 Min (snip) I admit this solution is better than the one I thought of, but the same article said: "But for the rest of us, it is all evenly spread out." helge From glnews030922 at highspot.net Thu Jan 1 13:20:25 2004 From: glnews030922 at highspot.net (Graeme Leith) Date: Thu Jan 1 14:20:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Marjolein Katsma wrote: > Ik wilde alleen nog een extra alternatief toevoegen. Teun kan ook nog. ;-) > Toone klinkt ook goed... Asieoniezi, asieoniezi asieoniezi asieoniezi Asieoniezi? Asieoniezi asieoniezi asieoniezi asieoniezi asieoniezi asieoniezi asieoniezi asieoniezi Asieoniezi. ;-) -- 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 antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Thu Jan 1 20:18:36 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Thu Jan 1 14:20:11 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" a ?crit dans le message de news:bt1nku$ltk$1@news.spamcop.net > Mike Easter wrote: > > I saw a comprehensive article once upon a time about why the > > 'expected' frequency was completely outawhack compared to 'reality'. > > I'll have to find that dude. > > Well, 'completely outawhack' isn't exactly true, but it does turn out > that there are 'slightly' more Fridays the 13th than any other day of > the week. Psychologically, maybe, because people pay attention to them. But mathematically, no way. None of the cycles are multiples of 7, and 7 is a prime number, so in the long run, there are as many Fridays the 13th as there are Mondays the 13th, or Tuesdays, etc. > > This article http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~rbell/Friday13.html > emphasizes how 'normal' everything should be: - Friday the Thirteenth: > when it happens > > This article http://www.furrfu.com/magpies/friday_13.html shows how it > isn't exactly normal. Some snippages therefrom: > > Claim: > The 13th of the month is more likely to fall on a Friday than on any > other day of the week. > Truth: > That's true or false, depending on what you mean. > > But there are times when the normal cycling of years is disrupted > > When a timeframe crosses one of these, the frequency of the calendar > repetitions gets skewed, and the distribution is no longer even. This > is because replacing that single leap year with a non leap year not > only replaces that year. It also disrupts the cycle of years such > that an entire section of the sequence is omitted. > > Crunching the numbers for a 400 year segment yields this distribution: 400 years isn't enough. You need 2800 years. > > Sunday 687 > Monday 685 > Tuesday 685 > Wednesday 687 > Thursday 684 Min > Friday 688 Max > Saturday 684 Min > > The expected number for each day with an even distribution would be > > 400 years * 12 months / 7 calendar days > = 685.714 > > > -- > Mike Easter It's a question of the "dominical letter". (Where the hell did I put that Que sais-je? titled "Le calendrier"?) I don't remember by heart which letter corresponds to which calendar but I remember that there are 7 letters, A B C D E F G, and that the dominical letter goes backward 1 unit in the series on the 1st of January every year, and on the 1st of March (or the 25th of February if you count in Latin) on leap years. So: On a non-leap year, if Jan.1 is a Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Jan.13 is a Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Feb 13 ia a Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Mar 13 is a Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Apr 13 is a Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu May 13 is a Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Jun 13 is a Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue Jul 13 is a Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Aug 13 is a Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Sep 13 is a Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Oct 13 is a Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Fri Sat Nov 13 is a Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Dec 13 ia a Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed and the next year, Jan 13 is a Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat etc. On leap years, just use the next column to the right (round-robin) starting in March. (or move the columns for Mar-Dec one column to the left, round-robin, which comes to the same thing). Also, after a leap year, the next year uses the 2nd next column instead of the next. The result is that one column is skipped for each month every leap year. But that means one in 4, minus 1 in 100, plus 1 in 400, and none of those are multiples of 7, which is prime. The result is that in 7 cycles of 400 years, viz. 2800 years in all, all columns have been skipped an equal number of times. Since each weekday appears exactly once in each line, in that same period, there have been exactly 4800 Fridays the 13th -- also Mondays, Tuesdays, etc. Q.E.D. Happy New Year, Tony. From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Thu Jan 1 20:33:30 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Thu Jan 1 14:35:05 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: "Graeme Leith" a ?crit dans le message de news:bt1rms$up3$1@news.spamcop.net > Marjolein Katsma wrote: > > > Ik wilde alleen nog een extra alternatief toevoegen. Teun kan ook > > nog. ;-) Toone klinkt ook goed... > > Asieoniezi, asieoniezi asieoniezi asieoniezi Asieoniezi? > > Asieoniezi asieoniezi asieoniezi asieoniezi asieoniezi asieoniezi > asieoniezi asieoniezi Asieoniezi. > > ;-) > > -- > 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. Eh, oh, keep cool. I can post a translation of my post and of Marjolein's answer if you really want to. But can't you look at it as at a riddle? I'm sure Helge already has a fairly good idea (if not necessarily an exact understanding) of what we meant. The key is this: it is not French, I live in Brussels and Marjolein in Amsterdam. Maybe the best way to crack it would be to treat it as a kind of distorted English. Or German. Oh, I forgot. You don't know German, do you? Happy New Year, Tony. From masfjorden at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 20:35:33 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (masfjorden@spamcop.net) Date: Thu Jan 1 14:40:09 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Antoine J. Mechelynck wrote: > "Mike Easter" a ?crit dans le message de > news:bt1nku$ltk$1@news.spamcop.net > >>Mike Easter wrote: >> >>>I saw a comprehensive article once upon a time about why the >>>'expected' frequency was completely outawhack compared to 'reality'. >>>I'll have to find that dude. >> >>Well, 'completely outawhack' isn't exactly true, but it does turn out >>that there are 'slightly' more Fridays the 13th than any other day of >>the week. > > > Psychologically, maybe, because people pay attention to them. But > mathematically, no way. None of the cycles are multiples of 7, and 7 is a prime > number, so in the long run, there are as many Fridays the 13th as there are > Mondays the 13th, or Tuesdays, etc. > > >>This article http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~rbell/Friday13.html >>emphasizes how 'normal' everything should be: - Friday the Thirteenth: >>when it happens >> >>This article http://www.furrfu.com/magpies/friday_13.html shows how it >>isn't exactly normal. Some snippages therefrom: >> >>Claim: >>The 13th of the month is more likely to fall on a Friday than on any >>other day of the week. >>Truth: >>That's true or false, depending on what you mean. >> >>But there are times when the normal cycling of years is disrupted >> >>When a timeframe crosses one of these, the frequency of the calendar >>repetitions gets skewed, and the distribution is no longer even. This >>is because replacing that single leap year with a non leap year not >>only replaces that year. It also disrupts the cycle of years such >>that an entire section of the sequence is omitted. >> >>Crunching the numbers for a 400 year segment yields this distribution: > > > 400 years isn't enough. You need 2800 years. > > >>Sunday 687 >>Monday 685 >>Tuesday 685 >>Wednesday 687 >>Thursday 684 Min >>Friday 688 Max >>Saturday 684 Min >> >>The expected number for each day with an even distribution would be >> >> 400 years * 12 months / 7 calendar days >> = 685.714 >> >> >>-- >>Mike Easter > > > It's a question of the "dominical letter". (Where the hell did I put that Que > sais-je? titled "Le calendrier"?) I don't remember by heart which letter > corresponds to which calendar but I remember that there are 7 letters, A B C D E > F G, and that the dominical letter goes backward 1 unit in the series on the 1st > of January every year, and on the 1st of March (or the 25th of February if you > count in Latin) on leap years. So: > > On a non-leap year, if Jan.1 is a > Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun > > Jan.13 is a Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri > Feb 13 ia a Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon > Mar 13 is a Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon > Apr 13 is a Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu > May 13 is a Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat > Jun 13 is a Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue > Jul 13 is a Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu > Aug 13 is a Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun > Sep 13 is a Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed > Oct 13 is a Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Fri Sat > Nov 13 is a Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon > Dec 13 ia a Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed > > and the next year, > > Jan 13 is a Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat > etc. > > On leap years, just use the next column to the right (round-robin) starting in > March. (or move the columns for Mar-Dec one column to the left, round-robin, > which comes to the same thing). Also, after a leap year, the next year uses the > 2nd next column instead of the next. > > The result is that one column is skipped for each month every leap year. But > that means one in 4, minus 1 in 100, plus 1 in 400, and none of those are > multiples of 7, which is prime. The result is that in 7 cycles of 400 years, > viz. 2800 years in all, all columns have been skipped an equal number of times. > Since each weekday appears exactly once in each line, in that same period, there > have been exactly 4800 Fridays the 13th -- also Mondays, Tuesdays, etc. > > Q.E.D. > > Happy New Year, > Tony. > If, as you mentioned, there is a calendar reform on or before AD 3000, that may put a spanner in your analysis, if applied to the first 2800 years of Gregorian calendar, Sorry, Tony, I still think Mike's solution is more satisfactory, somehow. helge From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Thu Jan 1 20:44:20 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Thu Jan 1 14:45:10 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" a ?crit dans le message de news:bt1pi6$se7$1@news.spamcop.net > Antoine J. Mechelynck wrote: > > Dank je, Marjolein, maar Toone (Brussels dialect) blijft (als met de > > beroemde poppentheater -- de stichter had Antoine als voornaam, al > > zijn nagangers niet, > > What is a 'naganger'? > > > -- > Mike Easter after-goer. (The opposite of "voorganger", "foregoer"). Dutch "na" is cognate to German "nach" and means "after". Or "successor" if you want a less literal, but maybe more usual, translation. Happy New Year Tony. PS. My newsreader is awfully sluggish today. Opening or previewing a different message takes forever. (Well, maybe a minute or so.) And it's not SC responding slowly, since my CPU usage goes to (or quite near) 100% each time. Happy New Year Tony. From masfjorden at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 20:51:44 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (masfjorden@spamcop.net) Date: Thu Jan 1 14:55:13 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Antoine J. Mechelynck wrote: > "Graeme Leith" a ?crit dans le message de > news:bt1rms$up3$1@news.spamcop.net > >>Marjolein Katsma wrote: >> >> >>>Ik wilde alleen nog een extra alternatief toevoegen. Teun kan ook >>>nog. ;-) Toone klinkt ook goed... >> >>Asieoniezi, asieoniezi asieoniezi asieoniezi Asieoniezi? >> >>Asieoniezi asieoniezi asieoniezi asieoniezi asieoniezi asieoniezi >>asieoniezi asieoniezi Asieoniezi. >> >>;-) >> >>-- >>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. > > > Eh, oh, keep cool. I can post a translation of my post and of Marjolein's answer > if you really want to. But can't you look at it as at a riddle? I'm sure Helge > already has a fairly good idea (if not necessarily an exact understanding) of > what we meant. The key is this: it is not French, I live in Brussels and > Marjolein in Amsterdam. Maybe the best way to crack it would be to treat it as a > kind of distorted English. Or German. Oh, I forgot. You don't know German, do > you? > > Happy New Year, > Tony. > >Dank je, Marjolein, maar Toone (Brussels dialect) blijft (als met de >> beroemde poppentheater -- de stichter had Antoine als voornaam, al >> zijn nagangers niet, maar ze hielden "Toone" als een soort >> handelsmerk, het is nu Toone VII of Toone VIII, ik ben er niet zeker >> van). Het vraagteken was over hoe het in Noors zou zijn. Als je van >> "Toone" niet houdt, mag je me "Toontje" noemen (zo was min >> groot-grootvader in zijn familie bekend). My tentative translation: Thank you, Marjolein, but Toone stays (was?) (as with the famous marionette/dolls theatre (forget what it is in proper english) -- the founder had Antoine as first name, but not his successors. Even so they kept Toone as a sort of trade mark, it is now Toone VII or VIII, I am not sure) [The next part is difficult.] The question mark???? was what to call it in the North??? Since I cannot claim to be called (????) Toone, perhaps I may call myself Toontje (so my greatgrandfather known in his family. Beste Toon(tje), Ik wilde alleen nog een extra alternatief toevoegen. Teun kan ook nog. Toone klinkt ook goed... Dearest Toon(tje) I just wanted to add an extra alternative. Teun also. Toone sounds also good That's as far as I can get without consulting dictionaries. helge From MikeE at ster.invalid Thu Jan 1 11:49:50 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Thu Jan 1 14:55:21 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: Antoine J. Mechelynck wrote: > Or "successor" if you want a less literal, but maybe more usual, > translation. Ah, so. Tnx. I couldn't find it in my favorite online translators; I found it contexted on a website but I still couldn't make the context 'tell me' what it was, and I wasn't able to parse its root/s like you did. > PS. My newsreader is awfully sluggish today. Opening or previewing a > different message takes forever. (Well, maybe a minute or so.) And > it's not SC responding slowly, since my CPU usage goes to (or quite > near) 100% each time. Well, I don't know about it not being SC's end. I've been having SC ng trouble with -1- connecting -2- dl/ing headers -3- dl/ing body/s - different issues at different times, but quite a bit of it. While accessing other news servers isn't doing that at all. -- Mike Easter From noone at reply.by.posting.msg Thu Jan 1 13:56:34 2004 From: noone at reply.by.posting.msg (Mike Vollmer) Date: Thu Jan 1 15:00:09 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: Never say never. As long as it's easy for me to add my email addresses to such a list, I don't care how unmanageable it is for the spammers to use. Afraid of giving spammers yet another list of email addresses? Hash 'em. Now the spammers might object that hashing algorithms aren't perfect (two email addresses could get the same hash value, accidentally protecting a second email address whose owner really wants spam), for which FTC could offer to hash them with different algorithms, resulting in 2 * several terabytes of info instead of just several terabytes. Distributions could be incremental (emails added & deleted). Only newly aspiring spammers would have to purchase the entire list (at ~250 DVD's per terabyte ...ugh!). If it works like the do-not-call lists, the spammers would have to purchase new lists every few months and would be legally obligated to check the email addresses against the list or else. My biggest concern would that the "or else" have enough teeth in to encourage compliance (a few years in prison or a firing squad consisting of volunteers from this forum). But I can't see that collecting & hashing the email addresses & distributing the info will be any great challenge; any good government bureaucracy should be up to the task. Just make it easy on our end! As for the original question, I'm not perceiving a decrease in the spew -- a slight drop, perhaps, when I checked my email after work yesterday (perhaps attributable to a few spammers going out to New Years' parties -- they actually have friends?) but it's spew as normal today. > >>7. A true do-not-call list with right of action (see #2, #5, and #6) > > > > We will have to see on this one. Date for response is nine months from > > now... > > I can't see this going anywhere. They've clearly listened to enough > already to know that it would either be technically totally unworkable, or > it would result in very wide use which wouldn't be satisfactory for the > DMA-member type marketers. From noone at reply.by.posting.msg Thu Jan 1 14:02:17 2004 From: noone at reply.by.posting.msg (Mike Vollmer) Date: Thu Jan 1 15:05:08 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: I'm going to hold off on using the opt-out's for a month or two or three and see if the legal types first get a good start at clamping down on the current bunch of dirtball spammers. After a few well-publized cases, the opt-out mechanisms might (note lack of certitude) be more worth tring. From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 12:16:27 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Don Wannit) Date: Thu Jan 1 15:20:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? In-Reply-To: <3FF45AC1.99BCABA4@not.here.for.spam.all.stream.net.invalid> References: <3FF45AC1.99BCABA4@not.here.for.spam.all.stream.net.invalid> Message-ID: S B wrote: > Ben wrote: > >>Now that the new U.S. (Federal) laws now apparently apply to spam, I wonder if they will >>help. Or will it be more of the same, or worse? > > > Hasn't changed so far ... and even the spams sent today don't conform to > can-spam even if they're obviously from the US. In the first 12 hours (local time) of 2004, my server logs and my own inbox show pretty much the same thing as in weeks past, and it's not encouraging: server-wide (applies to all users): 127 rejected by sendmail (cn, kr, br blocks) 198 rejected because sender domain name doesn't resolve 110 user unknown, sent to common but nonexistent user names & role accts 55 caught by global SpamAssassin & quarantined for examination my email (I'll hear from my users tomorrow :-) 186 caught by SpamCop & held (not a single false positive, BTW) 30 passed SpamCop but then caught by my personal Eudora 6.0.2 junk filtering (false negatives for SpamCop filtering) 11 spam got through all the filtering to my inbox, used for training SpamAssassin & Eudora junk filtering legitimate email messages (just my email, don't know about other users) 19 real messages, including mailing lists and automatic system messages to root This is just from the first 12 hours (GMT-0800) of being protected by CAN SPAM. The improvement is obvious to the casual observer. It's all downhill from here! (ambiguity intentional) -- Don Wannit CAN SPAM? I don wannit, either! From noone at reply.by.posting.msg Thu Jan 1 14:18:53 2004 From: noone at reply.by.posting.msg (Mike Vollmer) Date: Thu Jan 1 15:20:10 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: > It will be interesting to see. One scenario I can easily envision is that > the federal authorities are looking at a few major US spammers and waiting > for a chance to use the new law to pounce if the spammers screw up. I am > sure this is why Ralsky is announcing he is not spamming these days ....... > I expect to see a series of major spam busts sometime this year. In normal times those would be my exact sentiments. However, the anti-terror efforts are consuming a lot of law-enforcement & Justice Dept. resources, and rightly so. The sooner, the better, & my fingers are crossed .... > On the other hand, I am sure it will not reduce the amount of spam overall > in the longer term. Spammers will move all their operations overseas, and As long as the spammers are in the U.S. and the communication/email/spam/advertisement originates in the U.S. and the products are being shipped to/from the U.S., they are fair game. > increasingly use proxies, trojans, etc. to disguise their identities. I That will only increase their criminality and make them a better (if more challenging) target for arrest & prosecution. > think this will result in renewed pressure for tougher legislation. So even > if the current law turns out to be ineffective, I think it is still a step > forward, and will probably be the first in a series of evolving laws that > will be tougher. In fact, I think it might even turn out to be a good thing > for the anti-spam camp that a weak law was passed in the beginning, because > the backlash that it will create once it is clear that the initial law was > inadequate may persuade legislators to consider much tougher laws than they > would have in the first place. Good theory, but when was the last time Congress followed up a weak law with a tougher one, unless the courts threw it out & they had to do something else. I can't think of any examples. Congress has done spam; now their on to muck up other things. I hope your're right (!!!), but I'm not holding my breath. > > From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Thu Jan 1 21:22:12 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Thu Jan 1 15:25:11 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: a ?crit dans le message de news:bt1tr0$25a$1@news.spamcop.net > Antoine J. Mechelynck wrote: [...] > > as at a riddle? I'm sure Helge already has a fairly good idea (if > > not necessarily an exact understanding) of what we meant. The key [...] > >Dank je, Marjolein, maar Toone (Brussels dialect) blijft (als met de > >> beroemde poppentheater -- de stichter had Antoine als voornaam, al > >> zijn nagangers niet, maar ze hielden "Toone" als een soort > >> handelsmerk, het is nu Toone VII of Toone VIII, ik ben er niet > zeker >> van). Het vraagteken was over hoe het in Noors zou zijn. > Als je van >> "Toone" niet houdt, mag je me "Toontje" noemen (zo was > min >> groot-grootvader in zijn familie bekend). > My tentative translation: > Thank you, Marjolein, but Toone / stays (was?) (as with the famous add / (Brussels dialect). And it is "stays", cf. German "bleibt". > marionette/dolls theatre (forget what it is in proper english) -- the puppet theatre > founder had Antoine as first name, but not his successors. Even so > they > kept Toone as a sort of trade mark, it is now Toone VII or VIII, I am > not sure) > [The next part is difficult.] The question mark???? was what to call > it > in the North??? [keeping the Dutch word-order] The question mark was about how it in the Norse should be. [i.e.] The question mark was about how it should be in the Norwegian language. [Noors = Norsk, cf. Zweeds, Engl. Swedish, = Svensk. I know there are Bokmaal and Nynorsk but I don't always emphasize the distinction. Dutch "het" + is how to name a language. "The North" would be "het Noorden".] > Since I cannot claim to be called (????) Toone, If you don't like "Toone" [Dutch "houden van", wfw. "to hold of" is one of the ways to express liking or even loving], you may call me "Toontje" [a diminutive] (my great-grandfather was called that in his family) [or, wfw., so was my great-grandfather in his family known]. > perhaps > I may call myself Toontje (so my greatgrandfather known in his family. > > > Beste Toon(tje), > > Ik wilde alleen nog een extra alternatief toevoegen. Teun kan ook nog. > Toone klinkt ook goed... > > Dearest Toon(tje) > I just wanted to add an extra alternative. Teun also. Toone sounds > also good 2nd sentence: Teun is also possible. (wfw "Teun can also still") > > That's as far as I can get without consulting dictionaries. > helge Very good. You did indeed catch most of it. So much the better since I'm not sure I write "literary" Dutch. Understandable, certainly (Marjolein understood). But probably far from perfect, and certainly worse than my English. Godt nytt aar Tony. From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 12:33:38 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Ray) Date: Thu Jan 1 15:35:07 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? In-Reply-To: <3FF45AC1.99BCABA4@not.here.for.spam.all.stream.net.invalid> References: <3FF45AC1.99BCABA4@not.here.for.spam.all.stream.net.invalid> Message-ID: S B wrote: > Ben wrote: > >>Now that the new U.S. (Federal) laws now apparently apply to spam, I wonder if they will >>help. Or will it be more of the same, or worse? > > > Hasn't changed so far ... and even the spams sent today don't conform to > can-spam even if they're obviously from the US. Only 24 for me so far today, about half the usual. Not one conforming, all but 5 using open proxies, many with meaningless subject lines, few with opt-out links. No surprise. From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 20:35:06 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tim) Date: Thu Jan 1 15:35:17 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: anti-Spamcop trick - Part II: � References: Message-ID: > > � > � > � > � > � > � > What are these? How do they resolve to '/?' ? From masfjorden at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 21:41:49 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (masfjorden@spamcop.net) Date: Thu Jan 1 15:45:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Antoine J. Mechelynck skrev: > > [keeping the Dutch word-order] The question mark was about how it in the Norse > should be. [i.e.] The question mark was about how it should be in the Norwegian > language. [Noors = Norsk, cf. Zweeds, Engl. Swedish, = Svensk. I know there are > Bokmaal and Nynorsk but I don't always emphasize the distinction. Dutch "het" > + is how to name a language. "The > North" would be "het Noorden".] Silly mistake on my part. When I went to Amsterdam some years ago, I learned a single phrase: Ik sprek geen Neederlands (sorry, I never learn when the 'e' is double). I used it when two small boys came running up to me and said something very quickly. One of them replied: Oh sh*t, obviously an expression more commonly used there than in Britain. > If you don't like "Toone" [Dutch "houden van", wfw. "to hold of" is one of the > ways to express liking or even loving], you may call me "Toontje" [a diminutive] > (my great-grandfather was called that in his family) [or, wfw., so was my > great-grandfather in his family known]. Prepositions are always difficult, also the way you in this word corrupt an l to an u (english, scandinavian, german has kept that l. But the expression is the same in Noors: holde av = elske (agape or eros), even though it is rather oldfashioned. > Godt nytt aar > Tony. Takk, det samme helge From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Thu Jan 1 21:43:27 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Thu Jan 1 15:45:09 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" a ?crit dans le message de news:bt1tr6$25e$1@news.spamcop.net > Antoine J. Mechelynck wrote: > > Or "successor" if you want a less literal, but maybe more usual, > > translation. > > Ah, so. Tnx. I couldn't find it in my favorite online translators; > I found it contexted on a website but I still couldn't make the > context 'tell me' what it was, and I wasn't able to parse its root/s > like you did. My van Dale doesn't give it either. (it does give nagaan = 1. follow, succeed; 2. imitate; etc.) It could have meant "his imitators" but I hope the context was clear enough. I coined it by analogy to "voorganger". I believe such "word-forming by agglutination" is more common in Dutch or German than e.g. in French or English. > > > PS. My newsreader is awfully sluggish today. Opening or previewing a > > different message takes forever. (Well, maybe a minute or so.) And > > it's not SC responding slowly, since my CPU usage goes to (or quite > > near) 100% each time. > > Well, I don't know about it not being SC's end. I've been having SC > ng trouble with -1- connecting -2- dl/ing headers -3- dl/ing body/s - > different issues at different times, but quite a bit of it. While > accessing other news servers isn't doing that at all. > > -- > Mike Easter Well, if SC was slow responding, I would use almost 0% CPU waiting for an answer on the line wouldn't I? But while OE opens a window, or just change to a different message in the preview pane, my CPU% indicator (in Norton System Doctor) climbs to almost 100%, which makes me think OE is using my own computer's resources less-than-efficiently. (As soon as I find a Linux driver for my Alcatel PCI ADSL card I go over to Linux with no regrets.) (What takes longest is when I click "Respond to Newsgroup". Now at that point there is nothing to be got from SC, is there? And sometimes while typing, like in the preceding sentence, my cursor just freezes for a minute or so, then comes back on. (It happened, at least this time, a few seconds after receiving some mail.) Happy New Year Tony. From michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com Thu Jan 1 20:55:51 2004 From: michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com (Michael Lefevre) Date: Thu Jan 1 16:00:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: Mike Vollmer wrote: > Never say never. As long as it's easy for me to add my email addresses to > such a list, I don't care how unmanageable it is for the spammers to use. You might not care, but marketers will care. If the legitimate marketers care, the government won't do it. > Afraid of giving spammers yet another list of email addresses? Hash 'em. > > Now the spammers might object that hashing algorithms aren't perfect (two [snip] The objection to hashing isn't likely to be from that side. Spammers currently generate millions of addresses and test them by connecting to remote servers and trying them out. If they can generate millions of addresses and find the real ones locally by simply hashing them, you've made their task a lot easier. [snip] > But I can't see that collecting & hashing the email addresses & distributing > the info will be any great challenge; any good government bureaucracy should > be up to the task. Just make it easy on our end! It does indeed become easier if you don't make the effort to do it in a way that marketers are happy with. The international element still makes it pretty much impossible - unless you only deal with cases where the marketer and the user are in the US, which again makes it ineffective. -- Michael From MikeE at ster.invalid Thu Jan 1 12:53:35 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Thu Jan 1 16:00:15 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: Antoine J. Mechelynck wrote: > "Mike Easter" >> Well, I don't know about it not being SC's end. I've been having SC >> ng trouble with -1- connecting -2- dl/ing headers -3- dl/ing body/s - >> different issues at different times, but quite a bit of it. While >> accessing other news servers isn't doing that at all. What I'm talking about up there isn't what you are talking about down there. > Well, if SC was slow responding, I would use almost 0% CPU waiting > for an answer on the line wouldn't I? But while OE opens a window, or > just change to a different message in the preview pane, my CPU% > indicator (in Norton System Doctor) climbs to almost 100%, which > makes me think OE is using my own computer's resources > less-than-efficiently. (As soon as I find a Linux driver for my > Alcatel PCI ADSL card I go over to Linux with no regrets.) > > (What takes longest is when I click "Respond to Newsgroup". Now at > that point there is nothing to be got from SC, is there? And > sometimes while typing, like in the preceding sentence, my cursor > just freezes for a minute or so, then comes back on. (It happened, at > least this time, a few seconds after receiving some mail.) Something is being sick with your OE. I would troubleshoot it by messing around on another newserver, and use its test group. If it is well in the other newsserver, but persistently sick in the SC ng/s, including test, I would R&R the SC newsserver account. I would doubt if it would just happen in one SC ng, from what you are describing. Another thing which causes OE's brains to get scrambled is when you need to do maintenance on your folders, such as compacting. -- Mike Easter From masfjorden at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 21:58:48 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (masfjorden@spamcop.net) Date: Thu Jan 1 16:05:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Antoine J. Mechelynck wrote: > "Mike Easter" a ?crit dans le message de > news:bt1tr6$25e$1@news.spamcop.net > >>Antoine J. Mechelynck wrote: >> >>>Or "successor" if you want a less literal, but maybe more usual, >>>translation. >> >>Ah, so. Tnx. I couldn't find it in my favorite online translators; >>I found it contexted on a website but I still couldn't make the >>context 'tell me' what it was, and I wasn't able to parse its root/s >>like you did. > > > My van Dale doesn't give it either. (it does give nagaan = 1. follow, succeed; > 2. imitate; etc.) It could have meant "his imitators" but I hope the context was > clear enough. I coined it by analogy to "voorganger". I believe such > "word-forming by agglutination" is more common in Dutch or German than e.g. in > French or English. That word wasn't difficult for me, I see 'na' as related to german nach and the first part of neighbour and noors neste or even na in nabo = neighbour [neighbour (US neighbor) (snip explanation) ? ORIGIN OE nUahgebGr, from nUah ?nigh, near? + gebGr ?inhabitant, peasant, farmer? (cf. boor).] OED However, norwegian has chosen a different solution: it is forgjenger (s/he who goes before) but etterf?lger (s/he who follows after). The english predecessor/successor uses, in part the same root verb, it seems From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Thu Jan 1 22:13:40 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Thu Jan 1 16:15:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: a ?crit dans le message de news:bt20pe$6sr$1@news.spamcop.net > Antoine J. Mechelynck skrev: > > > > > [keeping the Dutch word-order] The question mark was about how it > > in the Norse should be. [i.e.] The question mark was about how it > > should be in the Norwegian language. [Noors = Norsk, cf. Zweeds, > > Engl. Swedish, = Svensk. I know there are Bokmaal and Nynorsk but I > > don't always emphasize the distinction. Dutch "het" > article> + is how to name a language. "The > > North" would be "het Noorden".] > Silly mistake on my part. When I went to Amsterdam some years ago, I > learned a single phrase: Ik sprek geen Neederlands (sorry, I never > learn > when the 'e' is double). I used it when two small boys came running > up to me and said something very quickly. One of them replied: > Oh sh*t, obviously an expression more commonly used there than in > Britain. Dutch uses aa, ee, oo, uu for long vowels in closed syllables. (Open syllables are always long, except when they have a "silent e", i.e. schwa.) To avoid confusion, some short words ending in long ? double it (twee = two, de zee = the sea, vs. ze = short form of "zij", meaning "she" or "they"), and their derived words then keep it (tweede "second"; zeehaven "sea-harbour"). In a few cases it has to be learnt (e.g. the place-name Enschede is pronounced en-sch(e)-DEE, not en-SCHEE-d(e), where (e) represents the schwa). I is either i (short, "impure") or ie ("pure") -- the timbre is different. > > > If you don't like "Toone" [Dutch "houden van", wfw. "to hold of" is > > one of the ways to express liking or even loving], you may call me > > "Toontje" [a diminutive] (my great-grandfather was called that in > > his family) [or, wfw., so was my great-grandfather in his family > > known]. > Prepositions are always difficult, also the way you in this word > corrupt > an l to an u (english, scandinavian, german has kept that l. Conversely, Old French has converted most cases of preconsonantal Latin l to u. Dutch has other cases: e.g. koud (E. cold, G. kalt) woud (forest, G. Wald), and some often-used words have more fleeting use (Nl. wilde / wou, E. etym. would [l not pronounced], but replaced by willed in non-auxiliary meaning; G wollte) > But the expression is the same in Noors: holde av = elske (agape or > eros), even though it is rather oldfashioned. > > > Godt nytt aar > > Tony. > Takk, det samme > > helge From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Thu Jan 1 22:18:53 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Thu Jan 1 16:20:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" a ?crit dans le message de news:bt21io$7sc$1@news.spamcop.net [...] > Something is being sick with your OE. I would troubleshoot it by > messing around on another newserver, and use its test group. If it is > well in the other newsserver, but persistently sick in the SC ng/s, > including test, I would R&R the SC newsserver account. I would doubt > if it would just happen in one SC ng, from what you are describing. > Another thing which causes OE's brains to get scrambled is when you > need to do maintenance on your folders, such as compacting. > > -- > Mike Easter Yeah, maybe it's just not enough room on my C: disk. Maybe I should replace it by a newer model and (aargh!) copy everything over. Happy New Year Tony From pstock at columbus.rr.com Thu Jan 1 16:24:05 2004 From: pstock at columbus.rr.com (Peter A. Stock) Date: Thu Jan 1 16:25:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Quick Reports slow or broken? Message-ID: No quick reports I have submitted since 11:20 AM Eastern (the last five hours) have been processed. The Statistics page doesn't seem to show an unusually high load. Is something broken? From agent01413 at my-deja.com Thu Jan 1 14:33:41 2004 From: agent01413 at my-deja.com (Socks the Whitehouse Cat) Date: Thu Jan 1 16:35:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: I can't believe that Mike Vollmer really had the following to say that was worth commenting on: > Never say never. As long as it's easy for me to add my email > addresses to such a list, I don't care how unmanageable it is for the > spammers to use. > > Afraid of giving spammers yet another list of email addresses? Hash > 'em. > > Now the spammers might object that hashing algorithms aren't perfect > (two email addresses could get the same hash value, accidentally > protecting a second email address whose owner really wants spam), for > which FTC could offer to hash them with different algorithms, > resulting in 2 * several terabytes of info instead of just several > terabytes. Distributions could be incremental (emails added & > deleted). Only newly aspiring spammers would have to purchase the > entire list (at ~250 DVD's per terabyte ...ugh!). > Hashing is part of the solution. There is a bigger problem that needs a solution. I have my own domain. Every combination of letters, numbers, and valid special characters, including unicaode characters, is a legit email address. I want to opt out all of my addresses at once. Based on the current cost of storage, the FTC budget just to list the valid addresses on my domain alone would exceed the projected federal revenue stream for 2004. But if the FTC permits domain wide opt out, the spammers will yowl as soon as *@aol.com is added to the list. Yeah, you're right. Let them yowl. Also, I think the appropriate solution will be similar to what the USPS now does with zip+4 address true ups. Skip the next paragraph if you know how it works already, but let me bring everyone else along: I do occasional bulk postal mail, mostly newsletters to members of a non- profit that I belong to. We have a third class permit. We get an added discount on that mail if all the addresses are properly formatted (street abbreviations match standard, apt num and street addr in proper sequence, etc) and also nine digit zips on the bulk of the mail, and we certify that we have done a true up on some regular basis, which I think is annually. We have the option of giving our mailing list to the USPS or an independent but USPS certified organization (think there are a couple of dozen of them, at least), pay a fee (6 cents per addr last time I did it with one vendor), and we get back a diskette with corrected addresses, and the certification letter that we show the bulk mail facility to get our added discount. Now apply that to spam. Assume that the FTC hashes, and assume that the regs permit domain wide opt out. Don't sell the DNS list to spammers. Sell it to a limited number of certified clearing houses. Shoot - I could see the DMA getting such a certification and offering the service to its members as an added benefit. Seed the DNS list with some FTC spamtraps that will catch cheaters, with heavy fines. Make the costs sufficiently high to adequately enforce Can Spam. I think I'll play around with this some and submit the proposal to the FTC when the do the RFC for the registry later this year. -- tired of reading posts from morphing kooks? get a real news reader - http://xnews.newsguy.com From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Thu Jan 1 22:38:56 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Thu Jan 1 16:40:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: a ?crit dans le message de news:bt21pf$8d2$1@news.spamcop.net [about Dutch word "naganger"] [...] > That word wasn't difficult for me, I see 'na' as related to german > nach and the first part of neighbour and noors neste or even na in > nabo = > neighbour > [neighbour (US neighbor) > (snip explanation) > ? ORIGIN OE nUahgebGr, from nUah ?nigh, near? + gebGr ?inhabitant, > peasant, farmer? (cf. boor).] OED > > However, norwegian has chosen a different solution: > it is forgjenger (s/he who goes before) but > etterf?lger (s/he who follows after). The english > predecessor/successor > uses, in part the same root verb, it seems predecessor / successor are from late Latin (praedecessor / successor), probably via the French (pr?d?cesseur / successeur). The French words mean the same as the English, the Latin ones are form on a root cedere cess- step, go. I see predecessor < prae (before) + decess- (retiring officer, cf. decease: de- from, cess- step) + -or (agent). successor < su(b) under + cedere cess- step. "The English language was borne out of the efforts of Norman men-at-arms to make dates with Saxon farmers' daughters -- and as such, it is no more legitimate than the other offspring of the same efforts." (I forgot who wrote it.) Happy New Year Tony From michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com Thu Jan 1 21:40:50 2004 From: michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com (Michael Lefevre) Date: Thu Jan 1 16:45:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: anti-Spamcop trick - Part II: � References: Message-ID: hello wrote: > "Redstone" wrote in message > news:Xns94631B9FD9607lumbercartel@216.154.195.61... >> Appears to be a new anti-Spamcop trick. [snip] > > http:\\CAm.asksfor222.com�qdebttTVW034c2wj.tB.com > > I repeatedly get spam from this source (Chinanet), the particular URL is > different each time, but the slashes are always reversed. In my case, > Spamcop reverses the slashes correctly. > > However, Spmacop repeatedly misses this bit in the middle: > > � > > which should resolve to "/?" Actually it shouldn't - it should resolve to some currently (and probably forever more) non-existant unicode character. The code above doesn't work in Mozilla or Opera. IE (and therefore OE), in its infinite wisdom, seems to change HTML entities with codes of 0x3001 or above into "?", and then take that "?" as a URL delimeter (which it shows in the URL as "/?") > The spammer uses endless variations on this encoding: > > � > � > � > � > � > � > > With Internet Explorer, each of these resolves to "/?", but Spamcop never > gets it right, and returns "host not found" As I said, Spamcop is getting it right really. IE is getting it wrong, as usual. However, given that spammers are using it, on the assumption that recipients will be using IE, Spamcop should probably handle it wrongly, like IE does. The ways in which IE interprets invalid stuff into real URLs never ceases to amaze... Anyway, thanks for the report. I'm passing this along to Julian so he can take a look. -- Michael From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Thu Jan 1 22:58:42 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Thu Jan 1 17:00:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" a ?crit dans le message de news:bt1fcj$6c7$1@news.spamcop.net [...] > Here's a big chart http://www.pjh2.de/datetime/weeknumber/wnc.php?l=en > showing all [rather a really lot] of the countries, which is the first > day of the week, how they figger the first week of the year, and how > that is handled in 4 different versions of Windows for that country. > One thing that is 'nice' about that chart is that it puts the ISO 8601 > 'acceptance' into perspective. > > > -- > Mike Easter Notice that, in your chart, several countries have more than one algorithm, even for a single language. Belgium is near the top of the chart, but look especially at the entries for India and Spain. One hour (and a couple of minutes) left before Jan.2 at my place Happy New Year Tony From masfjorden at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 23:14:18 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (masfjorden@spamcop.net) Date: Thu Jan 1 17:20:09 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Antoine J. Mechelynck skrev: > [keeping the Dutch word-order] The question mark was about how it in the Norse > should be. [i.e.] The question mark was about how it should be in the Norwegian > language. [Noors = Norsk, cf. Zweeds, Engl. Swedish, = Svensk. I know there are > Bokmaal and Nynorsk but I don't always emphasize the distinction. Dutch "het" > + is how to name a language. "The > North" would be "het Noorden".] I forgot to give you an answer: As far as I know Anton is the only version used for boys. Tonje is a girl's name, fairly recent, while Anton is not much used now. helge From smcgarrett at hawaii.com Thu Jan 1 16:22:41 2004 From: smcgarrett at hawaii.com (Steve McGarrett) Date: Thu Jan 1 17:25:34 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Marjolein Katsma wrote: > >>>Like Vidal Blanc, vee-DAHL BlahN, the crisp, dry, white wine. Watch >>>out for the piney ones. >>> >> >>So it is the way I have pronunced it myself, sort of frenchlike. > > > Yeah, me too. Trouble is, I have _absolutely_ no idea why I pronounce it > like that... Then there's Lily Tomlin's Earnestine the operator: "Mr. VEE-dle? (snort, snort)" Dating myself here. . . Aloha, McGarrett "LART 'em, Danno!" From smcgarrett at hawaii.com Thu Jan 1 16:26:47 2004 From: smcgarrett at hawaii.com (Steve McGarrett) Date: Thu Jan 1 17:30:14 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Marjolein Katsma wrote: > Antoine J. Mechelynck wrote in news:bt176s$l87$1@news.spamcop.net: > >>>>Then there is the Islamic calendar, where the "weekend" is Thursday >>>>and Friday. This gives rise to the famous phrase commonly >>>>abbreviated P.A.I.W. >>> >>>And what "famous" phrase might that be? I've never seen that >>>abbreviation. >> >>Must be some kinda smartass joke on T.G.I.F. (Thank God It's Friday) >>so -- let me guess -- wait -- maybe -- er -- gotcha! -- Praise Allah >>It's Wednesday (though even non-Arab speaking Muslims say "Hamdullah" >>for "Praise God"). > > Aaah, I believe you may be right. Good one! > > Now, of course, the question is whether Muslims _actually_ use such an > expression (and if so, where). > Smart-ass Westerners working in the Middle East used it 15 or so years ago. At least according to a friend who was there then. Aloha, McGarrett "LART 'em, Danno!" From ob1dbNOSPAM at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 17:33:34 2004 From: ob1dbNOSPAM at spamcop.net (David Butler) Date: Thu Jan 1 17:35:08 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Items on "Appeal" reporting: why no explanation? References: Message-ID: In article , "Ellen" wrote: > "David Butler" wrote in message > news:ob1dbNOSPAM-F88216.11303123122003@news.spamcop.net... > > At least 2 or 3 times a week I get items that have an items that states > "experts > > only, Spamcop will Investigate", etc. > > > > Usually this is on spam that is under 24-48 hours old. > > > > There nearly NEVER is an explanation, so I always "Appeal" AND request a > response > > AND that the folks on PSamCop put SOME reason it is "Experts ONly". > > There *are* no explanations -- if you have a checkbox/popup to enter an > appeal and you do appeal then it means the issue will show up on our queue > and we will see if the site is still live and if it should be reopened. It > will either be reopened or it will be denied -- in extremely rare instances > we may send an email to someone if an appeal is denied. When I say extremely > rare I mean maybe once in 6 months. > > > > > > I NEVER get an answer. > > There is no facility for answers. And I am not sure what answer you would > expect anyway. URLs get set to closed for a variety of reasons -- sometimes > the spammer has moved to another IP, sometimes the reports are being sent to > the wrong place and we have to reroute and then reopen, sometimes the site > is down but the spams are still being delivered or the spammer doesn't > realize the site is down, sometimes the ISP just closes the issue. > > > > > > What do folks think of asking for some explanation or at least a standard > code AND A > > DATE ??? > > > > Was it handled today? Last week ? 6 months ago? > > We re-open (or deny) issues usually within 24 hours of them showing up -- > we got behind last week so it took longer and Sat AM I reopened (or denied) > a whole slew of them. Beyond that I am not sure what it is that you want to > know. > > > > > Resolved? > > I don't know what you expect to have happen. When you get the opportunity to > appeal you are supposed to see if the site is still live before clicking in > the popup. When we look at it if it's still live and not a joe-job and not > just some random url that the spammer stuck in the spam to make it look > legit and there isn't some special note from the ISP (happens occasionally) > then it's going to be re-opened. > > Thanks, I will be even more careful on appeal items then. I was NOT appealing at random, only for VERY fresh spam. Would it really be so hard to have a brief explanation or code associated ? I realize this is a Julian question, I think. Ya know: "resolved, site shut down" "ISP refuses to do anything" "Joe Job" "Spammer moved from this ISP" or so-on. Would make it easier to know WHAT research to do. Thanks again for claryifying David From RobertTaylor at SpamCop.net Thu Jan 1 17:33:41 2004 From: RobertTaylor at SpamCop.net (Robert Taylor) Date: Thu Jan 1 17:35:14 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: In news:Xns9463B10C9AF54homesitehelp@216.154.195.61, Marjolein Katsma sent: > Robert Taylor wrote in news:bt1fea$6e4$1@news.spamcop.net: > >> I think we may safely forego publishing your error on page-1 of the >> Sunday New York Times. :) > > That's a relief! Thank you, thank you! ...niets om te danken! > ...en lokkich nijjier! And the same to you (is that Frisian?), Robert -- eMail: RobertTaylor@SpamCop.net Web-Address: http://users.rcn.com/robertt.nh.ultranet/Web-SitePg1.htm SILENCE IS FOO [ Foo: the sacred syllable (FOO MANI PADME HUM); to be spoken only when under obligation to commune with the Deity. Our first obligation is to keep the Foo Counters turning. ] From ob1dbNOSPAM at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 17:40:46 2004 From: ob1dbNOSPAM at spamcop.net (David Butler) Date: Thu Jan 1 17:45:08 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Items on "Appeal" reporting: why no explanation? References: Message-ID: In article , "WazoO" wrote: > "David Butler" wrote in message > news:ob1dbNOSPAM-F88216.11303123122003@news.spamcop.net... > > At least 2 or 3 times a week I get items that have an items that states > "experts > > only, Spamcop will Investigate", etc. > > > > Usually this is on spam that is under 24-48 hours old. > > > > There nearly NEVER is an explanation, so I always "Appeal" AND request a > response > > AND that the folks on PSamCop put SOME reason it is "Experts ONly". > > Well, the "experts only" clause was put there for just the reason you > cited .... > no one was doing any verification, so Deputy time was being wasted on > looking up sites that had basically disappeared two days prior, but the > reporter had just gotten around to reporting the spam. The "experts > only" flag was supposed to be the big hint that you are to do the research > first to see if there is an actual issue, then povide some details to show > that Deputy time may be warrented. That you say you "always Appeal", > but make no mention of doing reseach, possibly suggests that your > "requests for a response" probably don't jump right to the top of Ellen's > list (never mind that she just recently posted that she's a bit over-whelmed > at present" ..... I appeal either VERY fresh items or live sites, sorry for the lack of clarity... > > I NEVER get an answer. > > As above, if you're not doing the research and providing some details in > the Appeal, you're not following the plan. I'm not going to say that you're > being ignored, but .... I'd have to guess that you don't seem to be > making it easy to move your appeals to the top of the priority list. > > > What do folks think of asking for some explanation or at least a standard > code AND A > > DATE ??? > > Was it handled today? Last week ? 6 months ago? > > Part of that is based on the ISP's selction of checked buttons > on their response to he complaint. But, surely no one would > mind having that data available. I would hope so! > > > Resolved? > > The "resolution" to a successful Appeal is that the complaints are > once again set to go to the responsible ISP. > > > Joe Job ? > > I haven't been able to stretch any definition of "joe job" into > including anything to do with the above. well, is that NOT one possibility there is an appeal? I assume Spamcop does not pursue something determined to be a JoeJob ! > > > This one parses by itself: > > > > Parsing input: bmw99.us > > host 69.50.173.194 (getting name) no name > > No recent reports, no history available > > [report history] > > Resolves to 69.50.173.194 > > > > NO RECENT REPORTS ?? > > Some of those results are based on things like what kind of account > you have (I think that this is a standard response for free users). On paying user AND subscribing email service.... ;-) I pay twice. > the other habd, (here we go back to your investigation), do have > some evidence that this particular IP has been reported 100 times > in the last 10 minutes? We should note that your query was for > a domain name, whereas SpamCop's history database is based on > the tracking of IP's .... and the paser would then parse the IP, no ? anyway: Parsing input: 69.50.173.194 host 69.50.173.194 (getting name) no name No recent reports, no history available [report history] Resolves to 69.50.173.194 Tracking ip 69.50.173.194 Routing details for 69.50.173.194 [refresh/show] Cached whois for 69.50.173.194 : postmaster@atrivo.com Using abuse net on postmaster@atrivo.com No abuse net record for atrivo.com Using default postmaster contacts postmaster@atrivo.com Statistics: 69.50.173.194 not listed in bl.spamcop.net More Information.. 69.50.173.194 not listed in dnsbl.njabl.org 69.50.173.194 not listed in dnsbl.njabl.org 69.50.173.194 not listed in cbl.abuseat.org 69.50.173.194 not listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net 69.50.173.194 not listed in relays.ordb.org. Reporting addresses: postmaster@atrivo.com Not much on the IP either! Same answer. > > > Don't want to waste deputy time, but this has been bugging me. > > Well, none of the Deputies can actually resolve the issue > described in your Subject line. That's a programming issue > that would be handled by Julian himself. > I mentioned it in my reply to Ellen, hope it gets passed on. From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Thu Jan 1 23:42:24 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Thu Jan 1 17:45:15 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 18:33:19 +0000, Marjolein Katsma wrote: > Toone klinkt ook goed... Ik denk ook, dat Toone beter als Toon klinkt. Maar ik ben niet Vlaamse op Nederlandse :) -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- Stupidity is NOT a handicap. Park elsewhere! From ob1dbNOSPAM at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 17:44:52 2004 From: ob1dbNOSPAM at spamcop.net (David Butler) Date: Thu Jan 1 17:45:24 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: ATT Deputies Re: child porn or joe job? References: Message-ID: In article , Robert Slade wrote: > directNIC makes this information available "as is," and does not guarantee > > its accuracy. > > > > Registrant: > > Amber Domain Manager > > Triester Strasse 10/3 > > Suite 115 > > Vienna, Neudorf A-2351 > > AT > > (242) 502-8723 > > > Domain Name: ACCESSCONX.COM > > Administrative Contact: > > Webmaster, Amber Sky domain_manager00@hotmail.com > > Triester Strasse 10/3 > > Suite 115 > > Vienna, Neudorf A-2351 > > AT > > (242) 502-8723 > > Technical Contact: > > Webmaster, Amber Sky domain_manager00@hotmail.com > > Triester Strasse 10/3 > > Suite 115 > > Vienna, Neudorf A-2351 > > AT > > (242) 502-8723 > > Record last updated 07-17-2002 09:20:43 AM > > Record expires on 09-25-2004 > > Record created on 09-25-2001 > > > Domain servers in listed order: > > NS1.DNS-SECURE.COM 64.125.84.16 > > NS2.DNS-SECURE.COM 64.125.84.7 > > This looks like a dummy (is that a US phone no?), the server for > accessconx.com > appears to be hosted on 64.125.84.100 which is in above.net's allocation. > > Conclusions: > > a. reports to ACCESSCONX.COM are going to the spammer and should be > re-routed to above.net. > > b. the cp mail is probably a scam to get sick people to download the dialer. > > c. the cp mail is not a joe job it is a spam. > > I'm cross posting this to .routing. > > Rob > Report them to hotmail abuse: TOS for hotmail prohibits using the service for business and site registration should meet that requirement! ;-) From agent01413 at my-deja.com Thu Jan 1 15:51:12 2004 From: agent01413 at my-deja.com (Socks the Whitehouse Cat) Date: Thu Jan 1 17:50:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: I can't believe that Michael Lefevre really had the following to say that was worth commenting on: > > The objection to hashing isn't likely to be from that side. > > Spammers currently generate millions of addresses and test them by > connecting to remote servers and trying them out. If they can > generate millions of addresses and find the real ones locally by > simply hashing them, you've made their task a lot easier. I think my proposal for outsourcing the queries deals with that. If spammers pay a per address querying fee, it quickly becomes cost prohibitive to run a dictionary attack on the database. -- tired of reading posts from morphing kooks? get a real news reader - http://xnews.newsguy.com From noone at reply.by.posting.msg Thu Jan 1 17:00:17 2004 From: noone at reply.by.posting.msg (Mike Vollmer) Date: Thu Jan 1 18:05:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: The separate clearing house is a good idea; then the small player can't complain about the massive resources resources that will be require to run a complete copy of the list. Meanwhile, the (!canned) spew continues .... From tboyer at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 18:27:17 2004 From: tboyer at spamcop.net (Tim Boyer) Date: Thu Jan 1 18:30:32 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 13:43:48 +0000 (UTC), Marjolein Katsma wrote: >Mike Easter wrote in news:bt125n$7e5$1@news.spamcop.net: > >> Those who like to line up their weeks Su-Sa, could play the same game >> with that calendar as well. I think 2000 did that. Oh, I see, it works >> at 28 day intervals for Tue Feb 29. Eek. > >Except, of course, that 2000 was _not_ a leap year. ;-) > >Leap years are every year that's divisible by four, except if the >centuries are divisible by four. So 1900 was a leap year, 2000 was not. Other way around. 2000 was; 1900 wasn't; 2100 won't be. tim -- tboyer@spamcop.net Nothing official, just another Spamcop user From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 17:58:32 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Cat) Date: Thu Jan 1 19:00:32 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] New Years Fun (was Re: Cleaning a list) References: <3FF393AC.9000306@spamcop.net> <3FF39732.6020508@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <3FF4B428.9B400D93@spamcop.net> (follow-ups to .social) Tim McGraw wrote: > You're welcome, and much peace, prosperity and happiness to Merlyn, Cat, > Socks, JH, JT and all the deps and the rest of the sc klan in '04. Thanks! Happy New Year to you, too! I spent mine out partying last night with a friend at my favorite local bar. The place was packed. From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Fri Jan 2 01:19:09 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Thu Jan 1 19:20:53 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: a ?crit dans le message de news:bt2686$dqn$1@news.spamcop.net > Antoine J. Mechelynck skrev: > > > [keeping the Dutch word-order] The question mark was about how it > > in the Norse should be. [i.e.] The question mark was about how it > > should be in the Norwegian language. [Noors = Norsk, cf. Zweeds, > > Engl. Swedish, = Svensk. I know there are Bokmaal and Nynorsk but I > > don't always emphasize the distinction. Dutch "het" > article> + is how to name a language. "The > > North" would be "het Noorden".] For completeness, I might have mentioned Deens = Danish = Dansk. "Icelandic" I don't know for sure but I would guess IJslands (yes, with a double capital). > > I forgot to give you an answer: As far as I know Anton is the only > version used for boys. Tonje is a girl's name, fairly recent, while > Anton is not much used now. > helge Well, "Antoine" is the full French first name I'm stuck with (with five more) so I guess that's what it corresponds to. No diminutives I might use (like Tony vs. Anthony)? OK, Anton then. I notice your message now has "skrev" rather than "write". Why not? My stupid W98SE puts it in French. Not "skrev i meddelandet" yet. Or is that some other Scandinavian language? (Hard for me to tell them apart on the basis of three words with no barred o or ? and no thorn or edh.) Best regards, Tony. From sidewinder at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 01:21:10 2004 From: sidewinder at spamcop.net (Richard Winder) Date: Thu Jan 1 20:25:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OT - clock police bulletin References: Message-ID: > Ah ah. Not so 'fast' [or slow]. 2003 doesn't /get/ a leap second > added. In fact, the last leap second was added in 1999, and a leap > second hasn't been subtracted since the system we're using for that > began in 1972. They've been adding seconds so that time will correspond to the Earth's position in space. Since 1999, the Earth's motion hasn't been slowing as expected (no one knows why), so no leap seconds have been added recently. CNN article: http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/01/01/leap.second.ap/index.html -- -RSW From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 19:39:19 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Doug) Date: Thu Jan 1 20:45:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Hotmail In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Joe wrote: > John Marion wrote: > >> Wow! I've gone from 30 spams a day to 1 a day! Whatever they are now >> doing at Hotmail is way overdue but it seems to be working. >> > > My understanding is that the spam load got so great that the sysadmins > were finally able to overcome the legal department's fears. They've > instituted a proprietary blocklist. I'm getting all this second and > third-hand, so it may not be correct. > That may well be the case. My own hotmail spamtrap address has dropped from 100 per day to one ovry other day or so. I may be able to resume using it as a good email address after four years of only getting garbage in it. From alyoung at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 16:00:55 2004 From: alyoung at spamcop.net (Al Young) Date: Thu Jan 1 22:01:20 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] sending reports silently Message-ID: <011601c3d0dc$a3e87950$0100a8c0@al> Re: In response, we now offer the ability to send reports silently. These reports are not emailed and are not available to anyone but SpamCop administrators and will not be shared (except as aggregate counts). This provides a way for SpamCop to continue to learn about new spam sources for the purpose of blacklisting them without ever tipping off the spammers themselves. In essence, this gives us the ability to form a new, parallel network of "mole" users who provide data only to SpamCop, not the senders or their providers. As an unskilled relative newbie in the fight against SPAM I am uncertain of the most effective way to send reports, and seek guidance - I have no fear of my email address being disclosed even though it may mean being 'bombed'; that being said, what is the most effective way that I can be of service to the cause? Is it being a 'mole' or not? regards Al Young ------------------------------------------------------------------------- FIGHT BACK AGAINST SPAM! Download Spam Inspector, the Award Winning Anti-Spam Filter http://mail.giantcompany.com From nobody at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 21:13:17 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (John Anderson) Date: Thu Jan 1 22:15:29 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: "Socks the Whitehouse Cat" wrote in message news:Xns946394209900Aagent01413mydejacom@216.154.195.61... > There is a bigger problem that needs a solution. I have my own domain. > Every combination of letters, numbers, and valid special characters, > including unicaode characters, is a legit email address. I want to opt > out all of my addresses at once. Based on the current cost of storage, > the FTC budget just to list the valid addresses on my domain alone would > exceed the projected federal revenue stream for 2004. But if the FTC > permits domain wide opt out, the spammers will yowl as soon as *@aol.com > is added to the list. I have two domains, both hosted by the same host, but my mail servers have been down so much, I no longer use the addresses, and the spammers seem to have given up as well ! Final solution to the spam problem, shut down your e-mail accounts, and use instant messenger to keep in touch with your friends! Also, there is that thing with the envelopes and stamps..........!! From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 03:56:55 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (TimeLord) Date: Thu Jan 1 23:00:07 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Quick Reports slow or broken? References: Message-ID: "Peter A. Stock" wrote in message news:bt231k$9ua$1@news.spamcop.net... > No quick reports I have submitted since 11:20 AM Eastern (the last five > hours) have been processed. The Statistics page doesn't seem to show an > unusually high load. Is something broken? > My last report was Thu, 1 Jan 2004 11:38:47 UTC - everything after that says 'no report filed', about 60 spams. From pbw at nospam.gol.com Fri Jan 2 13:59:03 2004 From: pbw at nospam.gol.com (Pat Willener) Date: Fri Jan 2 00:00:30 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: anti-Spamcop trick - Part II: � References: Message-ID: "Michael Lefevre" wrote in message news:bt2451$bj4$1@news.spamcop.net... > ... > Anyway, thanks for the report. I'm passing this along to Julian so he can > take a look. Seems to be fixed now: Parsing input: http:\\CAm.asksfor222.com�qdebttTVW034c2wj.tB.com Hex ampersand decode: http:\\CAm.asksfor222.comqdebttTVW034c2wj.tB.com Normalizing slashes: http://CAm.asksfor222.comqdebttTVW034c2wj.tB.com From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 05:05:06 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tuatara) Date: Fri Jan 2 00:05:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: (media) real spam solution References: <3FF24F58.9060206@yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3ff4fbd4.77777093@news.spamcop.net> On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 16:14:53 -0600, r5 wrote: > Godwin Stewart wrote: >> How much does a spammer have to pay the DMA (or whatever authority would >> be at the head of this scheme) to be labelled a "legitimate marketer" and >> thus get onto the formal registry? > >Probably no more than what all the scammers pay who join >the Better Business Bureau. So long as the BBB gets their >membership fee, they don't care what the members do, even >if it is unlawful (e.g. MLM scams, street spamming, false >advertising). I'll second that statement about the BBB. From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 05:13:22 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tuatara) Date: Fri Jan 2 00:15:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: (media) real spam solution References: <3FF24F58.9060206@yahoo.com> <3FF3085C.6000800@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <3ff4fc1f.77851937@news.spamcop.net> On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 09:33:16 -0800, Tim McGraw wrote: >caroljean52 wrote: >> Spam and Small Biz: Good News, Mostly >> http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/dec2003/sb20031230_3687.htm > >This seems to me to be like bondedsender and >the-carrot-and-the-stick.org, but allowing mail without opting in. YUP! Some providers want some of the action--the dough--to permit spam. The good news is that a registry is bound to fail if recipients did not directly, knowingly, and expressly opt in. It will NOT prevent us from submitting abuse reports, SpamCop reports, black-listing, etc. The registry is a con-job my marketers who dream of spewing under yet another false guise of legitimacy. The DMA proved their own false guise of declaring themselves to be "anti-spam" by conveniently groping to redefine spam such that spam would have a very very narrow definition. They know that there's a sucker born every minute to buy that scam. Just look at the hundreds of media outlets--including the major TV networks--that reported the DMA's "anti-spam" press release. Either too many journalists have no brains, or someone higher up advised them to relay the scam as-is. From tfm3 at nospam.teleproc.com Thu Jan 1 23:36:52 2004 From: tfm3 at nospam.teleproc.com (Thomas Mooney) Date: Fri Jan 2 00:42:10 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] SpamCop gone south again? Message-ID: It sure looks like SpamCop's reporting turnaround has taken another serious turn for the worse. I submitted a measly two pieces for parsing and no response in 15 minutes. Thirty seconds to two minutes would be normal. Also the statistics graphs are bleak averaging under 4 spams per second processed over the past 3+ hours. In that case anywhere from 10-20 per second would be normal. Are there any deputies/admins around? -- TFM3 Note: Spam-resistant e-mail address From support at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 00:44:26 2004 From: support at spamcop.net (JT) Date: Fri Jan 2 00:45:09 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: SpamCop gone south again? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thomas Mooney wrote: > It sure looks like SpamCop's reporting turnaround has taken another serious > turn for the worse. > > I submitted a measly two pieces for parsing and no response in 15 minutes. > Thirty seconds to two minutes would be normal. > > Also the statistics graphs are bleak averaging under 4 spams per second > processed over the past 3+ hours. In that case anywhere from 10-20 per > second would be normal. > > Are there any deputies/admins around? > I sent some emails a few minutes ago. JT From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 00:12:00 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Fri Jan 2 01:16:06 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: <2s2avvsn9c9ft5artsnnnh1ephsjb9lq90@4ax.com> On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 13:56:34 -0600, "Mike Vollmer" wrote: >My biggest concern would that the "or >else" have enough teeth in to encourage compliance (a few years in prison or >a firing squad consisting of volunteers from this forum). Or a friendly beheading... I'll even pull my great Claymore off the wall mounting for that one and dang, but I don't care if I get splattered in the blood... From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 00:19:13 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Fri Jan 2 01:20:09 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 07:43:11 -0700, Socks the Whitehouse Cat wrote: >As soon as I figure out the appropriate place to file a complaint, mine >goes in. Let us in on it, when you get the information... In the meantime, I spent an hour or so this morning reporting via the regular channels and adding a note as to what parts of the law were being violated to all parties, including the FTC (and FDA for the pill pushers). Basically, the new law hasn't changed anything with regard to spam flow. It is as if the law doesn't exist, which is a point I plan on asking about when I visit my local rep's office... maybe even tomorrow if someone is there. From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 00:21:36 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Fri Jan 2 01:25:15 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: <6c3avv8u9smt7eto3kt9acviff45mniupv@4ax.com> On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 18:31:38 +0000 (UTC), Michael Lefevre wrote: >>>2. Right of private action, individuals can sue the spammer in local court; just like >>>with FAX in 47 USC 227 at $500.00 with trebled damages for repeat offenders. >> >> Even if this was left in, the fact that ISPs cannot take independent >> action (i.e., AOL, MSN, etc.) under the law is a problem. > >As I understand it, ISPs can take action, although individuals cannot. >ISPs can take action over misleading from/received headers, dictionary >attacks, harvesting, automatically signing up for accounts, abuse of >relays/proxies or failure to label porn spam, and also for "patterns or >practices" that would violate the provisions about not emailing people who >have opted-out, or not giving them an option to opt-out. Breaking this up a bit... I didn't see anything with regard to a private party (including ISPs) bringing independent legal action, only State and Federal prosecutors. That was part of the California law, not this one... (to the best of my somewhat limited and sometimes forgetful knowledge). From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 00:22:56 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Fri Jan 2 01:25:40 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 18:31:38 +0000 (UTC), Michael Lefevre wrote: >>>3. Specific Tagging requirements in body and header. (Feed those hungry filters) >> >> Porn falls under this requirement... I don't know if anything else >> does or not... > >Sexually oriented UCE has to be labelled in the header, by some prescribed >means that the FTC will specify within 120 days of today (i.e. by some >means that a machine can easily filter when given the header) > >Other UCE has to identify itself as such in some way, but there's no >prescribed means of doing that. The sender can choose to put a tag in the >subject or header, or some words in the body (i.e. it has to be possible >for a human reading the whole message to identify it as UCE, but it >doesn't have to be machine-readable) If that last doesn't leave some holes big enough to drive the Starship Enterprise through, I don't know what it would be. From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 00:24:30 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Fri Jan 2 01:25:51 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 18:31:38 +0000 (UTC), Michael Lefevre wrote: >>>4. No obfuscation what so ever. (More filter food) >> >> Some of this in the new law. > >Yes, it's maybe not as tough as it could be, but it does make it unlawful >to obfuscate anything about who the sender is, or where the message was >transmitted from (no relays, proxies, or faked Received lines), which >outlaws the techniques used for the majority of current spam. In reviewing the received spam today, It appears that no one is paying any attention to this requirement. It is business as usual for the spammers, which is pretty much the way people said it would be (no impact). From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 00:28:07 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Fri Jan 2 01:31:30 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 18:31:38 +0000 (UTC), Michael Lefevre wrote: >>>7. A true do-not-call list with right of action (see #2, #5, and #6) >> >> We will have to see on this one. Date for response is nine months from >> now... > >I can't see this going anywhere. They've clearly listened to enough >already to know that it would either be technically totally unworkable, or >it would result in very wide use which wouldn't be satisfactory for the >DMA-member type marketers. > "Socks" tossed out a suggestion (third-party clearing house using the list provided by the FTC) that might be viable and I hope s/he submits it to the FTC... or maybe Julian could do something with it, since he testified last year ('03) about the spam problem in that three-day forum. He may have some contacts that will actually take a look at the suggestions. As to the international aspect, that's always going to be a problem, but for U.S. Citizens and businesses with U.S. addresses, it should be enforceable... as long as there is some real teeth in the penalty. From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 00:30:05 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Fri Jan 2 01:35:11 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: <4s3avv4n8v4ra72n1ku8p9f5spjiirabed@4ax.com> On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 18:31:38 +0000 (UTC), Michael Lefevre wrote: >>>9. Both the company/person who used/contracted the spammer and the spammer them selves >>>are together liable. >> >> The second major item left out of the new law. This must/needs to be >> corrected before the law has any real hope of being effective. Take >> away the reason to provide e-mailing services and a lot of e-mailers >> will simply go away. >[snip] > >There is a provision for this in the law. I don't know how it will work >out, but "procuring" the origination or transmission of a message in the >law counts as "initiating" a message, just the same as if you actually >originate or transmit the message yourself. I'm not sure if that would >stick if someone hires someone to do marketing but doesn't know the >details of what the marketer is doing. Sounds far too vague, in my opinion. What does "procuring" mean? In my opinion, an advertising agency would fall into this category, not the business being advertised... unless somewhere along the line, personal accountability is used and tracked back to the decision maker... but somehow, I don't think that will happen. From someone at microsoft.com Fri Jan 2 01:46:27 2004 From: someone at microsoft.com (hello) Date: Fri Jan 2 01:50:39 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: anti-Spamcop trick - Part II: � References: Message-ID: "Pat Willener" wrote in message news:bt2tqj$crr$1@news.spamcop.net... > "Michael Lefevre" wrote in message > news:bt2451$bj4$1@news.spamcop.net... > > ... > > Anyway, thanks for the report. I'm passing this along to Julian so he can > > take a look. > > Seems to be fixed now: > Parsing input: > http:\\CAm.asksfor222.com�qdebttTVW034c2wj.tB.com > Hex ampersand decode: http:\\CAm.asksfor222.comqdebttTVW034c2wj.tB.com > Normalizing slashes: http://CAm.asksfor222.comqdebttTVW034c2wj.tB.com > No, this is the incorrect parsing that causes Spamcop to miss the spammer. The character in the middle " " is wrong. It should be "/?" -Marc From someone at microsoft.com Fri Jan 2 02:06:45 2004 From: someone at microsoft.com (hello) Date: Fri Jan 2 02:12:20 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: anti-Spamcop trick - Part II: � References: Message-ID: "Michael Lefevre" wrote in message news:bt2451$bj4$1@news.spamcop.net... > hello wrote: > > "Redstone" wrote in message > > news:Xns94631B9FD9607lumbercartel@216.154.195.61... > >> Appears to be a new anti-Spamcop trick. > [snip] > > > > http:\\CAm.asksfor222.com�qdebttTVW034c2wj.tB.com > > > > I repeatedly get spam from this source (Chinanet), the particular URL is > > different each time, but the slashes are always reversed. In my case, > > Spamcop reverses the slashes correctly. > > > > However, Spmacop repeatedly misses this bit in the middle: > > > > � > > > > which should resolve to "/?" > > Actually it shouldn't - it should resolve to some currently (and probably > forever more) non-existant unicode character. The code above doesn't work > in Mozilla or Opera. IE (and therefore OE), in its infinite wisdom, seems > to change HTML entities with codes of 0x3001 or above into "?", and then > take that "?" as a URL delimeter (which it shows in the URL as "/?") OK, that makes sense. I couldn't figure out how so many different codes could all resolve to the same /? These same spammers have jumped from one obsfucation trick to the next. About 2 months ago they had URLs that were almost a thousand characters long and contained a sting of stuff such as "Rel=http://www.PirIU.com Rel=http://www.jpqg.com Rel=http://www.JPujH.com Methods=http://www.GFX.com ." etc. Their hosting jumps between Chinanet and Pakistan. The block used at Chinanet is identified by Spamhaus as being associated with Ralsky .... (perhaps). From someone at microsoft.com Fri Jan 2 02:14:32 2004 From: someone at microsoft.com (hello) Date: Fri Jan 2 02:17:17 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: "Mike Vollmer" wrote in message news:bt1vbh$4en$1@news.spamcop.net... > > if the current law turns out to be ineffective, I think it is still a step > > forward, and will probably be the first in a series of evolving laws that > > will be tougher. In fact, I think it might even turn out to be a good > thing > > for the anti-spam camp that a weak law was passed in the beginning, > because > > the backlash that it will create once it is clear that the initial law was > > inadequate may persuade legislators to consider much tougher laws than > they > > would have in the first place. > > Good theory, but when was the last time Congress followed up a weak law with > a tougher one, unless the courts threw it out & they had to do something > else. I can't think of any examples. I can think of a lot of examples - more stringent car emissions requirements, stricter anti-smoking legislation, RICO statutes to fight organized crime; none of these required court action. Congressmen get spammed like everyone else, and get complaints from their constituents who get spammed, so I think the reaction is going to be to that the first bill was not effective and something stronger is needed. In any case, it is up to us to make sure our congressmen get this message if they don't figure it out for themselves. From affordable at spamcop.net Thu Jan 1 23:32:00 2004 From: affordable at spamcop.net (Bill Sullivan) Date: Fri Jan 2 02:36:06 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Netscape users suffer increased timeouts? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Update: Despite several timeouts earlier today, I was just able to connect, slowly, but then the site worked normally - page refreshes were good, and all functionality seemed restored. Getting better!! Bill Sullivan wrote: > The timeout threads suggest that the problem is intermittent for the > posters. I'm using the latest Netscape 7.1x browser, which worked fine > before the move to IronPort, but now will not connect to the homepage on > 90% of the attempts. When the homepage opens, there is an 80% liklihood > of timeout on the Held Mail page, and if that loads, a 100% timeout rate > on the submission. > > Seconds later, I can connect (slowly) using IE6x and the entire site > works, if slowly. > Netscape won't load the logo image, and won't run the java applets on > the Held Mail page, either. > > The really strange thing here is that my uplink server is only a few > feet away from the Akamai server for SpamCop. If it's a gateway issue, > it's definitely at the front or back of the Akamai gateway. > > Anyone else experiencing this with Netscape? (I understand that if you > can't connect, you can't readily subscribe to the forum - hopefully, > there are pre-existing subscribers that can respond.) > I opened an IronPort ticket and am waiting for a response.... tried > several times to get info from Admin (Don?) but he gave up after the > initial exchanges. > -- Bill Sullivan One of the original spamcoppers From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 07:44:33 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Robert Slade) Date: Fri Jan 2 02:46:22 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: ATT Deputies Re: child porn or joe job? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: David Butler wrote: > In article , Robert Slade > wrote: > > > > >>Technical Contact: >> >> Webmaster, Amber Sky domain_manager00@hotmail.com >> >> Triester Strasse 10/3 >> >> Suite 115 >> >> Vienna, Neudorf A-2351 >> >> AT >> >> (242) 502-8723 >> >>Record last updated 07-17-2002 09:20:43 AM >> >>Record expires on 09-25-2004 >> >>Record created on 09-25-2001 Snip > Report them to hotmail abuse: TOS for hotmail prohibits using the service for > business and site registration should meet that requirement! > > ;-) Thanks, Already done. I havn't been able to check the address & phone number though. Can anybody else help? Rob From redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com Fri Jan 2 08:10:53 2004 From: redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com (Redstone) Date: Fri Jan 2 03:16:58 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Topica.com, discussion lists and BL References: Message-ID: Marjolein Katsma wrote in news:Xns94637970E48CAhomesitehelp@216.154.195.61: > Yes they do. > > They just don't _always_ do. And don't care whether their clients do. > > A half-assed job still won't cut the mustard. They aren't that clueless, they would rather spam than do the work needed for being a responsible emailer. From redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com Fri Jan 2 08:24:41 2004 From: redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com (Redstone) Date: Fri Jan 2 03:26:23 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: anti-Spamcop trick - Part II: � References: Message-ID: "hello" wrote in news:bt35a6$6m6$1@news.spamcop.net: > > "Michael Lefevre" wrote in > message news:bt2451$bj4$1@news.spamcop.net... >> hello wrote: >> > "Redstone" wrote in >> > message news:Xns94631B9FD9607lumbercartel@216.154.195.61... >> >> Appears to be a new anti-Spamcop trick. >> [snip] >> > >> > http:\\CAm.asksfor222.com�qdebttTVW034c2wj.tB.com >> > >> > I repeatedly get spam from this source (Chinanet), the >> > particular URL is different each time, but the slashes are >> > always reversed. In my case, Spamcop reverses the slashes >> > correctly. >> > >> > However, Spmacop repeatedly misses this bit in the middle: >> > >> > � >> > >> > which should resolve to "/?" >> >> Actually it shouldn't - it should resolve to some currently (and >> probably forever more) non-existant unicode character. The code >> above doesn't work in Mozilla or Opera. IE (and therefore OE), >> in its infinite wisdom, seems to change HTML entities with codes >> of 0x3001 or above into "?", and then take that "?" as a URL >> delimeter (which it shows in the URL as "/?") > > OK, that makes sense. I couldn't figure out how so many different > codes could all resolve to the same /? > > These same spammers have jumped from one obsfucation trick to the > next. About 2 months ago they had URLs that were almost a thousand > characters long and contained a sting of stuff such as > "Rel=http://www.PirIU.com Rel=http://www.jpqg.com > Rel=http://www.JPujH.com Methods=http://www.GFX.com ." etc. Their > hosting jumps between Chinanet and Pakistan. The block used at > Chinanet is identified by Spamhaus as being associated with Ralsky > .... (perhaps). > > > > > It appears to be Ralsky. I get these spams from the Hotmail servers. It appears he has opened dozens of MSN accounts to send out spam. I'm assuming that MSN is doing some kind of promotional. ("Get 1000 minutes free without a credit card". :-p) From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 09:44:20 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Fri Jan 2 04:51:01 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Topica.com, discussion lists and BL References: Message-ID: Redstone (redford_stone@INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com) wrote in news:Xns94641AAB7038lumbercartel@216.154.195.61: > They aren't that > clueless, they would rather spam than do the work needed for being a > responsible emailer. Oh no, they're not clueless. Like I said, they just don't care. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 09:48:59 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Fri Jan 2 04:57:33 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: Steve McGarrett (smcgarrett@hawaii.com) wrote in news:bt26r2$em5$1 @news.spamcop.net: >> Now, of course, the question is whether Muslims _actually_ use such an >> expression (and if so, where). >> > > Smart-ass Westerners working in the Middle East used it 15 or so years > ago. At least according to a friend who was there then. Well, OK - but that doesn't answer my question: do Muslims use that expression (or its equivalent)? -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 09:52:30 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Fri Jan 2 04:57:55 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: Robert Taylor (RobertTaylor@SpamCop.net) wrote in news:bt2784$ff7$1 @news.spamcop.net: >> ...en lokkich nijjier! > > And the same to you (is that Frisian?) Yup. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 10:49:13 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Fri Jan 2 05:56:30 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: How to get your post read: top posting/bottom posting/inline posting References: <01c3cbd2$25968ce0$LocalHost@default> <01c3cd68$b05291c0$LocalHost@default> <5O$4aNe2YfEW@eisner.encompasserve.org> Message-ID: John Malmberg (a@all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa) wrote in news:bt1ggl$860$1@news.spamcop.net: >> Ah, really!? I've never heard of word processors that do that (but I >> only _very_ rarely use one anyway). Any references to forums where I >> might read such results? > > It is a feature of recent Microsoft Word. I forget the exact phrases, > and the invocation of the feature. > > A http://www.google.com may help find some examples. Only if I knew what to look for. I don't even have an idea what keywords to use! -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From rvaessen at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 03:52:24 2004 From: rvaessen at spamcop.net (Robert L. Vaessen) Date: Fri Jan 2 05:59:18 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Connects to whois.arin.net are timing out Message-ID: All - It appears we've got a bigger problem on our hands. I have several reports that have failed to parse correctly/completely. The error I'm receiving (in all instances) is something similar to this: Fatal error parsing spam: Connect failed in s_whois: Interrupted system call 24.128.11.75@whois.arin.net Try again later? All different IP's. All apparently in the ARIN registry block. Manual lookup from web page http://ww1.arin.net/whois/ had no problems. jwhois query from my terminal had no problems. Anyone else seeing this? ARIN blocking spamcop? - Robert From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 10:51:29 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Fri Jan 2 06:00:32 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Microsoft not taking anti-piracy submissions any longer? References: <3FEDFF0D.93A422B@nowhere.com> <3FEFB1A2.3EA87ED8@nowhere.com> Message-ID: Redstone (redford_stone@INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com) wrote in news:Xns946311F1A9694lumbercartel@216.154.195.61: > It appears something is going on.. I was getting a bunch of those > spams each day. Now there is nothing to this day. (Good riddance.) >:-) I had one just days ago. Same old same old. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From masfjorden at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 12:07:19 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (masfjorden@spamcop.net) Date: Fri Jan 2 06:10:48 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Antoine J. Mechelynck skrev i en melding: > a ?crit dans le message de > news:bt2686$dqn$1@news.spamcop.net > >>Antoine J. Mechelynck skrev: > > I notice your message now has "skrev" rather than "write". Why not? My stupid > W98SE puts it in French. Not "skrev i meddelandet" yet. Or is that some other > Scandinavian language? Svensk. And it's past tense (not as in French past perfect). Skrive /skrev /har skrevet =a ?crit. I haven't found out how to install Noors in Mozilla, so I have to manually change wrote to skrev. >(Hard for me to tell them apart on the basis of three > words with no barred o or ? and no thorn or edh.) Well, the thorn and edh were abandoned in late medieval Noors, Zweeds, Deens. IJslands and perhaps Faroese (f?r?yisk)retain them. Helge From steve.lionel at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 06:12:07 2004 From: steve.lionel at spamcop.net (Steve Lionel) Date: Fri Jan 2 06:19:45 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Connects to whois.arin.net are timing out References: Message-ID: "Robert L. Vaessen" wrote in message news:mailman.74.1073041164.14687.spamcop-list@news.spamcop.net... > Fatal error parsing spam: Connect failed in s_whois: Interrupted system > call 24.128.11.75@whois.arin.net > Try again later? > > Anyone else seeing this? ARIN blocking spamcop? I am seeing it too, for what that's worth. Steve From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 11:17:38 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Robert Slade) Date: Fri Jan 2 06:31:19 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Connects to whois.arin.net are timing out In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Robert L. Vaessen wrote: > All - > > It appears we've got a bigger problem on our hands. I have several > reports that have failed to parse correctly/completely. The error I'm > receiving (in all instances) is something similar to this: > > Fatal error parsing spam: Connect failed in s_whois: Interrupted system > call 24.128.11.75@whois.arin.net > Try again later? > > All different IP's. All apparently in the ARIN registry block. Manual > lookup from web page http://ww1.arin.net/whois/ had no problems. jwhois > query from my terminal had no problems. > > Anyone else seeing this? ARIN blocking spamcop? > > - Robert > Short answer is yes Arin and others are blocking spamcop for exceeding lookup limits. It is related to the recent changes as the old agreements SC had no longer apply. Rob From martis.N0sPaM at ntlworld.com Fri Jan 2 11:54:34 2004 From: martis.N0sPaM at ntlworld.com (Martin S) Date: Fri Jan 2 07:04:25 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Connects to whois.arin.net are timing out References: Message-ID: "Robert Slade" wrote in message news:bt3k0j$1or$1@news.spamcop.net... > Robert L. Vaessen wrote: > > Short answer is yes Arin and others are blocking spamcop for exceeding > lookup limits. It is related to the recent changes as the old agreements > SC had no longer apply. > > Rob > Is there any point in continuing to submit spam reports in this case? What does it mean try again later? will we have to re-submit the reports or just follow the link later? Martin From newsgroups at jc-rules.com Fri Jan 2 06:11:29 2004 From: newsgroups at jc-rules.com (JC-Rules) Date: Fri Jan 2 07:15:51 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Limit on emails as attachments? Message-ID: Is there any limit on the quantity of spam emails that can be sent to SpamCop as an attachment? I use SpamSource plugin and this morning, for instance, I grabbed about 40 spams and reported them via email to SpamCop. I then grabbed the remaining 80 something spams and reported them to SpamCop. In other words, I only sent two emails to SpamCop. I have not got any responses yet and was just curious as to whether or not I have possibly gone over some limit. Any help would be appreciated. -- Jerry Phelps - President JC Rules Computing, Inc. Metro 817-498-4890 NRA Lifetime Member TSRA Lifetime Member LEAA Lifetime Member http://www.JC-rules.com The best weapon is ANYTHING that makes your enemy change his or her mind. (Do NOT reply via email but to this Group ONLY. Emails to embedded email address are set to bounce back to sender.) From agent01413 at my-deja.com Fri Jan 2 05:16:15 2004 From: agent01413 at my-deja.com (Socks the Whitehouse Cat) Date: Fri Jan 2 07:15:59 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Connects to whois.arin.net are timing out References: Message-ID: I can't believe that Steve Lionel really had the following to say that was worth commenting on: > "Robert L. Vaessen" wrote in message > news:mailman.74.1073041164.14687.spamcop-list@news.spamcop.net... > >> Fatal error parsing spam: Connect failed in s_whois: Interrupted system >> call 24.128.11.75@whois.arin.net >> Try again later? >> >> Anyone else seeing this? ARIN blocking spamcop? > > I am seeing it too, for what that's worth. > I am getting this problem at 0515 MST -- tired of reading posts from morphing kooks? get a real news reader - http://xnews.newsguy.com From agent01413 at my-deja.com Fri Jan 2 05:30:46 2004 From: agent01413 at my-deja.com (Socks the Whitehouse Cat) Date: Fri Jan 2 07:30:36 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: <6c3avv8u9smt7eto3kt9acviff45mniupv@4ax.com> Message-ID: I can't believe that Tom really had the following to say that was worth commenting on: > > Breaking this up a bit... > > I didn't see anything with regard to a private party (including ISPs) > bringing independent legal action, only State and Federal prosecutors. > That was part of the California law, not this one... (to the best of > my somewhat limited and sometimes forgetful knowledge). > read section 7, subsection (g) "Action by Provider of Internet Access Service" -- tired of reading posts from morphing kooks? get a real news reader - http://xnews.newsguy.com From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Fri Jan 2 13:33:04 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Fri Jan 2 07:40:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Limit on emails as attachments? References: Message-ID: On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 06:11:29 -0600, JC-Rules wrote: > Is there any limit on the quantity of spam emails that can be sent to > SpamCop as an attachment? No single e-mail attachment should be greater than 50KB, and the entire e-mail containing all the attachments shouldn't be bigger than 100KB IIRC. -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- Profanity is the one language all programmers know best. From a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa Fri Jan 2 07:59:24 2004 From: a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa (John Malmberg) Date: Fri Jan 2 08:03:26 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: hello wrote: > > I can think of a lot of examples - more stringent car emissions > requirements, stricter anti-smoking legislation, RICO statutes to fight > organized crime; none of these required court action. Congressmen get > spammed like everyone else, and get complaints from their constituents who > get spammed, so I think the reaction is going to be to that the first bill > was not effective and something stronger is needed. In any case, it is up to > us to make sure our congressmen get this message if they don't figure it out > for themselves. The U.S. Congress already got that message. This law was specifically rushed through to overturn the California law that got passed earlier. This being election season, polititions are appearing in public forums where they have to answer unscripted questions from the voters. Ask them why they passed a law that was legalizing spamming against the recomendation of the national association of state attorney generals. Tell them that you know that the only purpose of the law was to overturn the California anti-spam law that actually had teeth and prevent other states from adopting it. Ask them why anyone should vote for reelection of any candidate that voted for the CAN-SPAM act, because either they new it was a sham from the outset, or they are too clueless to be worth electing. -John wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only From a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa Fri Jan 2 08:08:21 2004 From: a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa (John Malmberg) Date: Fri Jan 2 08:12:45 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Microsoft not taking anti-piracy submissions any longer? In-Reply-To: References: <3FEDFF0D.93A422B@nowhere.com> <3FEFB1A2.3EA87ED8@nowhere.com> Message-ID: Marjolein Katsma wrote: > >>It appears something is going on.. I was getting a bunch of those >>spams each day. Now there is nothing to this day. (Good riddance.) >>:-) > > I had one just days ago. Same old same old. I never get them from the same web host more than a few days. It appears that they get nuked pretty fast. Are you helping the underpaid abuse desk person know how they can make a few bucks by turning in their spamming customer? Or how they are risking an BSA.ORG audit of all their computers for unlicensed software? All computers are disconnected from the network during that audit until it is completely done according to a video tape being circulated by attorneys that specialize in defending corporations from such audits. It has a strong suggestion that you do not want a BSA or an SPA audit, unless you can afford at least a day of downtime. The copyright enforcement groups have made sufficient political contacts and contributions to make sure that they have cooperation of the government in their raids for most countries. -John wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only From agent01413 at my-deja.com Fri Jan 2 06:58:24 2004 From: agent01413 at my-deja.com (Socks the Whitehouse Cat) Date: Fri Jan 2 09:00:28 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Connects to whois.arin.net are timing out - resolved References: Message-ID: I can't believe that Socks the Whitehouse Cat really had the following to say that was worth commenting on: > I can't believe that Steve Lionel really had the following to say that > was worth commenting on: > >> "Robert L. Vaessen" wrote in message >> news:mailman.74.1073041164.14687.spamcop-list@news.spamcop.net... >> >>> Fatal error parsing spam: Connect failed in s_whois: Interrupted >>> system call 24.128.11.75@whois.arin.net >>> Try again later? >>> >>> Anyone else seeing this? ARIN blocking spamcop? >> >> I am seeing it too, for what that's worth. >> > > I am getting this problem at 0515 MST > as of 0700 MST problem seems to have been fixed -- tired of reading posts from morphing kooks? get a real news reader - http://xnews.newsguy.com From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 09:26:45 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (NilsC) Date: Fri Jan 2 09:32:19 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Connects to whois.arin.net are timing out In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Robert L. Vaessen wrote: > All - > > It appears we've got a bigger problem on our hands. I have several > reports that have failed to parse correctly/completely. The error I'm > receiving (in all instances) is something similar to this: > > Fatal error parsing spam: Connect failed in s_whois: Interrupted system > call 24.128.11.75@whois.arin.net > Try again later? > > All different IP's. All apparently in the ARIN registry block. Manual > lookup from web page http://ww1.arin.net/whois/ had no problems. jwhois > query from my terminal had no problems. > > Anyone else seeing this? ARIN blocking spamcop? > > - Robert > It's is still timing out, I lost 4 out of 24 this last run. I lost 3-4 more this morning, some of those I had reported last night, I didnt get the reply by the time I went to bed :-) they where there this morning but a lot of the failed. The time here is 9:25AM EST -- Nils From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 10:20:50 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Ellen) Date: Fri Jan 2 10:30:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Connects to whois.arin.net are timing out References: Message-ID: "NilsC" wrote in message news:bt3v3b$2u8$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > It's is still timing out, I lost 4 out of 24 this last run. I lost 3-4 > more this morning, some of those I had reported last night, I didnt get > the reply by the time I went to bed :-) > they where there this morning but a lot of the failed. The time here is > 9:25AM EST > This has been sent to Julian Ellen From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 09:40:25 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (WazoO) Date: Fri Jan 2 10:45:08 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: How to get your post read: top posting/bottom posting/inline posting References: <01c3cbd2$25968ce0$LocalHost@default> <01c3cd68$b05291c0$LocalHost@default> <5O$4aNe2YfEW@eisner.encompasserve.org> Message-ID: "Marjolein Katsma" wrote in message news:Xns9464783E46650homesitehelp@216.154.195.61... > John Malmberg (a@all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa) wrote in > news:bt1ggl$860$1@news.spamcop.net: > > >> Ah, really!? I've never heard of word processors that do that (but I > >> only _very_ rarely use one anyway). Any references to forums where I > >> might read such results? > > > > It is a feature of recent Microsoft Word. I forget the exact phrases, > > and the invocation of the feature. > > > > A http://www.google.com may help find some examples. > > Only if I knew what to look for. I don't even have an idea what keywords > to use! Is it possible you folks are trying to talk about a grammar checker, perhaps? Or some form of readability index? This is one of those posts where the critical point has been snipped away, so I'm trying to remember just how far off the path this thread has actually gone and where it was yesterday From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 09:40:24 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Fri Jan 2 10:45:28 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 07:59:24 -0500, John Malmberg wrote: >> I can think of a lot of examples - more stringent car emissions >> requirements, stricter anti-smoking legislation, RICO statutes to fight >> organized crime; none of these required court action. Congressmen get >> spammed like everyone else, and get complaints from their constituents who >> get spammed, so I think the reaction is going to be to that the first bill >> was not effective and something stronger is needed. In any case, it is up to >> us to make sure our congressmen get this message if they don't figure it out >> for themselves. > >The U.S. Congress already got that message. This law was specifically >rushed through to overturn the California law that got passed earlier. > >This being election season, polititions are appearing in public forums >where they have to answer unscripted questions from the voters. > >Ask them why they passed a law that was legalizing spamming against the >recomendation of the national association of state attorney generals. > >Tell them that you know that the only purpose of the law was to overturn >the California anti-spam law that actually had teeth and prevent other >states from adopting it. > >Ask them why anyone should vote for reelection of any candidate that >voted for the CAN-SPAM act, because either they new it was a sham from >the outset, or they are too clueless to be worth electing. I couldn't agree with both of you more... It really is time for all of us (U.S.) folks to let our congress critters know just how we feel about this... From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 09:41:04 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Fri Jan 2 10:45:39 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: <6c3avv8u9smt7eto3kt9acviff45mniupv@4ax.com> Message-ID: <884bvvcm65jtch9cik92a9srppruf67sl4@4ax.com> On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 05:30:46 -0700, Socks the Whitehouse Cat wrote: >> I didn't see anything with regard to a private party (including ISPs) >> bringing independent legal action, only State and Federal prosecutors. >> That was part of the California law, not this one... (to the best of >> my somewhat limited and sometimes forgetful knowledge). >> > >read section 7, subsection (g) "Action by Provider of Internet Access >Service" Ah... Thanks! From MikeE at ster.invalid Fri Jan 2 07:43:45 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Fri Jan 2 10:50:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: How to get your post read: top posting/bottom posting/inline posting References: <01c3cd68$b05291c0$LocalHost@default> <5O$4aNe2YfEW@eisner.encompasserve.org> Message-ID: WazoO wrote: > Is it possible you folks are trying to talk about a > grammar checker, perhaps? That's how I interpreted it. MS Word has had a grammar checker since Word97, and it has a number of features that pertain to readability for more than one style. I don't know how much that has advanced since Word97, but it probably has. -- Mike Easter From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 15:49:21 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (nobody@spamcop.net) Date: Fri Jan 2 10:50:15 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Slow listwashing attempt? Message-ID: I sent a spam report on the 22nd of last month and I just received this listwashing attempt now. What is the "correct email" supposed to be? >From "Frank Nazario" { Hi this is not an automated response... please send the correct email so we can unsubscribe you from our mailing list thanks before hand for your attention to this matter. frank mailserver administrator } Subject: "This Christmas Give Your Family Something They Will Remember" http://mailsc.spamcop.net/sc?id=z226222193z7d1cd6972ba420c5ecc2afe2ff95d8 31z From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 15:59:12 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Fri Jan 2 11:00:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: How to get your post read: top posting/bottom posting/inline posting References: <01c3cd68$b05291c0$LocalHost@default> <5O$4aNe2YfEW@eisner.encompasserve.org> Message-ID: WazoO (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt43d9$9hg$1@news.spamcop.net: > Is it possible you folks are trying to talk about a > grammar checker, perhaps? Not me... What was described here (by John Malmerg in message ) was help to write more clearly, rephrasing sentences. That's not the same thing as a grammar checker as I understand it. I've actually used Grammatik - didn't like it - but didn't do anything of the sort. > Or some form of readability index? No again - that might tell you your text may not be clear - but won't rephrase for you. (Some grammar checkers actually include that.) I've just never heard of a tool like John described, hence my curiosity. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From MikeE at ster.invalid Fri Jan 2 08:06:00 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Fri Jan 2 11:10:15 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: How to get your post read: top posting/bottom posting/inline posting References: <01c3cd68$b05291c0$LocalHost@default> <5O$4aNe2YfEW@eisner.encompasserve.org> Message-ID: Marjolein Katsma wrote: > WazoO >> Is it possible you folks are trying to talk about a >> grammar checker, perhaps? > > Not me... What was described here (by John Malmerg in message $9c6$1@news.spamcop.net>) was help to write more clearly, rephrasing > sentences. What John sed was this: John Malmberg wrote: > Some word processors will on request try to rephrase a sentence for > better clarity, and some of their results have been posted on various > internet forums for amusement. John Malmberg wrote: > It is a feature of recent Microsoft Word. I forget the exact phrases, > and the invocation of the feature. -- Mike Easter From wayne at midwestcs.com Fri Jan 2 10:17:14 2004 From: wayne at midwestcs.com (wayne) Date: Fri Jan 2 11:20:10 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Slow listwashing attempt? References: Message-ID: In nobody@spamcop.net writes: > I sent a spam report on the 22nd of last month and I just received this > listwashing attempt now. What is the "correct email" supposed to be? SpamCop sends emails with an address of the report number spamcop.net. The "correct email", I'm guessing is email address that they sent the spam to. When I was using SpamCop, I didn't munge my reports, so my email address was usually found in the spam. Even still, I would every once and a while receive notes asking me for me "real email address". -wayne From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 16:22:22 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Fri Jan 2 11:25:18 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Slow listwashing attempt? References: Message-ID: wayne (wayne@midwestcs.com) wrote in news:x4ad56uxyt.fsf@footbone.midwestcs.com: > When I was using SpamCop, I didn't munge my reports, so my email > address was usually found in the spam. Even still, I would every once > and a while receive notes asking me for me "real email address". Which might have been in the BCc and not even known to you! -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From tmcgraw at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 08:49:19 2004 From: tmcgraw at spamcop.net (Tim McGraw) Date: Fri Jan 2 11:50:30 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Cleaning a list References: <3FF393AC.9000306@spamcop.net> <3FF39732.6020508@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <3FF5A10F.90804@spamcop.net> Merlyn wrote: > > I am going to quit smoking in an hour :0( Whoa. That's my resolution too! So far, so good. From PossumTrot at dont.spam.me Fri Jan 2 08:56:27 2004 From: PossumTrot at dont.spam.me (Possum Trot) Date: Fri Jan 2 12:00:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Fighting was: How to get your post read References: <01c3cd68$b05291c0$LocalHost@default> <5O$4aNe2YfEW@eisner.encompasserve.org> Message-ID: What someone may be thinking of is the free MS Word and PowerPoint plug-in called BULLFIGHTER available from Deloitte Consulting at http://www.dc.com/Insights/bullfighter/. I have used it for nearly a year and have modified it to add "Bullwords" that my co-workers often use that irritate me, such as "methodology". "Marjolein Katsma" wrote in message news:Xns9464ACCC54C09homesitehelp@216.154.195.61... > WazoO (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt43d9$9hg$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > Is it possible you folks are trying to talk about a > > grammar checker, perhaps? > > Not me... What was described here (by John Malmerg in message $9c6$1@news.spamcop.net>) was help to write more clearly, rephrasing > sentences. That's not the same thing as a grammar checker as I > understand it. I've actually used Grammatik - didn't like it - but > didn't do anything of the sort. > > > Or some form of readability index? > > No again - that might tell you your text may not be clear - but won't > rephrase for you. (Some grammar checkers actually include that.) > > I've just never heard of a tool like John described, hence my curiosity. > > > -- > Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ > Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. > Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. > The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. > http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From tmcgraw at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 09:03:46 2004 From: tmcgraw at spamcop.net (Tim McGraw) Date: Fri Jan 2 12:05:05 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: <3FF5A472.60804@spamcop.net> Mike Easter wrote: > >>The Department of Transportation declares that the first week of the >>year is the first _full_ week - i.e., starts on Monday >> >> > > Somewhere I read that the US [in this specific case, US DOT] doesn't use > the same system we are describing For better or worse, time zones in the U.S. are regulated by the Department of Transportation (not NIST as one might expect). http://www.dot.gov/ost/ogc/subject/faqs/regulation/timezone.html In fact Daylight Saving Time (first proposed by Benjamin Franklin) is primarily a transportation safety issue (relating to the safety of children traveling to school). From agent01413 at my-deja.com Fri Jan 2 10:08:08 2004 From: agent01413 at my-deja.com (Socks the Whitehouse Cat) Date: Fri Jan 2 12:10:14 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: I can't believe that Tom really had the following to say that was worth commenting on: > On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 07:59:24 -0500, John Malmberg > wrote: > >> >>Ask them why anyone should vote for reelection of any candidate that >>voted for the CAN-SPAM act, because either they new it was a sham from >>the outset, or they are too clueless to be worth electing. > > I couldn't agree with both of you more... > > It really is time for all of us (U.S.) folks to let our congress > critters know just how we feel about this... > Soliciting our congress critters' assistance in getting the FTC to act might yield interesting results. -- tired of reading posts from morphing kooks? get a real news reader - http://xnews.newsguy.com From MikeE at ster.invalid Fri Jan 2 09:04:41 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Fri Jan 2 12:10:28 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Connects to whois.arin.net are timing out References: Message-ID: It seems to me... I don't exactly know how this would be implemented, but arin supposedly makes its db available in bulk to those who would complete the form and ask for it: http://www.arin.net/policy/2002_4.html ARIN will provide a bulk copy of WHOIS output, including point of contact information, on the ARIN site for download by any organization that wishes to obtain the data providing they agree to ARIN's acceptable use policy. This point of contact information will not include data marked as private. http://www.arin.net/library/agreements/bulkwhois.pdf The ARIN WHOIS data is for Internet operational or technical research purposes pertaining to Internet operations only. It may not be used for advertising, direct marketing, marketing research, or similar purposes. Use of ARIN WHOIS data for these activities is explicitly forbidden. ARIN requests to be notified of any such activities or suspicions thereof. So, my idea would be to 'periodically' dl the arin bulk data, for the purposes of contriving a 'gizmo' which would determine *when* the arin db should be queried, and when it should be lacnic, ripe, apnic, nic.or.jp, nic.or.kr, nic.br, etc. Then, since the arin 'proper' data itself would be too dynamic to keep cached, that the SC would query arin itself for everything that was arin, but would *not* query arin for anything which was to be found in lacnic, ripe, apnic, etc. This would greatly reduce the 'burden' of SC on arin. Again, the purpose of dl/ing the bulk arin data would be for the construction of the gizmo to aim at appropriate registrars, not for the 'actual' arin data itself. -- Mike Easter From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 17:17:13 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Fri Jan 2 12:20:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Fighting was: How to get your post read References: <5O$4aNe2YfEW@eisner.encompasserve.org> Message-ID: Possum Trot (PossumTrot@dont.spam.me) wrote in news:bt4827$l63$1@news.spamcop.net: > "Marjolein Katsma" wrote in message > news:Xns9464ACCC54C09homesitehelp@216.154.195.61... >> WazoO (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in >> news:bt43d9$9hg$1@news.spamcop.net: >> >> > Is it possible you folks are trying to talk about a >> > grammar checker, perhaps? >> >> Not me... What was described here (by John Malmerg in message > $9c6$1@news.spamcop.net>) was help to write more clearly, rephrasing >> sentences. That's not the same thing as a grammar checker as I >> understand it. I've actually used Grammatik - didn't like it - but >> didn't do anything of the sort. >> >> > Or some form of readability index? >> >> No again - that might tell you your text may not be clear - but won't >> rephrase for you. (Some grammar checkers actually include that.) >> >> I've just never heard of a tool like John described, hence my >> curiosity. > What someone may be thinking of is the free MS Word and PowerPoint > plug-in called BULLFIGHTER available from Deloitte Consulting at > http://www.dc.com/Insights/bullfighter/. I have used it for nearly a > year and have modified it to add "Bullwords" that my co-workers often > use that irritate me, such as "methodology". Oh, that's interesting! Humorous site, too. :) Downloading now, so I can play with it... -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From usenet1 at DE.LETE.THISljvideo.com Fri Jan 2 17:18:32 2004 From: usenet1 at DE.LETE.THISljvideo.com (Larry Jandro) Date: Fri Jan 2 12:20:21 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] People really buy from these subjects..? Message-ID: Recent spam subject... Subject: embryo arhat ailanthus eurasia convalescent So this really gets people to buy a high interest rate mortgage or fake viagra or pirated software..? Are spammers THAT stupid, or is the public THAT stupid..? Nearly all the spam I get looks like this now, also with several hundred randomly generated words at the end. The only "real" part of the spam is a URL. -- Larry Jandro - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail "Lord, are we worthy of the task that lies before us, or are we just jerking off..?" From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 17:22:02 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Fri Jan 2 12:25:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: <3FF5A472.60804@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Tim McGraw (tmcgraw@spamcop.net) wrote in news:3FF5A472.60804@spamcop.net: > In fact Daylight Saving Time (first proposed by Benjamin Franklin) is > primarily a transportation safety issue (relating to the safety of > children traveling to school). Interesting. Especially when here, it's largely an energy-saving issue :) -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From maddsybil at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 12:35:16 2004 From: maddsybil at spamcop.net (MaddSybil) Date: Fri Jan 2 12:38:18 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: People really buy from these subjects..? References: Message-ID: "Larry Jandro" wrote in message news:Xns946468DE314D2larryathome@216.154.195.61... > Recent spam subject... > > Subject: embryo arhat ailanthus eurasia convalescent > > So this really gets people to buy a high interest rate mortgage or > fake viagra or pirated software..? > > Are spammers THAT stupid, or is the public THAT stupid..? > > Nearly all the spam I get looks like this now, also with several > hundred randomly generated words at the end. The only "real" part of > the spam is a URL. > > -- > Larry Jandro - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail > > "Lord, are we worthy of the task that lies before us, > or are we just jerking off..?" The spammer doesn't care if people buy anything or not, they get paid either way. The stupids are the people paying these spammers. -Syb Interzone Agent Provocateur www.paulgraham.com/ffbfaq.html From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 12:37:23 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Frank Glenn) Date: Fri Jan 2 12:40:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: How to get your post read: top posting/bottom posting/inline posting References: <5O$4aNe2YfEW@eisner.encompasserve.org> Message-ID: :|:John Malmberg wrote: :|:> It is a feature of recent Microsoft Word. I forget the exact phrases, :|:> and the invocation of the feature. :|: :|: Word 2000 will suggest different phrasing and is especially annoying with passive tense if grammar check is turned. I find it about 50% useful (50% of the time I take the suggestion). I used the "technical" mode most of the time. Frank From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 17:39:39 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net ([H]omer) Date: Fri Jan 2 12:40:22 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: People really buy from these subjects..? References: Message-ID: On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 17:18:32 +0000, Larry Jandro wrote: > Recent spam subject... > > Subject: embryo arhat ailanthus eurasia convalescent > > So this really gets people to buy a high interest rate mortgage or fake > viagra or pirated software..? > > Are spammers THAT stupid, or is the public THAT stupid..? > > Nearly all the spam I get looks like this now, also with several hundred > randomly generated words at the end. The only "real" part of the spam is > a URL. AFAICT such messages are an attempt to verify your address, they don't seem to serve any other purpose. It may also be a spammer testing an open proxy, maybe. From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 12:48:23 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Frank Glenn) Date: Fri Jan 2 12:50:10 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: People really buy from these subjects..? References: Message-ID: In article , usenet1 @DE.LETE.THISljvideo.com says... :|:Nearly all the spam I get looks like this now, also with several :|:hundred randomly generated words at the end. The only "real" part of :|:the spam is a URL. :|: :|: This is to fool the filters into thinking it is real email. Just proves that spammers are stupid, and they lie. Frank From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 12:49:44 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Frank Glenn) Date: Fri Jan 2 12:50:16 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: People really buy from these subjects..? References: Message-ID: In article , maddsybil@spamcop.net says... :|:The stupids are the people paying these spammers. :|: Who probably don't know and don't care what method the spammer used. And so it goes... Frank From tfm3 at nospam.teleproc.com Fri Jan 2 12:17:10 2004 From: tfm3 at nospam.teleproc.com (Thomas Mooney) Date: Fri Jan 2 13:20:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: People really buy from these subjects..? References: Message-ID: Larry Jandro wrote in message news:Xns946468DE314D2larryathome@216.154.195.61... > Recent spam subject... > > Subject: embryo arhat ailanthus eurasia convalescent > > So this really gets people to buy a high interest rate mortgage or > fake viagra or pirated software..? > > Are spammers THAT stupid, or is the public THAT stupid..? Same thing on some of the From: names I've seen lately. Examples: Teheran B. Quiches Barometer G. Calamine When verifying spam vs real mail before reporting, I look at each Subject:/From: pairing to try to find the real mail. When I see subjects such as the one you've shown as an example or from names like the above, I don't need to even think about what the content of the message is. There are some other combinations that are much more effective. While I won't reveal what's almost fooled me (for obvious reasons), suffice it to say that I've been on the brink of falsely reporting my younger son's math teacher (my son would have liked that ) and the person reponsible for organizing campouts for our local boy scout troop. -- TFM3 Note: Spam-resistant e-mail address From gezgin at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 20:21:39 2004 From: gezgin at spamcop.net (Gezgin) Date: Fri Jan 2 13:25:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: People really buy from these subjects..? References: Message-ID: "Larry Jandro" wrote in message > Subject: embryo arhat ailanthus eurasia convalescent > So this really gets people to buy a high interest rate mortgage or > fake viagra or pirated software..? Barnum's Law: There's a sucker born every minute. Frick's Addendum: On the internet, the rate of sucker propagation increases exponentially with time and space. -- Bob Kanyak's Doghouse http://kanyak.com From spammers_lie at rambler.ru Fri Jan 2 18:24:44 2004 From: spammers_lie at rambler.ru (Anri Erinin) Date: Fri Jan 2 13:30:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Useful base64 decoder tool: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: John J. Burness wrote: >> >> Web-Based Base64 Converter - ?david.carter-tod.com/base64/default.asp >> >> More and more text of spam messages is obfuscated into base64 to make it >> difficult for humans to read. This tool decodes it. > > I've tended to use:- > http://www.gulftech.org/base64.pl And I am still stuck with: copy/paste the encoded part in notepad. save as *.uue, open with winzip. -- Message-ID: <20030823172314.07346.00000168@mb-m26.aol.com> If Sobig is really a spamming virus, we really don't need to know who wrote it, we just need to know who is spamming with it. (I'm sure they will be happy tell who wrote it during the 'interview' phase...) From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 13:32:49 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Fri Jan 2 13:35:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: How to get your post read: top posting/bottom posting/inline posting References: <01c3cd68$b05291c0$LocalHost@default> <5O$4aNe2YfEW@eisner.encompasserve.org> Message-ID: "Mike Easter" wrote in message news:bt43pn$akv$1@news.spamcop.net... > WazoO wrote: > > Is it possible you folks are trying to talk about a > > grammar checker, perhaps? > > That's how I interpreted it. MS Word has had a grammar checker since > Word97, and it has a number of features that pertain to readability for > more than one style. I don't know how much that has advanced since > Word97, but it probably has. > It's still totally useless for writing anything that remotely resembles a technical report -- it complains that your order of your words in some sentences are incorrect. Typically certain sections of a paper are written kind of like a powerpoint bullet presentation: first part of the sentence(s) describes or names the top level object/topic, then the rest of it states what was done/performed/happened. Word wants to reverse the order, so you see the consequences or actions first, then it tells you the object of which you just read about. Might be "grammatically" correct, but it makes a report really hard to parse in the human mind. From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 13:45:30 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Fri Jan 2 13:50:22 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Posting etiquette thread morphed to Word GrammarCheck (line 441 error) Message-ID: Frank Glenn" wrote in message > Word 2000 will suggest different phrasing and is especially annoying > with passive tense if grammar check is turned. I find it about 50% > useful (50% of the time I take the suggestion). I used the > "technical" mode most of the time. > Frank Furrfu! I just re-checked the same paper I mentioned in my other post in "technical" mode and it was even worse! It rejected subscripts!! How in the world are you supposed to write an non-trivial equation without subscripts? And here's another laugher -- it wanted "7.5 ohms" to read "7.5-ohms". It's useless, I tell ya! From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 19:26:19 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Fri Jan 2 14:30:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Posting etiquette thread morphed to Word GrammarCheck (line 441 error) References: Message-ID: indigo (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt4e8b$11j$2@news.spamcop.net: > Furrfu! I just re-checked the same paper I mentioned in my other post > in "technical" mode and it was even worse! It rejected subscripts!! > How in the world are you supposed to write an non-trivial equation > without subscripts? Pathetic! Isn't there something like a "technical" word processor? Failing that, how about using HTML+MathML? > And here's another laugher -- it wanted "7.5 ohms" to read "7.5-ohms". ??? Can't even image what kind of rule that's supposed to comply with (unless you used it as an adjective?). -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 14:36:48 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Fri Jan 2 14:40:17 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Posting etiquette thread morphed to Word GrammarCheck (line 441 error) References: Message-ID: "Marjolein Katsma" wrote in message news:Xns9464CFE9E5371homesitehelp@216.154.195.61... > indigo (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt4e8b$11j$2@news.spamcop.net: > > > Furrfu! I just re-checked the same paper I mentioned in my other post > > in "technical" mode and it was even worse! It rejected subscripts!! > > How in the world are you supposed to write an non-trivial equation > > without subscripts? > > Pathetic! > > Isn't there something like a "technical" word processor? > Failing that, how about using HTML+MathML? > I prefer to proofread everything myself thru several iterations, then have someone else proofread it......that helps catch those little mental blind spots we all have when reading our own writings. From x at x.com Fri Jan 2 15:00:52 2004 From: x at x.com (Barbara Yoon) Date: Fri Jan 2 15:05:07 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: 0fficial Notice for aII E-Bay users Message-ID: "0fficial Notice for aII E-Bay users" -- are these spam e-mails that ask you to "update and verify your current [credit card] information" for using ebay really criminal fraud enterprises, and is ebay aware of this?! I find it especially 'fishy' since I myself have never used ebay... From spamcop001 at bellsouth.net Fri Jan 2 14:05:46 2004 From: spamcop001 at bellsouth.net (Bo Briggs) Date: Fri Jan 2 15:10:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: People really buy from these subjects..? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Larry Jandro wrote: > Recent spam subject... > > Subject: embryo arhat ailanthus eurasia convalescent > > So this really gets people to buy a high interest rate mortgage or > fake viagra or pirated software..? > > Are spammers THAT stupid, or is the public THAT stupid..? > Yes (to both)[1]. They speak a common language. [1] Although some numbers of spammers aren't and some of the public isn't. That's why there is a spam problem. -- Bo Briggs From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Fri Jan 2 14:10:22 2004 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Fri Jan 2 15:15:05 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: 0fficial Notice for aII E-Bay users References: Message-ID: <1vC+HjrTcAO+@eisner.encompasserve.org> In article , "Barbara Yoon" writes: > "0fficial Notice for aII E-Bay users" -- are these spam e-mails that ask > you to "update and verify your current [credit card] information" for > using ebay really criminal fraud enterprises, Yes. > and is ebay aware of this?! They will be if you add eBay as a recipient of your SpamCop reports. > I find it especially 'fishy' since I myself have never used ebay... I have used eBay, but I have never given them the email address to which those pieces of spam come. From NoSpamHere at Tulaweb.net Fri Jan 2 15:37:41 2004 From: NoSpamHere at Tulaweb.net (Dave Sanderson) Date: Fri Jan 2 15:40:11 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: sending reports silently In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Al Young wrote: > As an unskilled relative newbie in the fight against SPAM > I am uncertain of the most effective way to send reports, > and seek guidance - I have no fear of my email address being > disclosed even though it may mean being 'bombed'; that being > said, what is the most effective way that I can be of service > to the cause? Is it being a 'mole' or not? Al I'm sure you'll get several different opinions on it, but my opinion is that while mole status may be good for the scbl, reporting to the admin of the spam source and spamvertized sites does a better job of making the life of the spammer more difficult and less profitable, which is my primary goal. -- Dave Just a spamcop user From arielb at sliceplus.com Fri Jan 2 16:12:53 2004 From: arielb at sliceplus.com (Ariel Benzakein) Date: Fri Jan 2 16:15:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: 0fficial Notice for aII E-Bay users References: Message-ID: "Barbara Yoon" wrote in message news:bt4im0$858$1@news.spamcop.net... > "0fficial Notice for aII E-Bay users" -- are these spam e-mails that ask > you to "update and verify your current [credit card] information" for > using ebay really criminal fraud enterprises, and is ebay aware of this?! > I find it especially 'fishy' since I myself have never used ebay... I suggest you visit: http://pages.ebay.com/help/confidence/spoof-email.html They have information on how to spot and report these fradulent emails. Ariel From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 16:47:06 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Fri Jan 2 16:45:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Posting etiquette thread morphed to Word GrammarCheck (line 441 error) References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:bt4h8h$6a8$1@news.spamcop.net... > I prefer to proofread everything myself thru several iterations, then have > someone else proofread it......that helps catch those little mental blind > spots we all have when reading our own writings. > Someone gave me a hint about proofreading - read it backwards. That way you don't adjust for context and miss certain typos. for columns of numbers, I check them by place column and it really goes quickly. Miss Betsy From bill_beyer at excite.cXoYmZ Fri Jan 2 14:17:40 2004 From: bill_beyer at excite.cXoYmZ (Bill Beyer) Date: Fri Jan 2 17:20:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: 0fficial Notice for aII E-Bay users References: Message-ID: "Barbara Yoon" wrote in message news:bt4im0$858$1@news.spamcop.net... > "0fficial Notice for aII E-Bay users" -- are these spam e-mails that ask > you to "update and verify your current [credit card] information" for > using ebay really criminal fraud enterprises, and is ebay aware of this?! > I find it especially 'fishy' since I myself have never used ebay... Forward the email with complete headers to spoof@ebay.com. From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Fri Jan 2 23:46:16 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Fri Jan 2 17:50:05 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: a ?crit dans le message de news:bt3jd6$108$1@news.spamcop.net > Antoine J. Mechelynck skrev i en melding: [...] > > I notice your message now has "skrev" rather than "write". Why not? > > My stupid W98SE puts it in French. Not "skrev i meddelandet" yet. > > Or is that some other Scandinavian language? > Svensk. And it's past tense (not as in French past perfect). > Skrive /skrev /har skrevet =a ?crit. The French "pass? simple" (simple past tense) is now limited in use to "book language", i.e., stories and such. In normal, "colloquial" use it has been replaced by the "pass? compos?", so that "a ?crit" is the "right" translation for wrote / skrev / schreef / schreib / napisal / escribi? / etc. > I haven't found out how to install Noors in Mozilla, so I have to > manually change wrote to skrev. I have (but don't normally use for mail/news) Netscape 7 which is based on Mozilla. Try Options -> Preferences -> Appearance -> Languages/Content. Chack that you have either Norwegian/Bokma?l or Norwegian/Nynorsk (or both) installed and if not, "Download More". (You may need to reboot if you do). Similarly for "Content packs". You may have to do some more tweaking and/or rebooting. If you don't have those preferences in Mozilla, you may have to edit the startup preferences files (which are in ASCII). There is an "unofficial Netscape FAQ" at http://www.ufaq.org/ . Some of it is probably relevant for Mozilla too. I would have to change "a ?crit dans le message de" by "wrote in the message" in OE if I thought it were really important for the people who are going to read it. > > (Hard for me to tell them apart on the basis of three > > words with no barred o or ? and no thorn or edh.) > Well, the thorn and edh were abandoned in late medieval Noors, Zweeds, > Deens. > IJslands and perhaps Faroese (f?r?yisk)retain them. That's what I meant: presence of thorn and/or edh means it's probably Icelandic, barred o means it's not Swedish (which uses o-umlaut instead) but in their absence I don't know Scandinavian languages well enough to tell them apart from one another. (Finnish -- finsk, suomalainen -- is of course not a Scandinavian language even though Finland is often regarded as part of Scandinavia politically and geographically.) > > Helge Regards, Tony. From kenbrody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 16:46:20 2004 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Fri Jan 2 17:50:23 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: <3FF5E6AC.61209744@spamcop.net> Socks the Whitehouse Cat wrote: [...] > Soliciting our congress critters' assistance in getting the FTC to act > might yield interesting results. You mean the "Government-Sponsored List of Confirmed E-mail Addresses"? -- +---------+----------------------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth | kenbrody at spamcop.net | "The opinions expressed | | J. | http://www.hvcomputer.com | herein are not necessarily | | Brody | http://www.fptech.com | those of fP Technologies." | +---------+----------------------------------+-----------------------------+ From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Sat Jan 3 00:03:52 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Fri Jan 2 18:05:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: PAGING DEPUTIES - securityfocus.com mailing lists References: Message-ID: On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 10:02:10 -0700, SpamCop Admin wrote: > Anybody who sends a report to that address will get keelhauled. :-) OK. So has somebody just got themselves thwapped now? list2.securityfocus.com is listed again. -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- If flying is so safe, why do they call the airport the terminal? From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Fri Jan 2 17:12:58 2004 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Fri Jan 2 18:15:28 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: <3FF5E6AC.61209744@spamcop.net> Message-ID: In article <3FF5E6AC.61209744@spamcop.net>, Kenneth Brody writes: > Socks the Whitehouse Cat wrote: > [...] >> Soliciting our congress critters' assistance in getting the FTC to act >> might yield interesting results. > > You mean the "Government-Sponsored List of Confirmed E-mail Addresses"? I don't know what Socks meant, but I mean: Government-published list of SHA-1 checksums which is considerably less useful to spammers. From smcgarrett at hawaii.com Fri Jan 2 17:29:33 2004 From: smcgarrett at hawaii.com (Steve McGarrett) Date: Fri Jan 2 18:30:52 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Antoine J. Mechelynck wrote: > It's a question of the "dominical letter". (Where the hell did I put that Que > sais-je? titled "Le calendrier"?) I don't remember by heart which letter > corresponds to which calendar but I remember that there are 7 letters, A B C D E > F G, and that the dominical letter goes backward 1 unit in the series on the 1st > of January every year, and on the 1st of March (or the 25th of February if you > count in Latin) on leap years. Ah ha. I was wondering when we were going to get to dominical letters. On January 1, 2004 at 02:06 GMT, Steve McGarrett wrote: > Discussions of what time of day the day begins, Golden Numbers and > Dominical Letters, how a calendar can be off by 12 seconds per year, > etc. left for another time. The dominical letter for 2004 is d for January and February, c for the rest of the year. If you start with January 1 and put the letters A b c d e f g on the days (using d for both February 29 and March 1) the dominical letter tells you which days are Sundays. Now about the Golden number which, for 2004, is 10. . . Aloha, McGarrettt "LART 'em, Danno!" From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 15:32:27 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Eric) Date: Fri Jan 2 18:35:09 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? In-Reply-To: References: <3FF5E6AC.61209744@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Larry Kilgallen wrote: > In article <3FF5E6AC.61209744@spamcop.net>, Kenneth Brody writes: > >>Socks the Whitehouse Cat wrote: >>[...] >> >>>Soliciting our congress critters' assistance in getting the FTC to act >>>might yield interesting results. >> >>You mean the "Government-Sponsored List of Confirmed E-mail Addresses"? > > > I don't know what Socks meant, but I mean: > > Government-published list of SHA-1 checksums > > which is considerably less useful to spammers. Much less useful than a cleartext list of addresses, true, although it just means they need to run their dictionary attacks against the list, one by one, and see if they get a hit by trial-and-error. Judging from server logs here, they'll start with books of baby names, lists of role account names, any usernames that previously worked at any domain and might work on a random new domain, etc. Hey, maybe all the spammers will get together and build a grid network to distribute the computation! I wonder what the screensaver for SETI-spam at home might look like! :-) (the preceding paragraph was a joke, not meant to disparage the SETI program or the SETI At Home project in any way!) The only way a no-spam list, whether digested or cleartext, will help is if the authorities (if anyone has authority, at this point that's far from clear) go after violators relentlessly and expensively (big fines and/or jail time). It would probably help if the list is well seeded with klinkers (spamtraps and other known false addresses added intentionally), as road maps and snail-mailing lists are. Legitimate direct-mail marketers (really, that's not an oxymoron) know better than to risk tripping over one of those, it's time the email spammers found out how expensive it can be to ignore them. For a one-time use list, getting a second mailpiece at a trap address triggers the penalty. For spam, a single email spam would trigger an investigation to make sure it wasn't an innocent typo. I still think the biggest reduction in spam will be achieved simply by enforcing the prohibition against falsifying the headers (origin and reply/return address). By far the vast majority of spam I've seen has false header/envelope information. "Forge an email address, go to jail" -- I like that idea! From redball at mindspring.com Fri Jan 2 17:39:58 2004 From: redball at mindspring.com (Trish Roberts-Miller) Date: Fri Jan 2 18:39:52 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: How to get your post read: top posting/bottom posting/inline In-Reply-To: <200401021514.1aCvGn7E23Nl3oX0@new.mail.atl.earthlink.net> References: <200401021514.1aCvGn7E23Nl3oX0@new.mail.atl.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <3FF6014E.9010303@mindspring.com> [begin quoted] "Mike Easter" wrote in message news:bt43pn$akv$1@news.spamcop.net... >> WazoO wrote: > > >>> > Is it possible you folks are trying to talk about a >>> > grammar checker, perhaps? >> >> >> >> That's how I interpreted it. MS Word has had a grammar checker since >> Word97, and it has a number of features that pertain to readability for >> more than one style. I don't know how much that has advanced since >> Word97, but it probably has. > [end quoted] Nah, it has features that relate to a bunch of random rules imposed by someone's high school English teacher. So it mixes usage (not grammar) rules and style preferences. [begin quoted] It's still totally useless for writing anything that remotely resembles a technical report -- it complains that your order of your words in some sentences are incorrect. Typically certain sections of a paper are written kind of like a powerpoint bullet presentation: first part of the sentence(s) describes or names the top level object/topic, then the rest of it states what was done/performed/happened. Word wants to reverse the order, so you see the consequences or actions first, then it tells you the object of which you just read about. Might be "grammatically" correct, but it makes a report really hard to parse in the human mind. [end quoted] It's pretty good on catching some subject/verb agreeemnt errors, and that's about it. I tell my students to turn it off. If you want good advice on writing technical reports, Joseph Williams' _Style: Ten Lessons in Clarity and Grace_ is GREAT. -- Trish Roberts-Miller redball@mindspring.com http://www.cwrl.utexas.edu/~robertsmiller/homepage.html "if I cling to circumstances I could feel not responsible. Only she who says she did not choose, is the loser in the end." (A. Rich) From MikeE at ster.invalid Fri Jan 2 15:40:38 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Fri Jan 2 18:45:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: How to get your post read: top posting/bottom posting/inline References: <200401021514.1aCvGn7E23Nl3oX0@new.mail.atl.earthlink.net> Message-ID: Trish Roberts-Miller wrote: > "Mike Easter" >>> That's how I interpreted it. MS Word has had a grammar checker >>> since Word97, and it has a number of features that pertain to >>> readability for more than one style. I don't know how much that >>> has advanced since Word97, but it probably has. > It's pretty good on catching some subject/verb agreeemnt errors, > and that's about it. I tell my students to turn it off. I hope you folks aren't interpreting my remarks about what Word97 has to indicate that I think it is a useful 'feature'. I've never used it in my life. I suppose it might be kinda useful for something, like catching the equivalent of 'typo/s' but not for making 'real' grammatical changes. > If you want good advice on writing technical reports, Joseph Williams' > _Style: Ten Lessons in Clarity and Grace_ is GREAT. -- Mike Easter From smcgarrett at hawaii.com Fri Jan 2 17:45:19 2004 From: smcgarrett at hawaii.com (Steve McGarrett) Date: Fri Jan 2 18:50:19 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Marjolein Katsma wrote: > > Except, of course, that 2000 was _not_ a leap year. ;-) > So it was *you* who filed SPR 11-60903 twenty years ago: http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/products/year-2000/leap.html Aloha, McGarrett "LART 'em, Danno!" From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Fri Jan 2 18:00:54 2004 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Fri Jan 2 19:05:11 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: <3FF5E6AC.61209744@spamcop.net> Message-ID: In article , Eric writes: > Larry Kilgallen wrote: > >> In article <3FF5E6AC.61209744@spamcop.net>, Kenneth Brody writes: >> >>>Socks the Whitehouse Cat wrote: >>>[...] >>> >>>>Soliciting our congress critters' assistance in getting the FTC to act >>>>might yield interesting results. >>> >>>You mean the "Government-Sponsored List of Confirmed E-mail Addresses"? >> >> >> I don't know what Socks meant, but I mean: >> >> Government-published list of SHA-1 checksums >> >> which is considerably less useful to spammers. > > Much less useful than a cleartext list of addresses, true, although > it just means they need to run their dictionary attacks against > the list, one by one, and see if they get a hit by trial-and-error. But there is little to induce a spammer to go to that effort _just_ to compose a list of email addressees on the do-not-spam list. It is much better (from a spammer's perspective) to also spam those folks who have not signed up. > Judging from server logs here, they'll start with books of baby names, > lists of role account names, any usernames that previously worked at > any domain and might work on a random new domain, etc. Just like they are doing now. > The only way a no-spam list, whether digested or cleartext, > will help is if the authorities (if anyone has authority, at this > point that's far from clear) go after violators relentlessly and > expensively (big fines and/or jail time). _Some_ spammers (mainsleaze?) will honor the list due to fear of publicity. Any reduction is good -- no mechanism is perfect. > I still think the biggest reduction in spam will be achieved > simply by enforcing the prohibition against falsifying the > headers (origin and reply/return address). By far the vast > majority of spam I've seen has false header/envelope information. > > "Forge an email address, go to jail" -- I like that idea! Elliot Spitzer seems to have no compunction about going after such falsification by spammers under existing law, but if a new law wakes up some other prosecutors, that is good. From smcgarrett at hawaii.com Fri Jan 2 18:01:07 2004 From: smcgarrett at hawaii.com (Steve McGarrett) Date: Fri Jan 2 19:05:31 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: <3FF5A472.60804@spamcop.net> References: <3FF5A472.60804@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Tim McGraw wrote: > In fact Daylight Saving Time (first proposed by Benjamin Franklin) is > primarily a transportation safety issue (relating to the safety of > children traveling to school). > Umm. . . I don't think that's quite right. Making it dark for an extra hour in the morning wouldn't seem to contribute to the safety of children. Perhaps you're thinking with the ill-fated attempt in 1973 to go on DST year-round. This was a few months after the start of the Arab oil embargo, about the same time the old 55 mile per hour national speed limit went into effect. Unfortunately, the stupid congresscritters scheduled year-round DST to start almost immediately, which meant early January, when sunrise is the latest. A couple of children were killed while waiting for school buses in the dark, and before the next winter the law had been repealed. I believe DST started as a means of saving fuel during WWI and WWII. It was started up again in the U.S. in 1966. And, FWIW, Franklin meant his essay as a joke. Aloha, McGarrett "LART 'em, Danno!" From skiwi+newsgroups at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 16:07:33 2004 From: skiwi+newsgroups at spamcop.net (Skiwi) Date: Fri Jan 2 19:10:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] DEPUTIES - "feature" request - redirect from vww.spamcop.net Message-ID: Deputies, Is there a reason that the admin can't set up a web page or DNS redirect from Vww.spamcop.net to www.spamcop.net? Thanks: GREG... From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Sat Jan 3 01:14:08 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Fri Jan 2 19:15:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: "Steve McGarrett" a ?crit dans le message de news:bt4usn$o29$1@news.spamcop.net [...] > Now about the Golden number which, for 2004, is 10. . . > > Aloha, > McGarrettt > "LART 'em, Danno!" Maybe. But then you only need the golden number (or, better IIRC, at least in Gregorian, the epact) if you want to follow the moon around, e.g. to compute the date of Easter. (I don't think it's precise enough if what you want is to construct a nautical almanac with times and heights of the tides). Regards, Tony. From michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com Sat Jan 3 00:15:46 2004 From: michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com (Michael Lefevre) Date: Fri Jan 2 19:20:12 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: PAGING DEPUTIES - securityfocus.com mailing lists References: Message-ID: Godwin Stewart wrote: > On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 10:02:10 -0700, SpamCop Admin wrote: > >> Anybody who sends a report to that address will get keelhauled. :-) > > OK. So has somebody just got themselves thwapped now? > > list2.securityfocus.com is listed again. I've delisted it. The users in question have sent the reports to Don directly, so he'll know about it, but I'm copying this message to him anyway. I would guess the thwapping hasn't happened yet - I'm sure Don will let us know :) In this case, the original report seems to be of a list message which got a Spamassassin score of 5.5, due to being sent to a bunch of similar recipients (it was crossposted to a bunch of lists), and being sent from a hotmail address ending with a number, but not passing through hotmail's servers. -- Michael From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Sat Jan 3 01:29:05 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Fri Jan 2 19:30:12 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: <3FF5A472.60804@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Steve McGarrett" a ?crit dans le message de news:bt50nt$r4g$1@news.spamcop.net > Tim McGraw wrote: > > > In fact Daylight Saving Time (first proposed by Benjamin Franklin) > > is primarily a transportation safety issue (relating to the safety > > of children traveling to school). > > > > Umm. . . I don't think that's quite right. Making it dark for an extra > hour in the morning wouldn't seem to contribute to the safety of > children. > > Perhaps you're thinking with the ill-fated attempt in 1973 to go on > DST year-round. This was a few months after the start of the Arab oil > embargo, about the same time the old 55 mile per hour national speed > limit went into effect. Unfortunately, the stupid congresscritters > scheduled year-round DST to start almost immediately, which meant > early January, when sunrise is the latest. A couple of children were > killed while waiting for school buses in the dark, and before the > next winter the law had been repealed. > > I believe DST started as a means of saving fuel during WWI and WWII. > It was started up again in the U.S. in 1966. > > And, FWIW, Franklin meant his essay as a joke. > > Aloha, > McGarrett > "LART 'em, Danno!" We had summer-time all year round here when I was young. Don't remember how long ago it was changed, but nowadays we have summer time (GMT+1) in winter and "double summer time" (GMT+2) in summer (yes, our "theoretical legal time" is GMT, ot UT if you will, since all of Belgium [and of the Benelux, for that matter] has a longitude of less than 7?30' E). Was it a joke, a tongue-in-cheek joke, a serious proposal he didn't care too much about? Unless there is written proof one way or another, maybe no one will ever know for sure. Regards, Tony. From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Fri Jan 2 18:37:41 2004 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Fri Jan 2 19:40:14 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: "feature" request - redirect from vww.spamcop.net References: Message-ID: In article , Skiwi writes: > Is there a reason that the admin can't set up a web page or DNS redirect > from Vww.spamcop.net to www.spamcop.net? But what about: aww.spamcop.net bww.spamcop.net cww.spamcop.net dww.spamcop.net eww.spamcop.net fww.spamcop.net gww.spamcop.net hww.spamcop.net iww.spamcop.net jww.spamcop.net kww.spamcop.net lww.spamcop.net mww.spamcop.net nww.spamcop.net oww.spamcop.net pww.spamcop.net qww.spamcop.net rww.spamcop.net sww.spamcop.net tww.spamcop.net uww.spamcop.net www.spamcop.net xww.spamcop.net yww.spamcop.net zww.spamcop.net waw.spamcop.net wbw.spamcop.net wcw.spamcop.net wdw.spamcop.net wew.spamcop.net wfw.spamcop.net wgw.spamcop.net whw.spamcop.net wiw.spamcop.net wjw.spamcop.net wkw.spamcop.net wlw.spamcop.net wmw.spamcop.net wnw.spamcop.net wow.spamcop.net wpw.spamcop.net wqw.spamcop.net wrw.spamcop.net wsw.spamcop.net wtw.spamcop.net wuw.spamcop.net wvw.spamcop.net wxw.spamcop.net wyw.spamcop.net wzw.spamcop.net wwa.spamcop.net wwb.spamcop.net wwc.spamcop.net wwd.spamcop.net wwe.spamcop.net wwf.spamcop.net wwg.spamcop.net wwh.spamcop.net wwi.spamcop.net wwj.spamcop.net wwk.spamcop.net wwl.spamcop.net wwm.spamcop.net wwn.spamcop.net wwo.spamcop.net wwp.spamcop.net wwq.spamcop.net wwr.spamcop.net wws.spamcop.net wwt.spamcop.net wwu.spamcop.net wwv.spamcop.net wwx.spamcop.net wwy.spamcop.net wwz.spamcop.net And then one could go on to double-character errors... From skiwi+newsgroups at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 16:59:36 2004 From: skiwi+newsgroups at spamcop.net (Skiwi) Date: Fri Jan 2 20:00:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: "feature" request - redirect from vww.spamcop.net In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Larry Kilgallen wrote: > In article , Skiwi writes: > > >>Is there a reason that the admin can't set up a web page or DNS redirect >>from Vww.spamcop.net to www.spamcop.net? > > > But what about: > > aww.spamcop.net bww.spamcop.net cww.spamcop.net dww.spamcop.net > eww.spamcop.net fww.spamcop.net gww.spamcop.net hww.spamcop.net > iww.spamcop.net jww.spamcop.net kww.spamcop.net lww.spamcop.net > mww.spamcop.net nww.spamcop.net oww.spamcop.net pww.spamcop.net > qww.spamcop.net rww.spamcop.net sww.spamcop.net tww.spamcop.net > uww.spamcop.net www.spamcop.net xww.spamcop.net yww.spamcop.net > zww.spamcop.net > > waw.spamcop.net wbw.spamcop.net wcw.spamcop.net wdw.spamcop.net > wew.spamcop.net wfw.spamcop.net wgw.spamcop.net whw.spamcop.net > wiw.spamcop.net wjw.spamcop.net wkw.spamcop.net wlw.spamcop.net > wmw.spamcop.net wnw.spamcop.net wow.spamcop.net wpw.spamcop.net > wqw.spamcop.net wrw.spamcop.net wsw.spamcop.net wtw.spamcop.net > wuw.spamcop.net wvw.spamcop.net wxw.spamcop.net wyw.spamcop.net > wzw.spamcop.net > > wwa.spamcop.net wwb.spamcop.net wwc.spamcop.net wwd.spamcop.net > wwe.spamcop.net wwf.spamcop.net wwg.spamcop.net wwh.spamcop.net > wwi.spamcop.net wwj.spamcop.net wwk.spamcop.net wwl.spamcop.net > wwm.spamcop.net wwn.spamcop.net wwo.spamcop.net wwp.spamcop.net > wwq.spamcop.net wwr.spamcop.net wws.spamcop.net wwt.spamcop.net > wwu.spamcop.net wwv.spamcop.net wwx.spamcop.net wwy.spamcop.net > wwz.spamcop.net > > And then one could go on to double-character errors... Good point/s... However, IMHO, vww.spamcop.com is the one the most likely by far to be hit by unsuspecting potential .NET users. That is, many mediator commentators and "help" forums erroneously direct people to spamcop.COM, who have has set up this "false" redirect (see end of post.) It is also a fiendishly subtle redirect, as aww.aspamcop.net and such is much more obvious to the eye than vww.spamcop.net... I don't understand the procedures for redirects very well - I assume spamcop.net owns all the permutations of its name as above - i.e., aaa.spamcop.net through zzz.spamcop.net and *technically* they could set up these redirects if the wanted? (painful as that might be...) GREG... -------------- In case you didn't see it, the spamcop.COM redirect appears as follows: - you type in www.spamcop.com to your browser - it redirects to vww.spamcop.com, but you may not notice the 'v' instead of the 'w' - you manually edit the URL in your browser by typing "net" to replace the "com" - it tells you spamcop.net can not be found; you *think* that it is referring to www.spamcop.net, but your browser was in fact looking for vww.spamcop.net - hence the "false" redirect.. From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Sat Jan 3 02:06:56 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Fri Jan 2 20:10:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: "feature" request - redirect from vww.spamcop.net References: Message-ID: "Larry Kilgallen" a ?crit dans le message de news:IJ20aWP2IaFV@eisner.encompasserve.org > In article , Skiwi > writes: > > > Is there a reason that the admin can't set up a web page or DNS > > redirect > > from Vww.spamcop.net to www.spamcop.net? > > But what about: > > aww.spamcop.net bww.spamcop.net cww.spamcop.net dww.spamcop.net [...] For the reason about the query, have a look at the thread "Is SPAMCOP part of the problem?" in .help. Apparently spamcop.COM has maliciously set a redirect from www.spamcop.com to vww.spamcop.com which means that if you load the page, notice that it should be net instead of com (but don't notice the change from www to vww), and edit your browser's URL line, you'll get Error 404 or some other "page not found" error on vww.spamcop.net. Best regards, Tony. From tdy at blackhole.aosake.net Fri Jan 2 17:07:37 2004 From: tdy at blackhole.aosake.net (N. Miller) Date: Fri Jan 2 20:10:13 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Connection closed by remote server Message-ID: <2a5cvv0mbckv5lkmb167nuc6m8s7t6h5qc@4ax.com> When I click on the "Send Report" button, about every tenth time I get a "Connection closed by remote server" error, and no report numbers. If I then click the "Cancel" button, I am told that the report has been cancelled. Is that so? Can I then resubmit the report without causing a double complaint? Or do I just write off that report altogether. {Now, does anybody have a recommendation for wiping egg off of one's face? I rather stupidly opened the wrong news client configuration, and posted this question in N.A.N.A.E., where 99% of the regulars are going to roast me about posting nonsense.} :( -- Norman ~I'll be there, by your side ~in the land of Twilight. ~In your dream I will go ~'till we find the Sunlight. From agent01413 at my-deja.com Fri Jan 2 18:45:44 2004 From: agent01413 at my-deja.com (Socks the Whitehouse Cat) Date: Fri Jan 2 20:50:06 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: <3FF5E6AC.61209744@spamcop.net> Message-ID: I can't believe that Larry Kilgallen really had the following to say that was worth commenting on: > In article <3FF5E6AC.61209744@spamcop.net>, Kenneth Brody > writes: >> Socks the Whitehouse Cat wrote: >> [...] >>> Soliciting our congress critters' assistance in getting the FTC to >>> act might yield interesting results. >> >> You mean the "Government-Sponsored List of Confirmed E-mail >> Addresses"? > > I don't know what Socks meant, but I mean: > > Government-published list of SHA-1 checksums > > which is considerably less useful to spammers. what I meant will be the letters that I'll start sending to my critter's community aide in another week or so: Dear Congressman Tancredo: On January 1 I reported 2 spams that violated the can spam act to the FTC, using their preferred reporting address of uce@ftc.gov It is now Jan 10. I can not get them to tell me the status of the prosecution. There are no reports of arrests. The spammer is still sending the same illegal spam pushing a web site that is still up and functional at the same place. The FTC wont even respond to me emails asking for a status. Could your office please ask for a status on my complaint. You voted for the bill. I assume you want it to work. etc, etc. (I'll save that final paragraph for later versions of the letter) -- tired of reading posts from morphing kooks? get a real news reader - http://xnews.newsguy.com From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 18:27:19 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Ellen) Date: Fri Jan 2 21:50:29 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: PAGING DEPUTIES - securityfocus.com mailing lists References: Message-ID: "Godwin Stewart" wrote in message news:pan.2004.01.02.23.03.52.578258@loopback.sgms-centre.com... > On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 10:02:10 -0700, SpamCop Admin wrote: > > > Anybody who sends a report to that address will get keelhauled. :-) > > OK. So has somebody just got themselves thwapped now? > > list2.securityfocus.com is listed again. > IP? Ellen From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 21:44:29 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Ellen) Date: Fri Jan 2 21:51:01 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DEPUTIES - "feature" request - redirect from vww.spamcop.net References: Message-ID: "Skiwi" wrote in message news:bt5146$rs3$1@news.spamcop.net... > Deputies, > > Is there a reason that the admin can't set up a web page or DNS redirect > from Vww.spamcop.net to www.spamcop.net? > > Thanks: > GREG... > ???? That's not a registered domain name. Ellen From skiwi at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 18:54:47 2004 From: skiwi at spamcop.net (Skiwi) Date: Fri Jan 2 21:55:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DEPUTIES - "feature" request - redirect from vww.spamcop.net In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ellen wrote: > "Skiwi" wrote in message > news:bt5146$rs3$1@news.spamcop.net... > >>Deputies, >> >>Is there a reason that the admin can't set up a web page or DNS redirect >>from Vww.spamcop.net to www.spamcop.net? >> >>Thanks: >>GREG... >> > > > ???? That's not a registered domain name. However, vww.spamcop.com resolves (in fact, www.spamcop.com redirects there) - and they seem to be 'exploiting' the fact that vww.spamcop.net does not (see mine and other's observations in other threads in this post and the post "Is SPAMCOP part of the problem?" in spamcop.help) Thanks: GREG... From duhkoz at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 20:06:34 2004 From: duhkoz at spamcop.net (David Kozlowski) Date: Fri Jan 2 22:10:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Netscape users suffer increased timeouts? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Bill Sullivan wrote: > The timeout threads suggest that the problem is intermittent for the > posters. I'm using the latest Netscape 7.1x browser, which worked fine > before the move to IronPort, but now will not connect to the homepage on > 90% of the attempts. When the homepage opens, there is an 80% liklihood > of timeout on the Held Mail page, and if that loads, a 100% timeout rate > on the submission. > > Seconds later, I can connect (slowly) using IE6x and the entire site > works, if slowly. > Netscape won't load the logo image, and won't run the java applets on > the Held Mail page, either. > > The really strange thing here is that my uplink server is only a few > feet away from the Akamai server for SpamCop. If it's a gateway issue, > it's definitely at the front or back of the Akamai gateway. > > Anyone else experiencing this with Netscape? (I understand that if you > can't connect, you can't readily subscribe to the forum - hopefully, > there are pre-existing subscribers that can respond.) > I opened an IronPort ticket and am waiting for a response.... tried > several times to get info from Admin (Don?) but he gave up after the > initial exchanges. > I'm having a similar problem using Netscape 7.1. When going online and going to Spamcop mail login, it just sits there with a white screen waiting to transfer data from SC mail. But if I then stop and go to another website to verify that it is not my connection and then go from there to Spamcop the login page loads normally. From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 22:14:55 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (R. P. McCormick) Date: Fri Jan 2 22:15:19 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] DIA55.US Dutch registration info Message-ID: Marjolein: maybe you can offer some feedback on this one? DIRECT INFORMATION PVT. LTD., (D.B.A. DIRECTI.COM) Eddie Vos Vos Media Patervaessenstraat 55 Hoensbroek 6433 NL +06.51680661 Eddie_Vos@hotmail.com NS1.RED-DNS.INFO NS2.RED-DNS.INFO Domain Registration Date Thu Jan 01 11:34:59 GMT 2004 There is NO country code +06 ... obviously +31 is The Netherlands - so it may be worthy of a WHOIS data inaccuracy complaint based on that. Address seem legit? From michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com Sat Jan 3 03:28:26 2004 From: michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com (Michael Lefevre) Date: Fri Jan 2 22:30:11 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: PAGING DEPUTIES - securityfocus.com mailing lists References: Message-ID: Ellen wrote: > > "Godwin Stewart" wrote in message > news:pan.2004.01.02.23.03.52.578258@loopback.sgms-centre.com... >> On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 10:02:10 -0700, SpamCop Admin wrote: >> >> > Anybody who sends a report to that address will get keelhauled. :-) >> >> OK. So has somebody just got themselves thwapped now? >> >> list2.securityfocus.com is listed again. > > IP? Same as the one mentioned way back up the thread - 205.206.231.20. -- Michael From MikeE at ster.invalid Fri Jan 2 19:31:39 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Fri Jan 2 22:35:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DIA55.US Dutch registration info References: Message-ID: R. P. McCormick wrote: > +06.51680661 > There is NO country code +06 ... > obviously +31 is The Netherlands - so it may be worthy of > a WHOIS data inaccuracy complaint based on that. > Address seem legit? I think one could drop the country code 31 'legitimately' and just put the city code 65, which I read somewhere is 'car phones' or 'semaphones' [what's a semaphone?] ..but Hoensbroek is supposed to be 45, not 65, unless you use the 'car phone' trick. http://www.justphonecards.com/travel/countrycode/country/nl.html Netherlands +31 Phone Number Format 65 Carphones 65 Semaphones; +7 digits -- Mike Easter From spamcop001 at bellsouth.net Fri Jan 2 21:35:21 2004 From: spamcop001 at bellsouth.net (Bo Briggs) Date: Fri Jan 2 22:40:09 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DEPUTIES - "feature" request - redirect from vww.spamcop.net In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ellen wrote: > "Skiwi" wrote in message > news:bt5146$rs3$1@news.spamcop.net... > >>Deputies, >> >>Is there a reason that the admin can't set up a web page or DNS redirect >>from Vww.spamcop.net to www.spamcop.net? >> >>Thanks: >>GREG... >> > > > ???? That's not a registered domain name. > > Ellen > > www. is just another CNAME in the NS records (for the domain spamcop.net). vww could be added as well, but sometimes more useful is ww. (ww.google.com works) spamcop.net itself redirects to www. %host -a www.spamcop.net Trying "www.spamcop.net" ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 34904 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 6, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;www.spamcop.net. IN ANY ;; ANSWER SECTION: www.spamcop.net. 3137 IN CNAME www.spamcop.net.edgesuite.net. Anyone ever visited http://www.spamcop.net.edgesuite.net ? -- Bo Briggs From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Sat Jan 3 04:46:50 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Fri Jan 2 22:50:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DIA55.US Dutch registration info References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" a ?crit dans le message de news:bt5d92$a77$1@news.spamcop.net [...] > 'semaphones' [what's a semaphone?] [...] I think it's called a "pager" in the US. They were put into service before cell phones. A portable device, about the size of a cell phone, where you can receive a numeric code (telling you, for instance, whom to call back). They could (can) be called from the phone network and could not (cannot) transmit. Regards, Tony. From reply at in.news.group Fri Jan 2 22:34:24 2004 From: reply at in.news.group (Mike Vollmer) Date: Fri Jan 2 23:30:56 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: 0fficial Notice for aII E-Bay users References: Message-ID: Whenever I receive such a spam purporting to be from E-Bay or Visa or Whoever, I add the following address to the cc: line for the copy I send to the FTC: security@Whoever.com If they didn't know about it before, they will shortly. From someone at microsoft.com Sat Jan 3 00:01:47 2004 From: someone at microsoft.com (hello) Date: Sat Jan 3 00:05:12 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: anti-Spamcop trick - Part III : DAV References: Message-ID: "Redstone" wrote in message news:Xns94644018F45Clumbercartel@216.154.195.61... > It appears to be Ralsky. I get these spams from the Hotmail servers. > It appears he has opened dozens of MSN accounts to send out spam. I'm > assuming that MSN is doing some kind of promotional. ("Get 1000 > minutes free without a credit card". :-p) > How do you know it is Ralsky? Yes, all of the spams I receive from this source are relayed via Hotmail using the DAV interface. This interface was apparently created to knit together Outlook Express with Hotmail, but can be exploited by spammers (details are unclear to me). Here is an article describing this exploit: http://www.unicom.com/chrome/a/000262.html From someone at microsoft.com Sat Jan 3 00:04:26 2004 From: someone at microsoft.com (hello) Date: Sat Jan 3 00:05:29 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: "John Malmberg" wrote in message news:bt3pvc$mn4$1@news.spamcop.net... > Tell them that you know that the only purpose of the law was to overturn > the California anti-spam law that actually had teeth and prevent other > states from adopting it. This was the only purpose? What exactly is the benefit to the representative of doing this? From someone at microsoft.com Sat Jan 3 00:07:35 2004 From: someone at microsoft.com (hello) Date: Sat Jan 3 00:10:14 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: 0fficial Notice for aII E-Bay users References: Message-ID: "Barbara Yoon" wrote in message news:bt4im0$858$1@news.spamcop.net... > "0fficial Notice for aII E-Bay users" -- are these spam e-mails that ask > you to "update and verify your current [credit card] information" for > using ebay really criminal fraud enterprises, and is ebay aware of this?! > I find it especially 'fishy' since I myself have never used ebay... yes, ebay is aware of these scams. You got an email not because you ever used or didn't use ebay .... but because you exist and have an email address. From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Sat Jan 3 07:01:27 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Sat Jan 3 01:05:08 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: "hello" a ?crit dans le message de news:bt5igr$ert$1@news.spamcop.net > "John Malmberg" wrote in > message news:bt3pvc$mn4$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > Tell them that you know that the only purpose of the law was to > > overturn the California anti-spam law that actually had teeth and > > prevent other states from adopting it. > > This was the only purpose? What exactly is the benefit to the > representative of doing this? Well, godwill and, er, campaign contributions (oh, no, not bribes) from the companies using "email marketing", I suppose? Regards, Tony. From someone at microsoft.com Sat Jan 3 01:42:19 2004 From: someone at microsoft.com (hello) Date: Sat Jan 3 01:46:24 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: "Antoine J. Mechelynck" wrote in message news:bt5ls1$sk5$1@news.spamcop.net... > "hello" a crit dans le message de > news:bt5igr$ert$1@news.spamcop.net > > "John Malmberg" wrote in > > message news:bt3pvc$mn4$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > > > Tell them that you know that the only purpose of the law was to > > > overturn the California anti-spam law that actually had teeth and > > > prevent other states from adopting it. > > > > This was the only purpose? What exactly is the benefit to the > > representative of doing this? > > Well, godwill and, er, campaign contributions (oh, no, not bribes) from the > companies using "email marketing", I suppose? Sorry to be the anti-cynic here, but in this case I sincerely doubt the largesse of any spammer or the DMA comes anywhere close to the influence of the public disgust at spam. Most cases of bribes/campaign contributions involve legislation that are well removed from the public spotlight. I have a simpler theory; legislators don't fully understand the problem, and are simply acting conservatively in legislating within an area for which there is no precendence and where the issues are confused by questions of free speech versus the right to privacy. And legal precedence gives the nod to advertising as a form of free speech -- it will take some re-thinking to fully come around to the idea that free speech need not be protected in cases where the audience is required to pay at the whim of the speaker. From someone at microsoft.com Sat Jan 3 01:45:21 2004 From: someone at microsoft.com (hello) Date: Sat Jan 3 01:51:18 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: <3FF45AC1.99BCABA4@not.here.for.spam.all.stream.net.invalid> Message-ID: "S B" wrote in message news:3FF45AC1.99BCABA4@not.here.for.spam.all.stream.net.invalid... > Ben wrote: > > > > Now that the new U.S. (Federal) laws now apparently apply to spam, I wonder if they will > > help. Or will it be more of the same, or worse? > > Hasn't changed so far ... and even the spams sent today don't conform to > can-spam even if they're obviously from the US. same here .. absolutely no difference in the amount of spam I am getting after Jan 1st. Virtually all of my spam is hosted in China/Brazil, but surely spawned in the USA. From nobody at spamcop.net Fri Jan 2 22:45:53 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Don Wannit) Date: Sat Jan 3 01:52:33 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Analysis of a spammer's CD of email addresses Message-ID: There is a discussion on Slashdot (http://slashdot.org) of one of the spammer CD's of email addresses. While the Slashdot discussion is often of dubious quality, there are some gems of wisdom in there, if you can slog your way through the chaff. Here's the Slashdot synopsis of the story: "Recently over here in The Netherlands, the spam versus anti-spam 'war' has hardened. ... One of the more known anti-spam people has been sent one of the subjects of those spams: a CD with millions of e-mail addressess of 'individuals' and hundreds of thousands of 'businesses'... Rejo Zenger has done an analysis of such a CD, which is fuelling new debate as to why the recent EU anti-spam directive was weakened because of businesses complaining or indicating that spam wasn't a big issue for them." The analysis itself is at http://rejo.zenger.nl/abuse/emailcd.php Never mind that Spammers Always Lie, it is interesting to see this analysis of the "product" being sold by spammers to other spammers. Just a few points: - the CD advertised as containing more than 10 million email addresses actually contained, after deleting duplicates, only 6,220,454 addresses (oh no!) - email addresses of known [Dutch] spammers, and of [Dutch] politicians, are on the CD. (the analysis was done by a Dutch spamfighter, that's why these names popped out to the analyst) - my favorite quote: "Spammers love to dig their own graves. You can find a number of addresses you don't want to send spam to. The spammer didn't even remove the abuse@ and postmaster@ addresses, 175 and 561 respectively. Both of them have doubles themselves. These role accounts include respectable providers that have a widely known anti-spam policy: the abuse desk of XS4ALL appears 5 times, the abuse desk of Planet three times and their postmasters will receive the spam three times each." Since it has often been conjectured that the only real way for spammers to make $money$ is to sell stuff to other spammers, like email lists and spamming software, it's kind of interesting (but certainly not unexpected) to see that the "product" being hawked to the spammers themselves is no more efficacious than the products being sold to the public. But we knew that, didn't we? Spammers Are Stupid -- Don Wannit A paid SpamCop user since 1999 From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Sat Jan 3 10:06:45 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Sat Jan 3 04:11:38 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: PAGING DEPUTIES - securityfocus.com mailing lists References: Message-ID: On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 00:15:46 +0000, Michael Lefevre wrote: > In this case, the original report seems to be of a list message which got > a Spamassassin score of 5.5, due to being sent to a bunch of similar > recipients (it was crossposted to a bunch of lists), and being sent from a > hotmail address ending with a number, but not passing through hotmail's > servers. Yes, that happens frequently on bugtraq. People send their advisories to several mailing lists and they use throwaway mail accounts to do so in order not to drown in the deluge of "idiot is on vacation", "user unknown" and C/R messages which inevitably ensue. -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- Hurewitz's Memory Principle: The chance of forgetting something is directly proportional to ..... to ........ uh .............. From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Sat Jan 3 10:08:09 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Sat Jan 3 04:11:47 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: PAGING DEPUTIES - securityfocus.com mailing lists References: Message-ID: On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 03:28:26 +0000, Michael Lefevre wrote: >>> list2.securityfocus.com is listed again. >> >> IP? > > Same as the one mentioned way back up the thread - 205.206.231.20. Ellen probably can't see that since LookOut! $uxpress doesn't thread messages. -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- #define BITCOUNT(x) (((BX_(x)+(BX_(x)>>4)) & 0x0F0F0F0F) % 255) #define BX_(x) ((x) - (((x)>>1)&0x77777777) - (((x)>>2)&0x33333333) - (((x)>>3)&0x11111111)) -- really weird C code to count the number of bits in a word From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Sat Jan 3 10:21:51 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Sat Jan 3 04:29:49 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 17:45:19 -0600, Steve McGarrett wrote: > So it was *you* who filed SPR 11-60903 twenty years ago: > > http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/products/year-2000/leap.html >From that page: "NOTE: The astute reader may notice a technical typo in the SPR response. In the interests of preserving this archival document -- and permitting future readers the thrill of the hunt! -- we have intentionally left this error unedited." I found 2 typos: one technical (for which I'll let others search :), and this too: "....the present Gregorian calendar will still be in affect by the year 2000." ^^^^^^ Should be "in effect", with an "e". Effect is a noun, Affect is a verb. fx: takes off pedant's hat. -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- Nine megs for the secretaries fair, Seven megs for the hackers scarce, Five megs for the grads in smoky lairs, Three megs for system source. One disk to rule them all, One disk to bind them, One disk to hold all the files, And in the darkness grind 'em. From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Sat Jan 3 10:25:23 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Sat Jan 3 04:37:00 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: <3FF5A472.60804@spamcop.net> Message-ID: On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 01:29:05 +0100, Antoine J. Mechelynck wrote: > We had summer-time all year round here when I was young. Don't remember > how long ago it was changed, but nowadays we have summer time (GMT+1) in > winter and "double summer time" (GMT+2) in summer (yes, our "theoretical > legal time" is GMT, ot UT if you will, since all of Belgium [and of the > Benelux, for that matter] has a longitude of less than 7?30' E). Same here in France. I'm in central France, and in fact I'm only a few miles from the meridian. So, really, we *should* be using GMT here. Mind you, I have to admit that the long evenings in Summer as a result of being 2 hours ahead of the sun are nice :) -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- "I once had a rose named after me and I was very flattered. But I was not pleased to read the description in the catalogue: No good in a bed, but fine up against a wall." -- Eleanor Roosevelt From rmu93aw02 at sneakemail.com Sat Jan 3 03:29:59 2004 From: rmu93aw02 at sneakemail.com (Spambo) Date: Sat Jan 3 04:40:08 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: hello wrote: > [snip] > > Sorry to be the anti-cynic here, but in this case I sincerely doubt the > largesse of any spammer or the DMA comes anywhere close to the influence of > the public disgust at spam. Most cases of bribes/campaign contributions > involve legislation that are well removed from the public spotlight. > > I have a simpler theory; legislators don't fully understand the problem, and > are simply acting conservatively in legislating within an area for which > there is no precendence and where the issues are confused by questions of > free speech versus the right to privacy. And legal precedence gives the nod > to advertising as a form of free speech -- it will take some re-thinking to > fully come around to the idea that free speech need not be protected in > cases where the audience is required to pay at the whim of the speaker. It was easy for the DMA etc. to convince Congresscritters that forging headers should be outlawed, hijacking machines should be outlawed, misrepresenting the return address should be outlawed, that misleading Subject lines and fraudulent statements should be outlawed. The DMA did not try to convince the Congresscritters that "UCE" or "UBE" should be outlawed. The DMA effectively used the term "double 0pt-in" to convince the legislators that confirmed opt-in was an unnecessary and redundant burden and that a requirement for a working 0pt-0ut method was all that was needed. A simple "Double 0pt-in?? Why should someone have to 0pt-in twice? Once is good enough and if a working 0pt-0ut method is required then anyone that doesn't want the ads can easily get them stopped." was probably all that was needed to convince Congresscritters that confirmed opt-in wasn't necessary or desirable. With companies like AOHell & Microslut wanting to do their own commercial advertising by email (0pt-0ut, of course) backing the DMA in the CAN-SPAM act it is easy to see how the monetary influence won out over a philosophy that doesn't have a large PAC organization & hundreds of satellite organizations contributing to the Congresscritters "War Chest" every time they're up for reelection. From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Sat Jan 3 10:31:33 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Sat Jan 3 04:41:41 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: <3FF5E6AC.61209744@spamcop.net> Message-ID: On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 15:32:27 -0800, Eric wrote: > I still think the biggest reduction in spam will be achieved > simply by enforcing the prohibition against falsifying the > headers (origin and reply/return address). I also believe that fining the lusers whose boxen get trojanned would help as it would be a keen incentive for users to be more proactive about protecting themselves, and thus everyone else, from abuse. -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- The First Commandment for Technicians: Beware the lightening that lurketh in the undischarged capacitor, lest it cause thee to bounce upon thy buttocks in a most untechnician-like manner. From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Sat Jan 3 10:34:12 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Sat Jan 3 04:42:07 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: <3FF5E6AC.61209744@spamcop.net> Message-ID: On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 18:45:44 -0700, Socks the Whitehouse Cat wrote: > On January 1 I reported 2 spams that violated the can spam act to the > FTC, using their preferred reporting address of uce/at/ftc.gov ICBW but I think uce/at/ftc.gov is basically routed to the fridge. IOW, you're adding to the stockpile of spam which *might* be used as evidence in the event of a prosecution, you're not actually reporting it to anyone. -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- FAILURE IS NOT AN OPTION. It comes bundled with Microsoft software. From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 09:41:21 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sat Jan 3 04:48:23 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: Antoine J. Mechelynck (antoine.mechelynck@skynet.be) wrote in news:bt4sbs $kuk$1@news.spamcop.net: > If you don't have those preferences in Mozilla, you may have to edit > the startup preferences files (which are in ASCII). Not the recommended method. Just use about:config in the address field, and it's editable right there in your browser window, with far less chance of errors. Editable as of Mozilla 1.3. Netscape versions based on that or later should support that as well. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 09:45:06 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sat Jan 3 04:50:45 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: Godwin Stewart (gstewart@loopback.sgms-centre.com) wrote in news:pan.2004.01.03.09.21.49.253023@loopback.sgms-centre.com: > Should be "in effect", with an "e". Effect is a noun, Affect is a verb. Affect is a noun, too. But with a vastly different meaning from effect. (Common in psychological jargon.) ;-) And both are verbs. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 10:21:45 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sat Jan 3 05:29:32 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DIA55.US Dutch registration info References: Message-ID: R. P. McCormick (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt5c3e$8f9$1 @news.spamcop.net: > DIRECT INFORMATION PVT. LTD., (D.B.A. DIRECTI.COM) > > Eddie Vos > Vos Media > Patervaessenstraat 55 > Hoensbroek 6433 NL > +06.51680661 > Eddie_Vos@hotmail.com > > NS1.RED-DNS.INFO > NS2.RED-DNS.INFO > > Domain Registration Date Thu Jan 01 11:34:59 GMT 2004 > > There is NO country code +06 ... > obviously +31 is The Netherlands - so it may be worthy of > a WHOIS data inaccuracy complaint based on that. > Address seem legit? Probably only ignorant about the format for an international pohone number (many people are) or assuming that a Dutch address would imply the country code (many people do). Add 31, and it's simply a Dutch mobile phone number. ALL mobile phione numbers in the Netherlands start with 06 and are thus easily recognizable. Within a country (not using a country code), phone numbers are usually 10 digits, as this one is. More interesting is the postal code; looking it up (6433 N - leave off the final letter for the query) at http://www.postcode.nl/index.php?PageID=73 tells me it looks like it's in Hoensbroek, but 6433 NL doesn't actually exist, and the existing ones don't point to a Patervaessenstraat; also 'Hoensbroek, Patervaessenstraat 55' (an alternative query method) gives no result, and neither does 'Hoensbroek, Patervaessenstraat 55'; however, 'Hoensbroek, Pater' (using a partial street name) yields four postal codes with two located on the Pater Vaessenstraat (two words) - but house numbers range only from 1 through 28. Close, but no cigar. Conclusion: address is NOT legit (though the phone number may be, merely having an incorrect format). Keep that Dutch postal code lookup URL (and my "instructions" here for how to use it - instructions are all in Dutch)! -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 10:56:22 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sat Jan 3 06:08:47 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Analysis of a spammer's CD of email addresses References: Message-ID: Don Wannit (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt5of1$h6d$1 @news.spamcop.net: > There is a discussion on Slashdot (http://slashdot.org) of one > of the spammer CD's of email addresses. Before/in case it drops off the frontpage at /. - here's the URL for that specific item: http://slashdot.org/articles/04/01/02/1625224.shtml?tid=111&tid=126 -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Sat Jan 3 11:56:27 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Sat Jan 3 06:09:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 09:45:06 +0000, Marjolein Katsma wrote: > Affect is a noun, too. But with a vastly different meaning from effect. > (Common in psychological jargon.) ;-) I wouldn't know about that :) > And both are verbs. Yes, they are. It's just that "effect" is far more frequently used as a noun than as a verb. I put it down as just a noun before thinking. Caffeine depravation, maybe? -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- I don't approve of political jokes... I've seen too many of them get elected. From masfjorden at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 12:16:57 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (masfjorden@spamcop.net) Date: Sat Jan 3 06:24:55 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Godwin Stewart wrote: > On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 17:45:19 -0600, Steve McGarrett wrote: > > >>So it was *you* who filed SPR 11-60903 twenty years ago: >> >>http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/products/year-2000/leap.html > > > From that page: > > "NOTE: The astute reader may notice a technical typo in the SPR response. > In the interests of preserving this archival document -- and permitting > future readers the thrill of the hunt! -- we have intentionally left this > error unedited." > > I found 2 typos: one technical (for which I'll let others search :), and > this too: "....the present Gregorian calendar will still be in affect by > the year 2000." ^^^^^^ > > Should be "in effect", with an "e". Effect is a noun, Affect is a verb. > > fx: takes off pedant's hat. > This was the one I found: "They knew that a lunation (the time from one full moon to the next) was 29 1/2 days long, so their lunar year had a duration of 364 days. This fell short of the solar year by about 11 days." 29.5 times 12 makes 354, not 364, so the conclusion in the last sentence holds. I don't think I would call it technical... helge From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Sat Jan 3 12:28:26 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Sat Jan 3 06:31:08 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: "Marjolein Katsma" a ?crit dans le message de news:Xns94656CBCE6EBAhomesitehelp@216.154.195.61 > Antoine J. Mechelynck (antoine.mechelynck@skynet.be) wrote in > news:bt4sbs $kuk$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > If you don't have those preferences in Mozilla, you may have to edit > > the startup preferences files (which are in ASCII). > > Not the recommended method. Just use about:config in the address > field, and it's editable right there in your browser window, with far > less chance of errors. Editable as of Mozilla 1.3. Netscape versions > based on that or later should support that as well. > > > -- > Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ > Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. > Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. > The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. > http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html Netscape 7 has that, but there are so awfully many fields, with only name / status / type / value (and no comments) that I wouldn't know where to begin. Regards, Tony. From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Sat Jan 3 12:43:22 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Sat Jan 3 06:50:36 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 12:16:57 +0100, masfjorden wrote: > 29.5 times 12 makes 354, not 364, so the conclusion in the last sentence > holds. That's the one. > I don't think I would call it technical... Well, it isn't incorrect grammar, but I guess it's close to an ordinary typo in that the author pressed the '6' key instead of the intended '5' key. Qualifying it as a "technical" typo is, maybe, a little OTT. -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- For Mac, it's AppleTalk. For Novell, it's IPX. For Windows, it's a mystery. For the Internet, it's TCP/IP. Linux supports them all. From redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com Sat Jan 3 11:52:40 2004 From: redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com (Redstone) Date: Sat Jan 3 07:01:31 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Microsoft not taking anti-piracy submissions any longer? References: <3FEDFF0D.93A422B@nowhere.com> <3FEFB1A2.3EA87ED8@nowhere.com> Message-ID: John Malmberg wrote in news:bt3qg6$ooc$1@news.spamcop.net: > Marjolein Katsma wrote: >> >>>It appears something is going on.. I was getting a bunch of those >>>spams each day. Now there is nothing to this day. (Good >>>riddance.) >>>:-) >> >> I had one just days ago. Same old same old. > > I never get them from the same web host more than a few days. It > appears that they get nuked pretty fast. > > Are you helping the underpaid abuse desk person know how they can > make a few bucks by turning in their spamming customer? > > Or how they are risking an BSA.ORG audit of all their computers > for unlicensed software? All computers are disconnected from the > network during that audit until it is completely done according to > a video tape being circulated by attorneys that specialize in > defending corporations from such audits. It has a strong > suggestion that you do not want a BSA or an SPA audit, unless you > can afford at least a day of downtime. > > The copyright enforcement groups have made sufficient political > contacts and contributions to make sure that they have cooperation > of the government in their raids for most countries. > > -John > wb8tyw@qsl.network > Personal Opinion Only > > > How about make an additional wager that the pirate programs the suckers buy is laced with spammer zombie viruses. From redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com Sat Jan 3 12:10:45 2004 From: redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com (Redstone) Date: Sat Jan 3 07:16:41 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Topica.com, discussion lists and BL References: Message-ID: Marjolein Katsma wrote in news:Xns94646D3DD909Chomesitehelp@216.154.195.61: > > Oh no, they're not clueless. Like I said, they just don't care. > > Even more reason to confine them to their "intranet" From redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com Sat Jan 3 12:13:56 2004 From: redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com (Redstone) Date: Sat Jan 3 07:17:24 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: anti-Spamcop trick - Part III : DAV References: Message-ID: "hello" wrote in news:bt5ibs$eod$1@news.spamcop.net: > > How do you know it is Ralsky? > > Yes, all of the spams I receive from this source are relayed via > Hotmail using the DAV interface. This interface was apparently > created to knit together Outlook Express with Hotmail, but can be > exploited by spammers (details are unclear to me). Here is an > article describing this exploit: > > http://www.unicom.com/chrome/a/000262.html > > The IP address to the spamvertised scamsites lead to a Chinese netblock infested with Ralsky. (Information on the IPs gleaned from Spamhaus.org.) From redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com Sat Jan 3 12:23:25 2004 From: redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com (Redstone) Date: Sat Jan 3 07:27:45 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: People really buy from these subjects..? References: Message-ID: Larry Jandro wrote in news:Xns946468DE314D2larryathome@216.154.195.61: > Recent spam subject... > > Subject: embryo arhat ailanthus eurasia convalescent > > So this really gets people to buy a high interest rate mortgage or > fake viagra or pirated software..? > > Are spammers THAT stupid, or is the public THAT stupid..? > Apparently yes since spammers are still using this form of spamming. > Nearly all the spam I get looks like this now, also with several > hundred randomly generated words at the end. The only "real" part > of the spam is a URL. > Same here. Sometimes there is so much extraneous crap that it ends up screwing up the URL too. From redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com Sat Jan 3 12:29:29 2004 From: redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com (Redstone) Date: Sat Jan 3 07:31:06 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Slow listwashing attempt? References: Message-ID: nobody@spamcop.net wrote in news:nobody-36BB02.15492002012004@news.spamcop.net: > I sent a spam report on the 22nd of last month and I just received > this listwashing attempt now. What is the "correct email" > supposed to be? > I received the same thing. Probably the ISP he is spamming from just got around to the multitude of LARTs he generated. > From "Frank Nazario" > { > Hi this is not an automated response... > please send the correct email so we can unsubscribe you > from our mailing list > > thanks before hand for your attention to this matter. > > frank > mailserver administrator > } > > Silly rabbit. Tricks are for kids. From masfjorden at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 13:47:27 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (masfjorden@spamcop.net) Date: Sat Jan 3 07:56:55 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Antoine J. Mechelynck skrev: > a ?crit dans le message de > news:bt3jd6$108$1@news.spamcop.net > >>Antoine J. Mechelynck skrev i en melding: >>I haven't found out how to install Noors in Mozilla, so I have to >>manually change wrote to skrev. > > > I have (but don't normally use for mail/news) Netscape 7 which is based on > Mozilla. Try Options -> Preferences -> Appearance -> Languages/Content. Chack > that you have either Norwegian/Bokma?l or Norwegian/Nynorsk (or both) installed > and if not, "Download More". (You may need to reboot if you do). Similarly for > "Content packs". You may have to do some more tweaking and/or rebooting. If you > don't have those preferences in Mozilla, you may have to edit the startup > preferences files (which are in ASCII). There is an "unofficial Netscape FAQ" at > http://www.ufaq.org/ . Some of it is probably relevant for Mozilla too. It's there now. After some strange experience, I managed to download a huge (13Mb)file, including an upgrade to Mozilla 1.5 (from 1.4. First, I just set my preferred language to nynorsk (and I have done that before). the only notable change was that Spamcop welcomed me in nynorsk (only once, then it started using US-E again). Nothing at all happened in the mail/news programme. Then I read the instructions again, but couldn't see what I did wrong. At last I searched for 'languages' in help, and there I found out about the downloadable file in bokm?l. (I have been there before, but then I got only an incomplete version in nynorsk - that may be why I never got started then). Thanks for getting me started on this project! > That's what I meant: presence of thorn and/or edh means it's probably Icelandic, > barred o means it's not Swedish (which uses o-umlaut instead) but in their > absence I don't know Scandinavian languages well enough to tell them apart from > one another. (Finnish -- finsk, suomalainen -- is of course not a Scandinavian > language even though Finland is often regarded as part of Scandinavia > politically and geographically.) Seen from here, Skandinavia geographically is the peninsula of Sweden and Norway, politically it also includes Denmark. We call the whole region *Norden* (the North), which also includes Finnland, Island, F?r?yane and Gr?nland. helge From usenet at hostroute.com Sat Jan 3 13:32:43 2004 From: usenet at hostroute.com (Gordon Hudson) Date: Sat Jan 3 08:38:48 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Analysis of a spammer's CD of email addresses References: Message-ID: "Don Wannit" wrote in message news:bt5of1$h6d$1@news.spamcop.net... > There is a discussion on Slashdot (http://slashdot.org) of one > of the spammer CD's of email addresses. While the Slashdot > discussion is often of dubious quality, there are some gems > of wisdom in there, if you can slog your way through the chaff. > > Here's the Slashdot synopsis of the story: > > "Recently over here in The Netherlands, the spam versus anti-spam 'war' > has hardened. ... One of the more known anti-spam people has been sent > one of the subjects of those spams: a CD with millions of e-mail > addressess of 'individuals' and hundreds of thousands of 'businesses'... > Rejo Zenger has done an analysis of such a CD, which is fuelling new > debate as to why the recent EU anti-spam directive was weakened because > of businesses complaining or indicating that spam wasn't a big issue for > them." > > The analysis itself is at http://rejo.zenger.nl/abuse/emailcd.php > > Never mind that Spammers Always Lie, it is interesting to > see this analysis of the "product" being sold by spammers > to other spammers. Just a few points: > > - the CD advertised as containing more than 10 million > email addresses actually contained, after deleting > duplicates, only 6,220,454 addresses (oh no!) > > - email addresses of known [Dutch] spammers, and of > [Dutch] politicians, are on the CD. (the analysis was > done by a Dutch spamfighter, that's why these names > popped out to the analyst) > > - my favorite quote: > > "Spammers love to dig their own graves. You can find a number > of addresses you don't want to send spam to. The spammer didn't > even remove the abuse@ and postmaster@ addresses, We regularly get spam sent to our abuse@ address. In two classic cases it was our own customers spamming us and when we suspended them they claimed that abuse@ had opted in ........ Gordon From agent01413 at my-deja.com Sat Jan 3 06:37:43 2004 From: agent01413 at my-deja.com (Socks the Whitehouse Cat) Date: Sat Jan 3 08:45:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: <3FF5E6AC.61209744@spamcop.net> Message-ID: I can't believe that Godwin Stewart really had the following to say that was worth commenting on: > On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 18:45:44 -0700, Socks the Whitehouse Cat wrote: > >> On January 1 I reported 2 spams that violated the can spam act to the >> FTC, using their preferred reporting address of uce/at/ftc.gov > > ICBW but I think uce/at/ftc.gov is basically routed to the fridge. > IOW, you're adding to the stockpile of spam which *might* be used as > evidence in the event of a prosecution, you're not actually reporting > it to anyone. > granted. let the ftc explain that to my congress critter and provide an address for people to file reports that do have a result -- tired of reading posts from morphing kooks? get a real news reader - http://xnews.newsguy.com From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 14:16:12 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sat Jan 3 09:20:09 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OOT - week numbers References: Message-ID: Toone (antoine.mechelynck@skynet.be) wrote in news:bt691b$g0c$1@news.spamcop.net: >> > If you don't have those preferences in Mozilla, you may have to >> > edit the startup preferences files (which are in ASCII). >> >> Not the recommended method. Just use about:config in the address >> field, and it's editable right there in your browser window, with far >> less chance of errors. Editable as of Mozilla 1.3. Netscape versions >> based on that or later should support that as well. >> > > Netscape 7 has that, but there are so awfully many fields, with only > name / status / type / value (and no comments) that I wouldn't know > where to begin. There are as many fields there as there are in the file(s) - the browser simply provides a better interface to editing the settings. For instance, in the browser you can filter them, which is not as easy when directly editing the underlying file(s). The variables also have pretty sensible names and are ordered alphabetically. It's learnable. ;-) -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 09:32:15 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (R. P. McCormick) Date: Sat Jan 3 09:35:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DIA55.US Dutch registration info References: Message-ID: Tnx to all on this one ... Yes - I remember the nil-six numbers ... I even had a semaphone (pager) with one. > > Eddie Vos > > Vos Media > > Patervaessenstraat 55 > > Hoensbroek 6433 NL > > +06.51680661 > > Eddie_Vos@hotmail.com > Add 31, and it's simply a Dutch mobile phone number. > ALL mobile phione numbers in the Netherlands start > with 06 and are thus easily recognizable. Hmmm ... in The Netherlands ... does the caller pay for the incoming calls? If so - Eddie could be in for some trouble! > Within a country (not using a country code), phone numbers > are usually 10 digits, as this one is. No - that's not necessarily true. North America it is ... there is a consistent 3-digit "area" code and 7-digit subscriber number ... similar I guess to the renumbering that took place in NL a few years ago. But many other contries have completely different schemes. For example, Germany has variable length phone numbers. A business may have a number like 01234.557 as the main number - and direct to employees desks like 01234.55723. (Extension 23 at 557 in city code 01234.) A good site for research of international phone info is: http://www.wtng.info/ World Telephone Numbering Guide > More interesting is the postal code; looking it up > (6433 N - leave off the final letter for the query) at > http://www.postcode.nl/index.php?PageID=73 > tells me it looks like it's in Hoensbroek, but 6433 NL > doesn't actually exist, and the existing ones don't point to > a Patervaessenstraat; Sorry ... I can see the confusion there. I did that: Its city - post code - country code In this case ... where Dutch post codes are NNNNXX I can see where one would consider the country code NL as the least significant characters of the post code. The actual registration only had the four digit postal code. > also 'Hoensbroek, Patervaessenstraat 55' > (an alternative query method) gives no result, > and neither does 'Hoensbroek, Patervaessenstraat 55'; however, > 'Hoensbroek, Pater' (using a partial street name) yields four postal codes > with two located on the Pater Vaessenstraat (two words) - but house > numbers range only from 1 through 28. Close, but no cigar. > > Conclusion: address is NOT legit (though the phone number may be, > merely having an incorrect format). Cool. WHOIS inaccuracy report, coming up! > Keep that Dutch postal code lookup URL (and my "instructions" > here for how to use it - instructions are all in Dutch)! Was able to plod through the Dutch on the site without too much problem :) Good resource - dankjewel R P McCormick SpamCop user From michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com Sat Jan 3 14:46:10 2004 From: michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com (Michael Lefevre) Date: Sat Jan 3 09:50:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: PAGING DEPUTIES - securityfocus.com mailing lists References: Message-ID: Godwin Stewart wrote: > On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 03:28:26 +0000, Michael Lefevre wrote: > >>>> list2.securityfocus.com is listed again. >>> >>> IP? >> >> Same as the one mentioned way back up the thread - 205.206.231.20. > > Ellen probably can't see that since LookOut! $uxpress doesn't thread > messages. Not sure what you mean - OE does indeed thread messages. How easy it is to see previously-read parent posts depends on how you have it set up in terms of which messages are shown and it what order. [f'ups set] -- Michael From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 09:54:02 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (R. P. McCormick) Date: Sat Jan 3 09:55:10 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DIA55.US Dutch registration info References: Message-ID: Reported inaccurate WHOIS info to directi.com as follows: - no Patervaessenstraat in Hoensbroek - no listing for Eddie Vos or Vos Media - no country code +06 or +6 - email is not valid >> 220 mc1-f33.hotmail.com Microsoft ESMTP MAIL >> Service, Version: 5.0.2195.6713 ready at >> Sat, 3 Jan 2004 06:48:42 -0800 >> helo >> 250 mc1-f33.hotmail.com Hello [XX.XX.XX.XX] >> mail from:<> >> 250 <>....Sender OK >> rcpt to: >> 550 Requested action not taken: mailbox unavailable From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 10:13:10 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (R. P. McCormick) Date: Sat Jan 3 10:15:23 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] RED-DNS.INFO BLUE-DNS.INFO (was: DIA55.US Dutch registration info) References: Message-ID: RED-DNS.INFO (registrar directi.com) Franz Joachim Gleuwitz Joachim Media Inc. Altwiesenring 88 Erlenbach A. Main 63906 Germany +49.9372944889 admin@blue-dns.info NS1.JAKESDNS.BIZ NS2.JAKESDNS.BIZ Created 01-Jan-2004 03:46:13 UTC --- Ugh ... Not the dreaded jakesdns.biz authoritative servers! BTW: BLUE-DNS.INFO has the same registration info Created On 01-Jan-2004 03:46:09 UTC (blue comes before red) Do we see a pattern here with the name and then name "media"? Using: http://www.bitboost.com/ref/international-address-formats/germany/plz-en.html Appears that post code 63906 is correct for Altwiesenring 88 in Erlenbach. 09372 is a valid city code in Germany ... exchange area is Klingenberg a Main, Erlenbach a. Main, stadt. Anyone know a reverse phone lookup for German numbers? --- Just in case you're really bored ... JAKESDNS.BIZ (registrar directi.com) Kuhan Thananayagam Thananayagam Productions Ltd 33 Jalan Kemuja Kuala Lumpur 59000 Malaysia +60.322844432 twodns@mail15.com NS1.JAKESDNS.BIZ NS2.JAKESDNS.BIZ Domain Registration Date Thu Dec 04 05:38:52 GMT 2003 Domain Last Updated Date Thu Jan 01 03:37:42 GMT 2004 From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 15:41:59 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sat Jan 3 10:45:12 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DIA55.US Dutch registration info References: Message-ID: R. P. McCormick (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt6jpd$6un$1 @news.spamcop.net: > Hmmm ... in The Netherlands ... does the caller pay > for the incoming calls? If so - Eddie could be in for some trouble! Never. That's (mainly) why mobile telephony took off so much faster here than in the US. ;-) Caller pays. >> Within a country (not using a country code), phone numbers >> are usually 10 digits, as this one is. > > No - that's not necessarily true. North America it is ... > there is a consistent 3-digit "area" code and 7-digit subscriber > number ... similar I guess to the renumbering that took place > in NL a few years ago. I did say 'usually'. I know that in the UK London has 11-digit numbers (lots of protest against that one, corporate switchboard-type systems couldn't handle more than 10); andI just found out that China (or maybe part of China) has 11-digit numbers, too. > But many other contries have completely different schemes. > For example, Germany has variable length phone numbers. Hmmm - all German phone numbers I have for friends have 10 digits, too. >> More interesting is the postal code; looking it up >> (6433 N - leave off the final letter for the query) at >> http://www.postcode.nl/index.php?PageID=73 >> tells me it looks like it's in Hoensbroek, but 6433 NL >> doesn't actually exist, and the existing ones don't point to >> a Patervaessenstraat; > > Sorry ... I can see the confusion there. I did that: > Its city - post code - country code > > In this case ... where Dutch post codes are NNNNXX > I can see where one would consider the country code NL > as the least significant characters of the post code. Yes, but some address systems mangle Dutch postal codes; I've seen cases where the two letters (there must be a space between the digits and the letters: NNNN XX) were dropped by the program, and then the country code added - just like this pattern. So it _could_ have been an incomplete postal code followed by country code. And there was no country name _or_ code. That's why I dug a bit. It could well have been the registrar that mangled the address. See [1] for more about Dutch addressing (and more). The non-existing street number was the clincher, though. You can be sure there is no address in the Netherlands that doesn't have a postal code. I tried looking for the company name a bit, too, but didn't come up with anything useful. >> Keep that Dutch postal code lookup URL (and my "instructions" >> here for how to use it - instructions are all in Dutch)! > > Was able to plod through the Dutch on the site without too much > problem :) Good resource - dankjewel Yes, great resource, but hard to use if you can't figure out a bit of Dutch, especially with the different searching methods available. (Well, international spamfighters are not really part of the target audience :)) I found it when researching some of those lottery scam spams - often with a Dutch address and mobile phone number, where invariably the adress is fake. [1] FRANK'S COMPULSIVE GUIDE TO POSTAL ADDRESSES: http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/postal.html#europe -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 15:42:11 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sat Jan 3 10:45:27 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DIA55.US Dutch registration info References: Message-ID: R. P. McCormick (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt6l28$83h$1 @news.spamcop.net: > Reported inaccurate WHOIS info to directi.com as follows: > > - no Patervaessenstraat in Hoensbroek There _is_ a Pater Vaessenstraat - that's just a minor spelling difference. But there isn't a house number 55 on that street! -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 15:49:21 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sat Jan 3 10:50:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: RED-DNS.INFO BLUE-DNS.INFO (was: DIA55.US Dutch registration info) References: Message-ID: R. P. McCormick (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt6m64$94t$1 @news.spamcop.net: > Anyone know a reverse phone lookup for German numbers? Not likely; privacy law would probably forbid this (as it is forbidden in the Netherlands). -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 15:57:27 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sat Jan 3 11:00:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: RED-DNS.INFO BLUE-DNS.INFO (was: DIA55.US Dutch registration info) References: Message-ID: R. P. McCormick (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt6m64$94t$1 @news.spamcop.net: > Do we see a pattern here with the name and then > name "media"? Isn't that the general pattern for companies in the media business? ;) -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From apking at cox.net Sat Jan 3 09:15:22 2004 From: apking at cox.net (Lead - Zeppelin) Date: Sat Jan 3 11:20:05 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Auto forward Message-ID: It seems to me in the past month all the spam I report comes back to me and I have to cut/paste it and pass it on. It used to come back from Spamcop and gave me the option to send the report. What happend? From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Sat Jan 3 17:28:25 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Sat Jan 3 11:30:29 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: <3FF5E6AC.61209744@spamcop.net> Message-ID: On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 06:37:43 -0700, Socks the Whitehouse Cat wrote: > granted. let the ftc explain that to my congress critter and provide an > address for people to file reports that do have a result They might just consider doing that if and when they really get interested in the problem... -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- Microsoft Palladium: "Where the hell do you think YOU'RE going today?" From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 11:38:50 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Brent) Date: Sat Jan 3 11:40:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: "internet.abuse@sjrb.ca" References: Message-ID: weAponX scribed: > What is the deal with these guys, and is it safe to send them > "Un-munged" reports? [...] I regularly send them unmunged reports. I haven't noticed any problems to date. FWIW, I occasionally (read: very rarely) receive a response other than auto-ack. From mikegray at avoidpsamdsl.pipex.com Sat Jan 3 17:06:02 2004 From: mikegray at avoidpsamdsl.pipex.com (Mike Gray) Date: Sat Jan 3 12:10:07 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Someone's Joe-Jobbing Blackstar... Message-ID: Which is interesting... www.blackstar.co.uk are a UK DVD/Video retailer who I've had no problems with (in fact their CS is some of the best in the business in my previous experience) and their e-mail is white hat (again in my experience) but I've just had two spams which I'm 101% are joe-job fodder. Posted them in .spam Mike From PossumTrot at dont.spam.me Sat Jan 3 09:09:14 2004 From: PossumTrot at dont.spam.me (Possum Trot) Date: Sat Jan 3 12:15:13 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: IANAL but.this (and many other posts) repeats the myth that there is a legal "right to privacy". There clearly is a right of free speech which prevents (any) government from interfering in most cases, but there is no legal precedent to prevent each of us interfering peacefully with someone's attempt at speech, i.e., spam. There is no such legal guarantee for a purported "right of privacy" in the case of spam. Having said that, I sure wish there were. "hello" wrote in message news:bt5o8c$d0l$1@news.spamcop.net... > > I have a simpler theory; legislators don't fully understand the problem, and > are simply acting conservatively in legislating within an area for which > there is no precendence and where the issues are confused by questions of > free speech versus the right to privacy. From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 17:35:40 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Robert Slade) Date: Sat Jan 3 12:40:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Someone's Joe-Jobbing Blackstar... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Gray wrote: > Which is interesting... www.blackstar.co.uk are a UK DVD/Video retailer who > I've had no problems with (in fact their CS is some of the best in the > business in my previous experience) and their e-mail is white hat (again in > my experience) but I've just had two spams which I'm 101% are joe-job > fodder. > > Posted them in .spam > > Mike > > Mike, Yes it looks like a 'Joe Job' as it was sent though a charter.com open proxy with a forged line containing an IP belonging to andrews airforce base. I see that you are a BT customer as are blackstar, so if it came from them it should have not left BT space. However, Blackstar could be using a doggy marking company. It sounds like you have bought from them, in which case they can legally e-mail offers to you under the new UK Antispam Law. They do have to allow you to opt out of future mailings though. The other thing that is bothering me is that the new releases shown in the body of the mail are identical to those shown on their web site. I would manually report this to Blackstar, copy to their provider - BT. Rob PS stand by for more spam, you left your mail address in the header you posted. From mikegray at avoidpsamdsl.pipex.com Sat Jan 3 17:41:12 2004 From: mikegray at avoidpsamdsl.pipex.com (Mike Gray) Date: Sat Jan 3 12:45:15 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Someone's Joe-Jobbing Blackstar... References: Message-ID: Robert, > However, Blackstar could be using a doggy marking company. It sounds > like you have bought from them, in which case they can legally e-mail > offers to you under the new UK Antispam Law. They do have to allow you > to opt out of future mailings though. I've seen their mailings, I receive them as a customer (and am happy enough to do so) and they're nothing like that, more all-singing, all-dancing HTML affairs, complete with opt-out. :) > I would manually report this to Blackstar, copy to their provider - BT. Exactly what I've already done. :) Mike From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 12:42:51 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Brent) Date: Sat Jan 3 12:45:22 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Comcast Protest References: <3FEBA0D1.5040106@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Brad M. scribed: > Excellent! Until inaction costs them more than taking action, > they're not going to see the light. [...] Agreed. Here's a perfect example. I was a Comcast cable subscriber for about the past year or so. This is the only business I have ever done with Comcast (i.e. never used them for Internet access). Anyway, I cancelled my service two weeks ago. When I was inevitably prompted, by the CSR, for my reason for cancellation, I told her that it was a problem I had with the way the broadband unit runs (or doesn't run) their business and *briefly* mentioned the *huge* spam problem. (There was no use in going into a long discourse with a powerless CSR). As expected, she provided the obligatory, "Oh, we're so sorry to hear that and are sorry to lose you as a customer..." followed by some ad nauseum corporate-speak. She was very nice though. Yes, I realize that they won't miss my petty $40 per month. However, I have told several and plan to tell many more current and potential Comcast customers about my experiences and what actions I took and why. My intention is to influence 3 or 5 or 10 current or potential subscribers into action so that Comcast will eventually feel the pain of their ignorance. IMO, voting with your wallet is the single most effective thing you can do to make a *real* and *lasting* difference (this is true for any industry). As it was so well-explained earlier by Uncle StoatWarbler, the decisions made have *everything* to do with ROI ($$$). Well, guess what: their ROI is gradually decreasing little-by-little. Ain't free enterprise great?! :-) From usenet1 at DE.LETE.THISljvideo.com Sat Jan 3 17:45:18 2004 From: usenet1 at DE.LETE.THISljvideo.com (Larry Jandro) Date: Sat Jan 3 12:50:14 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Analysis of a spammer's CD of email addresses References: Message-ID: Waiving the right to remain silent, "Gordon Hudson" said: > We regularly get spam sent to our abuse@ address. > In two classic cases it was our own customers spamming us and > when we suspended them they claimed that abuse@ had opted in > ........ Unbelievable..! -- Larry Jandro - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail "Lord, are we worthy of the task that lies before us, or are we just jerking off..?" From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 12:56:39 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (R. P. McCormick) Date: Sat Jan 3 13:00:07 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DIA55.US Dutch registration info References: Message-ID: Hoi ... > > Hmmm ... in The Netherlands ... does the caller pay > > for the incoming calls? If so - Eddie could be in for some trouble! > > Never. That's (mainly) why mobile telephony took off so much faster here > than in the US. ;-) Caller pays. The US now has t-mobile ... but they don't seem to be bringing the Eu standard with them. (I think much of this has to do with the fact that in general, North American telephone service for residential numbers is generally not metered - though there are places where you can opt for that kind of service ... and others where they do "message units" by matter of fact.) > I did say 'usually'. I know that in the UK London has 11-digit > numbers (lots of protest against that one, corporate switchboard- > type systems couldn't handle more than 10); andI just found out > that China (or maybe part of China) has 11-digit numbers, too. Yup. There's plenty of places around the world where local numbers are 8-digits long. London. Tokyo. Some places in China. Makes sense to me: when you run out of numbers, in the local area just expand the amount of numbers you have by adding digits. I remember whilst in NL my home phone went from four digits to five digits to six digits in just a few years. In North America - they screw around with area codes ... sometimes they add one that overlays an existing one (benefit is that everyone gets to keep their numbers, but if you get a second number in your house it may be in a different area code!). Other times they split the area codes - which means that half the people have to change their numbers. Oh - and did I mention consistency of dialing? Some places all numbers have to be rung by dialing all 10-digits (area code + local number) ... but in other places you can dial just the local 7-digit number. And if its not local - some places you must dial 1 plus all 10-digits whilst other places you can dial 1 plus only the 7-digit subscriber number. Land of inconsistency! > > But many other contries have completely different schemes. > > For example, Germany has variable length phone numbers. > > Hmmm - all German phone numbers I have for friends have 10 digits, too. Right ... was just checking on some of that ... some places have shorter city codes and longer numbers, whilst others have longer (like 5-digit) city codes and shorter numbers. Still - I have some listings for businesses with a short number where you can also direct dial into the business (people, facismile) by just adding digits to the end. I think that's a cool feature ... Re: my posting where I put the country code NL after the post code: > Yes, but some address systems mangle Dutch postal codes; > I've seen cases where the two letters (there must be a space > between the digits and the letters: NNNN XX) were dropped > by the program, and then the country code added - just like this > pattern. So it _could_ have been an incomplete postal code > followed by country code. And there was no country name _or_ > code. That's why I dug a bit. It could well have been the registrar that > mangled the address. > See [1] for more about Dutch addressing (and more). > The non-existing street number was the clincher, though. > You can be sure there is no address in the Netherlands > that doesn't have a postal code. Yea - I loved that system. Huisnummer and postcode ... and that's all you need it seems! > Yes, great resource, but hard to use if you can't figure out a bit of > Dutch, especially with the different searching methods available. > (Well, international spamfighters are not really part of the target > audience :)) I found it when researching some of those lottery scam > spams - often with a Dutch address and mobile phone number, > where invariably the adress is fake. Yes - having some memory or exposure to the Dutch addressing system also helps ... > [1] FRANK'S COMPULSIVE GUIDE TO POSTAL ADDRESSES: > http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/postal.html#europe Good link - thanks ... gads, haven't heard/seen that name ... in years! R P McCormick SpamCop user From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 12:58:20 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (R. P. McCormick) Date: Sat Jan 3 13:00:22 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: RED-DNS.INFO BLUE-DNS.INFO (was: DIA55.US Dutch registration info) References: Message-ID: > > Do we see a pattern here with the name and then > > name "media"? > > Isn't that the general pattern for companies in the media business? ;) Ah ... but maybe it should have been: s/media/spammer Isn't that the general pattern for companies in the spammer business?! R P McCormick SpamCop user From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 13:11:31 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Ellen) Date: Sat Jan 3 13:15:21 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Someone's Joe-Jobbing Blackstar... References: Message-ID: "Mike Gray" wrote in message news:bt6uqs$htl$1@news.spamcop.net... > Robert, > > > However, Blackstar could be using a doggy marking company. It sounds > > like you have bought from them, in which case they can legally e-mail > > offers to you under the new UK Antispam Law. They do have to allow you > > to opt out of future mailings though. > > I've seen their mailings, I receive them as a customer (and am happy enough > to do so) and they're nothing like that, more all-singing, all-dancing HTML > affairs, complete with opt-out. :) > > > I would manually report this to Blackstar, copy to their provider - BT. > > Exactly what I've already done. :) > > Mike > > If you are sure that they are being joe-jobbed drop a note to deputies@admin.spamcop.net Ellen From someone at microsoft.com Sat Jan 3 13:14:10 2004 From: someone at microsoft.com (hello) Date: Sat Jan 3 13:15:46 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: anti-Spamcop trick - Part II: � References: Message-ID: "Michael Lefevre" wrote in message news:bt2451$bj4$1@news.spamcop.net... > Anyway, thanks for the report. I'm passing this along to Julian so he can > take a look. I see this has been incorporated now into the parsing by Spamcop. Thanks a lot. -Marc From kiss_me_HAIRYarse at killkillkill.com Sat Jan 3 12:38:53 2004 From: kiss_me_HAIRYarse at killkillkill.com (DeAnna) Date: Sat Jan 3 13:40:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Someone's Joe-Jobbing Blackstar... References: Message-ID: > If you are sure that they are being joe-jobbed drop a note to > deputies@admin.spamcop.net > > Ellen > What is the best way to tell if an email is a joe-job, in order to avoid possibly reporting an innocent party? D. -- ~Simply shave me arse to reply~ From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Sat Jan 3 19:38:56 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Sat Jan 3 13:40:16 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Analysis of a spammer's CD of email addresses References: Message-ID: On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 17:45:18 +0000, Larry Jandro wrote: >> We regularly get spam sent to our abuse@ address. >> In two classic cases it was our own customers spamming us and >> when we suspended them they claimed that abuse@ had opted in >> ........ > > Unbelievable..! Rules #1 and #3 rolled together into one big blooper :) -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- Sign spotted outside a second hand shop: WE EXCHANGE ANYTHING - BICYCLES, WASHING MACHINES, ETC. WHY NOT BRING YOUR WIFE ALONG AND GET A WONDERFUL BARGAIN? From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 13:41:03 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (eddie) Date: Sat Jan 3 13:45:05 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: People really buy from these subjects..? References: Message-ID: On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 17:18:32 +0000, Larry Jandro wrote: > Recent spam subject... > > Subject: embryo arhat ailanthus eurasia convalescent > > So this really gets people to buy a high interest rate mortgage or fake > viagra or pirated software..? > > Are spammers THAT stupid, or is the public THAT stupid..? snip I am beginning to think that most of the spam sales are to spammers, like a pyramid or MLM scheme/scam. The spam we are receiving is the bottom of the pile - just some fill to make the scam look legit, just as most MSL scams do have a real product that a few people actually buy. But most of the big money must be made at the top of this pyramid, by the people who make and distribute the address lists. Much of the spam I receive points to a URL that is not even functioning, which supports my theory, and much is so obfuscated that only IE can read the junk. Anyone using a browser that conforms to internet standards will not even get to the website, even if it is functional. Just my opinion, however - nothing scientific From a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa Sat Jan 3 14:11:55 2004 From: a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa (John Malmberg) Date: Sat Jan 3 14:15:30 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: hello wrote: > "John Malmberg" wrote in message > news:bt3pvc$mn4$1@news.spamcop.net... > > >>Tell them that you know that the only purpose of the law was to overturn >>the California anti-spam law that actually had teeth and prevent other >>states from adopting it. > > This was the only purpose? What exactly is the benefit to the representative > of doing this? The DMA and other marketing agencies have been trying to get a law passed so that they can intimidate ISPs, and Spam Filter vendors to let their SPEW through. The difference in this law, and the reason it was rushed through is that the California law would have explicitly prohibited the opt-out spam that Congress just passed a law for. The DMA only partially succeeded. They did not succeed in forcing ISPs to accept their spew, but they can use this law to try to intimidate them. But they will probably use this law to sue or threaten suits against content filters vendors that classify their OPT-OUT junk as spam. If this U.S. law had not been passed, it would be easier to prosecute spammers in California, and most states would have passed the law. This would have put most of the opt-out spammers out of business, as it is too hard to determine where a recipiant is. My broadband ISP could have their mail server in California sometimes, and they definitely have customers in California. The opt-out spammers think they could make a lot of money if the ISPs would stop trying to block their spew, and are willing to spend the effort lobbying congress. Not enough people convinced their congressional representatives that it was not in their interest, and too many people looked at the title and not the content. Now is the time to let your congress people know that they made a mistake and that you will remember it at the primary time and election time. -John wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only From a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa Sat Jan 3 14:21:11 2004 From: a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa (John Malmberg) Date: Sat Jan 3 14:25:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? In-Reply-To: References: <3FF5E6AC.61209744@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Godwin Stewart wrote: > > I also believe that fining the lusers whose boxen get trojanned would help > as it would be a keen incentive for users to be more proactive about > protecting themselves, and thus everyone else, from abuse. No, give a provision that makes a network financially liable for any spam that comes from a trojan machine more than 1 business day after a notification has been attempted to be delivered to their abuse mailbox. If their abuse mailbox is not working, that will be their problem. $250.00 per day, or $5.00 per spam message fine. Giving a network 1 business day is being very generous. It should take them less than 1/2 hour if they are very busy to isolate the compromised machine. They just have to drop a block for that MAC address at the router to stop the spew. Or they could just block port 25 for that user. -John wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only From a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa Sat Jan 3 14:30:49 2004 From: a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa (John Malmberg) Date: Sat Jan 3 14:35:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Slow listwashing attempt? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Redstone wrote: > somone wrote: >>From "Frank Nazario" >>{ >>Hi this is not an automated response... >>please send the correct email so we can unsubscribe you >>from our mailing list Ask them to post all the I.P. addresses that they send e-mail from on news.admin.net-abuse.blocklisting and that will make sure that everyone that does not want their e-mail will be unsubscribed. >>thanks before hand for your attention to this matter. >> >>frank >>mailserver administrator >>} > > Silly rabbit. Tricks are for kids. -John wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only From wayne at midwestcs.com Sat Jan 3 13:31:20 2004 From: wayne at midwestcs.com (wayne) Date: Sat Jan 3 14:35:25 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Analysis of a spammer's CD of email addresses References: Message-ID: In Don Wannit writes: > There is a discussion on Slashdot (http://slashdot.org) of one > of the spammer CD's of email addresses. [note: This is a repost from NANAE. When Rejo Zenger first mentioned this on NANAE, I posted the following reply. I suspect that those who learned about his analysis either here or on /. may have not see it.] In <41073060964m.rejo@smac.rz.nl.eu.org> Rejo Zenger <41073060964f.rejo@smac.rz.nl.eu.org> writes: > Just finished an analyses of a spamvertized CD that, according to the > spammers claims, contains 10,996,629 addresses. Last summer, some spammer left their website open and I picked up a list of ~50 million email addresses. A while ago, I decided to do some analysis on the data. > I'll tell you: The Rules apply this time as well. Yuppers. Here are the top 25 local parts of all the email addresses: 58911 postmaster 44854 mailer-daemon 38438 info 21163 daemon 12085 aster 11932 abuse 11059 mortgageshoppers 8778 chris 7766 david 7645 root 7305 admin 7270 john 6678 mike 6311 dave 5998 mark 5623 bob 5601 paul 5418 bill 5103 joe 5049 mail 4473 brian 4378 hostmaster 4305 andy 3900 dan 3873 peter You might wonder why "aster" is so popular, but in my experience spammer's lists often have truncated names in them and I suspect that "aster" is just truncated from "postmaster", "hostmaster" and "webmaster". A very large percentage of the email addresses appeared to be things like scraped message-ids and random text that happened to have an @ in it. -wayne From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 19:33:12 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sat Jan 3 14:35:33 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DIA55.US Dutch registration info References: Message-ID: R. P. McCormick (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt6vol$jhs$1 @news.spamcop.net: > Makes sense to me: when you run out of numbers, in the local > area just expand the amount of numbers you have by adding > digits. Or add an area code, without adding digits. Eventually you will run out of possible numbers - it just takes a little longer. :) > I remember whilst in NL my home phone went from four > digits to five digits to six digits in just a few years. All 10 digits since many years now - whether all those numbers are needed or not locally. I like consistency ;-) > Oh - and did I mention consistency of dialing? > Some places all numbers have to be rung by dialing > all 10-digits (area code + local number) ... but in other > places you can dial just the local 7-digit number. In the US, I never could work out what/how to dial! (That is, if I even could work out how to operate the phone...) > Still - I have some listings for businesses with a short number > where you can also direct dial into the business (people, facismile) > by just adding digits to the end. I think that's a cool feature ... We have that feature too, but still all numbers are 10 digits. A company's switchboard number usually ends in some fixed sequence which can be replaced by an individual's number or the number of a fax machine (if you know it). For instance, a switchboard number may end in 478; an individual's number in 623, and the fax is at 331 (example taken from a real company); so you don't *add* numbers, you just replace them. > Yea - I loved that system. Huisnummer and postcode ... and that's all > you need it seems! Yes, that's a completely qualified address. There's more to it: partial postal codes also correspond to neighborhoods in cities and towns, highway exits around cities are labelled with corresponding 3-number codes, and the numbers (for larger areas) are used on the ticket machines at railway stations, etc. For instance my parents have postal code 9718 SG, and to order a ticket to Groningen, where they live, I punch in 9700. And my postal code is 1056 KA, so you take exit (or "city route") 105 into town from the circular road. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa Sat Jan 3 14:35:23 2004 From: a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa (John Malmberg) Date: Sat Jan 3 14:40:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Analysis of a spammer's CD of email addresses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am curious about two things. 1. How is it sorted, if it is sorted.? 2. How many impossible to register domains are in it? That could help with countermeasures :-) -John wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only From manager at houterman.ourfamily.com Sat Jan 3 20:46:56 2004 From: manager at houterman.ourfamily.com (N.J. Houterman) Date: Sat Jan 3 14:45:12 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] SpamCop and Freeservers Message-ID: SpamCop isn't able to detect the way freeserver.com is handling and reporting it's mail. As a result SpamCop report a "Chain error mx2 not equal to last sender received line discarded". This happens for all mail servers used by freeserver.com. =============================================================== Return-Path: Received: from mx2 ([213.51.128.145]) by mail6-sh.home.nl (InterMail vM.5.01.06.05 201-253-122-130-105-20030824) with ESMTP id <20031231162626.BCOK7941.mail6-sh.home.nl@mx2> for ; Wed, 31 Dec 2003 17:26:26 +0100 Received: from [208.185.127.156] (port=54326 helo=mail.freeservers.com) by mx2 with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AbjAu-0007OB-GI for houterman@home.nl; Wed, 31 Dec 2003 17:26:24 +0100 Received: from 208.185.127.171 (unknown [203.197.204.174]) by mail.freeservers.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 692AF38EED for ; Wed, 31 Dec 2003 09:26:06 -0700 (MST) Received: from [144.183.93.41] by 208.185.127.171 with SMTP for ; Wed, 31 Dec 2003 20:13:49 +0300 Message-ID: <6$0-3$xm-ty$e@mre5g3po> From: "Traci Muniz" Reply-To: "Traci Muniz" To: susan@houterman.ourfamily.com Subject: Susan How about obtaining a fully recognized University degree!?? mivkiearv Date: Wed, 31 Dec 03 20:13:49 GMT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="1B3C6_.F.DA" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-AtHome-MailScanner-Information: Neem contact op met support@home.nl voor meer informatie X-AtHome-MailScanner: Found to be clean =============================================================== From MikeE at ster.invalid Sat Jan 3 12:05:49 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sat Jan 3 15:10:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: SpamCop and Freeservers References: Message-ID: N.J. Houterman wrote: > SpamCop isn't able to detect the way freeserver.com is handling and > reporting it's mail. As a result SpamCop report a "Chain error mx2 > not equal to last sender received line discarded". This happens for > all mail servers used by freeserver.com. The problem isn't in the line of the freeserver server: Abbreviated summary of Received: lines *comment from mx2 ([213.51.128.145]) by mail6-sh.home.nl *serves you from [208.185.127.156] (port=54326 helo=mail.freeservers.com) by mx2 *serves you from 208.185.127.171 (unknown [203.197.204.174]) by mail.freeservers.com *sourceline from [144.183.93.41] by 208.185.127.171 *bogusline ... the problem is in using mx2 'improperly' instead of a fqdn for the home.nl If I forge a fresh date and the fqdn mx2.home.nl into the appropriate places, SC will parse those headers correctly: http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z239195774z2614c542cd063d0d595798c86a3db136 z Would send message source reports to: Re: 203.197.204.174 (Administrator of network where email originates) abuse@vsnl.com abuse@vsnl.net -- Mike Easter From hanasaki at hanaden.com Sat Jan 3 14:29:48 2004 From: hanasaki at hanaden.com (hanasaki) Date: Sat Jan 3 15:29:52 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] getting error msg "....the server you are sending to is misconfigured..." Message-ID: <3FF7263C.7070507@hanaden.com> Hello all, This is being sent back to my MTA for all incoming email. Its likely becase the config was hosed for a day or two. What is the real source? Now that the config is right, I think, how can status be restored? thanks ========== 550-Your mail has been rejected because the server you are sending to is 550 misconfigured) From michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com Sat Jan 3 20:43:30 2004 From: michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com (Michael Lefevre) Date: Sat Jan 3 15:45:34 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: anti-Spamcop trick - Part II: � References: Message-ID: hello wrote: > > "Michael Lefevre" wrote in message > news:bt2451$bj4$1@news.spamcop.net... >> Anyway, thanks for the report. I'm passing this along to Julian so he can >> take a look. > > I see this has been incorporated now into the parsing by Spamcop. Thanks a > lot. Yeah - Julian emailed me back to say that, but you've beaten me to posting the info... :) -- Michael From novell at att.net Sat Jan 3 15:39:51 2004 From: novell at att.net (Bob Novell) Date: Sat Jan 3 16:40:52 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Thoughts on new US law - comments please Message-ID: <3FF736A7.6050605@att.net> Considering that all the new US law does is legitimize Spam - that is, anyone or any company is free to send Spam to anyone, anywhere, as long as the Spam follows the law's requirements such as: a) subject line must related to contents b) there must be a valid "remove me" link c) the name of the company must be given d) a valid address (postal) or telephone number must be provided Anyone can send Spam if they follow these, and other, requirements until individuals tell them to stop. This causes me to consider some points: 1) How can this US law control off-shore spammers? Probably can't 2) After years of being told not to use the "remove me" links, are we to now consider all of them legitimate and start using them? Three days into the new law my Spam traffic volume is the same as before and I'm still getting the fudged and mangled subject lines with ads for "Vi@gr@" and "Pe/n/is En1arge/rs" - and other strange "spellings" of words in attempts to get through the filters - would legitimate advertisers do this? How can anyone know that a particular "remove me" link is valid without doing an awful lot of checking such as: run piece through SpamCop to get real domains, doing WhoIs to see if the sending domain is registered in the US, etc.. Many of the "remove me" links will continue to be simply confirmations that the email is valid -- that's why we've been telling people for years not to use the "remove me" links. 3) The law, if I have read it correctly, will allow the Spammer to make the "remove link" either an email address or a URL of a web site. I suspect that many, if not most, will be URL's to web sites. After all, if an email address is provided, it will be too easy :-) and if it's a URL for a web site, the sender will get the recipient to at least go to their site where they can be bombarded with more adds with the hopes that the recipient might actually buy something. Providing a web site link gives the sender one last chance to hook the recipient. And with a web site link, it will take much more time to "opt out" - you'll have to go to the site, probably fill in a form, and then submit it. Also - as with telemarketers, the senders can simply change "identities" and claim that the "opt out" you did before was for a different company, not for theirs. How is a consumer expected to be able to keep track of what they've opted out of and be able to then take action if a Spammer continues to send messages :-( How are we expected to find the time to open each and every Spam to see if there's a "remove link" and then use the link? 4) ISP Filters - it seems to me that ISP Filters have become illegal with the activation of the new US law. Consider this - a) it is legal to send Spam as long as you abide by the requirements. A Spam which meets the requirements is a legal advertisement. b) Since the Spam is legal, it would be illegal to "tamper" with it. By diverting it to a "screened mail" mailbox or deleting it, the ISP Filter is "tampering" with it. I can see someone, say the Direct Mail Association, suing an ISP for "tampering" with the Spam or interfering with their right to send Spam. If the court rules in favor of the plaintiff, other ISPs would probably consider the court's decision as be applicable to all ISPs. ISPs would then shut down their filters. When this happens, everyone will see a drastic jump in the number of Spam they receive each day. (perhaps it would be a good thing in the long run because I can see every email user in the country flooding congress with complaints and demands that Spam be totally outlawed - but short term it will be a nightmare) Counting what is filtered and what gets by the filters on my main account, I average about 175 messages a day - an average of 30 of them get past AT&T's filters. Once it sinks in that Spam has been legitimized by this law, we may see many more companies sending out Spam - imagine getting one email from only 10% of all the businesses in the country, big and small - Sears, Kentucky Fried Chicken, Lane's Rentals (a small rental place hear my home), McDonalds, Wendy's, Allstate Insurance - simply open up your Yellow pages and start reading. I am hoping that legitimate businesses will be run by people who understand the realities of Spam and will not use Spam to advertise their products and services but the new law makes it legal to do so and a good business person really can't pass up the opportunity to get their offers out to millions of consumers at rates which make postage costs look outrageous. With an email address list, some simple software to send email (which I could write and test in about an hour) and an ISP account for, say, $20.00 a month, you can set up a computer to do nothing but churn out Spam 24 hours a day, 365 days a year for mere "nano-cents" per message. It's just too attractive to pass up. It takes me considerable time to cope with those 30 Spams a day - weeding them out of my inbox without removing legitimate messages to me. I don't see how I can cope with 175 each day and not miss legitimate messages. I don't even want to think about how long it would take to tell everyone to take me off their lists - and there's my point number 2, above, to consider. The US law also instructs the FTC to study the feasibility of a "do not spam" list. Many think there are too many problems to such a list and that it is not feasible. For one thing, technical considerations aside, it will be a terrific source of valid email addresses which can be used by "off shore" Spammers. 5) If I read the law correctly, consumers cannot sue Spammers - the ISPs would have to do it. 6) The law also prohibits harvesting email addresses. How will that be enforced? 7) It might prohibit using harvested email addresses but how do you regulate the use of the lists that already existed before the law went into effect? So - any comments or thoughts or ideas on this. Bob Novell From manager at houterman.ourfamily.com Sat Jan 3 23:04:30 2004 From: manager at houterman.ourfamily.com (N.J. Houterman) Date: Sat Jan 3 17:05:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: SpamCop and Freeservers References: Message-ID: Thanks Mike, my mistake. "Mike Easter" schreef in bericht news:bt77h3$s9m$1@news.spamcop.net... > N.J. Houterman wrote: > > SpamCop isn't able to detect the way freeserver.com is handling and > > reporting it's mail. As a result SpamCop report a "Chain error mx2 > > not equal to last sender received line discarded". This happens for > > all mail servers used by freeserver.com. > > The problem isn't in the line of the freeserver server: > > Abbreviated summary of Received: lines *comment > from mx2 ([213.51.128.145]) by mail6-sh.home.nl *serves you > from [208.185.127.156] (port=54326 helo=mail.freeservers.com) by mx2 > *serves you > from 208.185.127.171 (unknown [203.197.204.174]) by > mail.freeservers.com *sourceline > from [144.183.93.41] by 208.185.127.171 *bogusline > > ... the problem is in using mx2 'improperly' instead of a fqdn for the > home.nl > > If I forge a fresh date and the fqdn mx2.home.nl into the appropriate > places, SC will parse those headers correctly: > > http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z239195774z2614c542cd063d0d595798c86a3db136 > z > > Would send message source reports to: > Re: 203.197.204.174 (Administrator of network where email originates) > abuse@vsnl.com > abuse@vsnl.net > > > -- > Mike Easter > From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Sat Jan 3 16:03:03 2004 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Sat Jan 3 17:05:10 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Thoughts on new US law - comments please References: <3FF736A7.6050605@att.net> Message-ID: In article <3FF736A7.6050605@att.net>, Bob Novell writes: > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > --------------080503090107080406090608 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > The quoted material above was all extraneous and there were 7114 more bytes at the end which I have excised for the sake of brevity. Please do not post MIME in newsgroups or mailing lists that do not specifically permit it. If the documentation that came with your software is unclear regarding the method for avoiding MIME creation, contact your software vendor. > Considering that all the new US law does is legitimize Spam - that is, > anyone or any company is free to send Spam to anyone, anywhere, as long > as the Spam follows the law's requirements such as: No more than the law against drunk driving allows sober drivers to drive along the wrong side of the road. Each law proscribes certain behavior, but says nothing about other behavior or other federal laws. From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Sat Jan 3 23:32:17 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Sat Jan 3 17:35:05 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DIA55.US Dutch registration info References: Message-ID: "Marjolein Katsma" a ?crit dans le message de news:Xns9465A9E10282Fhomesitehelp@216.154.195.61 > R. P. McCormick (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt6jpd$6un$1 > @news.spamcop.net: > > > Hmmm ... in The Netherlands ... does the caller pay > > for the incoming calls? If so - Eddie could be in for some trouble! > > Never. That's (mainly) why mobile telephony took off so much faster > here than in the US. ;-) Caller pays. > > > > Within a country (not using a country code), phone numbers > > > are usually 10 digits, as this one is. > > > > No - that's not necessarily true. North America it is ... > > there is a consistent 3-digit "area" code and 7-digit subscriber > > number ... similar I guess to the renumbering that took place > > in NL a few years ago. > > I did say 'usually'. I know that in the UK London has 11-digit numbers > (lots of protest against that one, corporate switchboard-type systems > couldn't handle more than 10); andI just found out that China (or > maybe part of China) has 11-digit numbers, too. > > > But many other contries have completely different schemes. > > For example, Germany has variable length phone numbers. > > Hmmm - all German phone numbers I have for friends have 10 digits, > too. [...] In Belgium, fixed phones operated by Belgacom (the historic, ex-monopolistic operator) have 9 digits including the 0 in front of the area code but not the country code (+32). Other phone numbers are one more digit long. Some companies, hospitals, and the like, have "call-through" numbers: for instance in Brussels's St.Peter hospital, 02/535.3111 is the main switchboard operator, 02/535.4526 is the medico-psychological consultation, etc. (in this case, the last 4 digits are the "internal" phone number). Regards, Tony. From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 22:33:22 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Robert Slade) Date: Sat Jan 3 17:35:24 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Someone's Joe-Jobbing Blackstar... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: DeAnna wrote: >>If you are sure that they are being joe-jobbed drop a note to >>deputies@admin.spamcop.net >> >>Ellen >> > > > What is the best way to tell if an email is a joe-job, in order to avoid possibly > reporting an innocent party? > > D. > There isn't an easy way apart from knowing the site or company being Joe Jobbed. Sometimes Spammers claim to be Joe Jobbed - don't forget Spammers lie. In this case the mail appeared to come from Blackstar's e-mail UK address but came from an open proxy in the US (Spammers are Stupid). If you think that someone is being Joe Jobbed then the best course of action is to warn them. Rob From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 15:41:51 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Stanley P. Miller) Date: Sat Jan 3 17:45:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: google image spam References: <3FF1DAEF.4020503@davlinNOSPAM.net> <3FF20A2B.9040709@davlinNOSPAM.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 17:28:43 -0600, Len L wrote: >Marjolein Katsma wrote: > >> >> Google indexes images and has a special search engine for it; thumbnails >> of those images are stored (not "hosted") on Google's servers and >> displayed when you do a search (just like short textual descriptions of >> pages are stored on their servers). If you click on a thumbnail you get >> a frameset with a slightly larger version of the image (also stored on >> Google's servers) above the actual page where the image was originally >> found by Google's image bot. > >Ah, that makes sense now. So the spammer was trying to get me to go to his/her >website that way. I now find that Google removed the image from its search. > >Len > > > You should report this type of thing to google, they will pull the listing, ususlly within an hour or two. From a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa Sat Jan 3 17:47:50 2004 From: a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa (John Malmberg) Date: Sat Jan 3 17:50:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Thoughts on new US law - comments please In-Reply-To: <3FF736A7.6050605@att.net> References: <3FF736A7.6050605@att.net> Message-ID: Bob Novell wrote: > Considering that all the new US law does is legitimize Spam - that is, > anyone or any company is free to send Spam to anyone, anywhere, as long > as the Spam follows the law's requirements such as: > > a) subject line must related to contents > b) there must be a valid "remove me" link > c) the name of the company must be given > d) a valid address (postal) or telephone number must be provided > > Anyone can send Spam if they follow these, and other, requirements until > individuals tell them to stop. This causes me to consider some points: No change from before the law. > 1) How can this US law control off-shore spammers? Probably can't If the domain name is registered with a US address, then action can be taken. If they want payment from to a U.S. address, then action can be taken. If they are shipping from a U.S. address then action can be taken. Since most of these scammers are operating out of the U.S., it is just a matter of tracking them down. Having some easy to use tool that indicates if a domain name or I.P. address used in spamming is in the U.S. would help, if and only if you can find someone interested in prosecuting. > 2) After years of being told not to use the "remove me" links, are we to > now consider all of them legitimate and start using them? It is against the terms of service of my primary e-mail provider for me to follow any opt-out instructions for any spam that I did not opt in to. > Three days into the new law my Spam traffic volume is the same as before > and I'm still getting the fudged and mangled subject lines with ads for > "Vi@gr@" and "Pe/n/is En1arge/rs" - and other strange "spellings" of > words in attempts to get through the filters - would legitimate > advertisers do this? The law only prohibits them from obscuring the origins, it still permits them to try to get around content filters. No legitimate marketer will use unsolitited phone calls, faxes, or e-mail to sell their product. > How can anyone know that a particular "remove me" link is valid without > doing an awful lot of checking such as: run piece through SpamCop to get > real domains, doing WhoIs to see if the sending domain is registered in > the US, etc.. If I did not subscribe to it, then I must assume it is frauduant and reportable. If I did not subscribe to it, an unsubscribe request is fraud. As I stated, it is a violation of my postmaster's terms of service to opt-out of something that I did not opt in to. Based on my postmasters past attitudes on the matter, I would expect them to stop accepting e-mail from that spammer's I.P. address or all addresses registered to that spammer. If the spammer is in sbl.spamhaus.org, I will not see their spew. > Many of the "remove me" links will continue to be simply confirmations > that the email is valid -- that's why we've been telling people for > years not to use the "remove me" links. The hits on the spammers web servers from the pictures that the spam tries to display is confirming that your postmaster is allowing spam to get through also. As long as someone on your mail server is letting the external links get opened, the spammer knows that your mail server is accepting spam from them. > How is a consumer expected to be able to keep track of what they've > opted out of and be able to then take action if a Spammer continues to > send messages :-( How are we expected to find the time to open each and > every Spam to see if there's a "remove link" and then use the link? That is why the DMA likes the law. ISPs are not required to accept e-mail. > 4) ISP Filters - it seems to me that ISP Filters have become illegal > with the activation of the new US law. Consider this - No. The DMA will try to convince them of that. However no ISP is required to accept e-mail from any source for any reason. > a) it is legal to send Spam as long as you abide by the requirements. A > Spam which meets the requirements is a legal advertisement. It was legal before even if they did not, unless they were selling an illegal product or stealing resources from other networks, or committing some other illegal act. > b) Since the Spam is legal, it would be illegal to "tamper" with it. By > diverting it to a "screened mail" mailbox or deleting it, the ISP Filter > is "tampering" with it. An ISP can refuse any content that they feel is objectionalble. You will not find an ISP that guarantees reliable mail delivery, just best effort, and that they will reserve the right to block any network source that is objectionable. > I can see someone, say the Direct Mail Association, suing an ISP for > "tampering" with the Spam or interfering with their right to send Spam. > If the court rules in favor of the plaintiff, other ISPs would probably > consider the court's decision as be applicable to all ISPs. AOL is currently fighting such a suit, and has one past suits on the matter. An ISP's mail server is private property and they are not required to accept e-mail from other networks. ISPs can provide any filtering that they wish to e-mail. > ISPs would then shut down their filters. Good. They should reject spam from known spam sources and insecure server instead of trying to analyze the content. The most that a spammer winning a lawsuit about content will do is put the content filter providers out of business. The the ISPs that are pretending to care about blocking spam by using content filters will be forced to start using DNSbls to block spam. And then people will find out that if you select your DNSbls properly that they work better than the content filters at keeping spam out. > When this happens, everyone will see a drastic jump in the number of > Spam they receive each day. (perhaps it would be a good thing in the > long run because I can see every email user in the country flooding > congress with complaints and demands that Spam be totally outlawed - but > short term it will be a nightmare) I am only seeing a major jump in spam from mail servers that use content filters. > Counting what is filtered and what gets by the filters on my main > account, I average about 175 messages a day - an average of 30 of them > get past AT&T's filters. Once it sinks in that Spam has been legitimized > by this law, we may see many more companies sending out Spam - imagine > getting one email from only 10% of all the businesses in the country, > big and small - Sears, Kentucky Fried Chicken, Lane's Rentals (a small > rental place hear my home), McDonalds, Wendy's, Allstate Insurance - > simply open up your Yellow pages and start reading. This law was rushed through by the DMA to overturn the California law that would have banned mainstream spamming. Get everyone that you know to go after their congress people and tell them that they know that. See if you can get that stated at a public forum to get a candidates answer on why they legalized spamming while pretending to ban it? Even better if you can get them on the spot in front of a TV camera. > It takes me considerable time to cope with those 30 Spams a day - This means that your mail server operator is probably accepting e-mail from I.P. addresses that have previously been identified as only sending spam. When you report them to spamcop.net, do you show technical details? It will show if the spam was already in several of the popular DNSbls. > weeding them out of my inbox without removing legitimate messages to me. > I don't see how I can cope with 175 each day and not miss legitimate > messages. If you can not switch to a postmaster that knows how to separate spam from real e-mail, then you can use a client side spam filter. Have it check the I.P. address that your e-mail server accepted the spam from. Assuming that you have SpamAssasin with a score of 5 to be spam, You should test this before relying on it. If the e-mail came from an I.P. address listed: In sbl.spamhaus.org, score 6. Any Open Relay list, score 5. Any Open Proxy list, score 6. If you are getting spam from sources listed above, complain to your e-mail provider. There is no reason for that spam to even get into the mail server. Also much of these spam sources are not regularly reported to spamcop.net because a lot of us will not see them. If the e-mail had a bad rDNS, score 4. In bl.spamcop.net, score 4. in dul.dnsbl.sorbs.net, score 4. If an URL or e-mail address in the spam is for a non-existant domain, or the domain is listed in sbl.spamhaus.org, or spews, then score 1. > The US law also instructs the FTC to study the feasibility of a "do not > spam" list. Many think there are too many problems to such a list and > that it is not feasible. For one thing, technical considerations aside, > it will be a terrific source of valid email addresses which can be used > by "off shore" Spammers. Several posters on various forums have indicated that they will register all possible e-mail addresses for their domains. This will make the database terabytes in size. Since each spammer would have to have a local copy, it would be a big boon to the sellers of disk drives. A spammer would have to use confirmed opt-in instead, just from the economics. > 5) If I read the law correctly, consumers cannot sue Spammers - the ISPs > would have to do it. Yes. Prior to the law, consumers could sue spammers, if they could find grounds. However if anyone successfully sued under the junk fax law, it still might work. > 6) The law also prohibits harvesting email addresses. How will that be > enforced? Silly question. The same way it is enforced before the law. > 7) It might prohibit using harvested email addresses but how do you > regulate the use of the lists that already existed before the law went > into effect? Only a handful of prosecuters were interested before the law, so nothing will change. And the law does not prohibit them from selling the list to some one else. Bigspamco sells their list to smallspamco1 for a spam run. smallspamco1 disolves right after it, and smallspamco2 forms and buys the list. smallspamco2 is not bound to honor the opt-out requests that were given to spamspamco1. > So - any comments or thoughts or ideas on this. Get as many of your friends and neighbors to call the local phone numbers for your congress people and complain about their legalizing spam by overturning the California law. This is a campaign season, and the congress people are making sure that humans are answering the phone. This law was rushed though to overturn the California anti-spam law. That is it's main purpose. The other purpose is to put pressure on the content filter vendors to let spam conforming to the new law by the thread of lawsuits. -John wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 15:54:52 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Jeff) Date: Sat Jan 3 17:55:15 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Spamhaus on the new Can Spam Act Message-ID: http://www.spamhaus.org/position/CAN-SPAM_Act_2003.html From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Sun Jan 4 00:00:45 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Sat Jan 3 18:05:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: RED-DNS.INFO BLUE-DNS.INFO (was: DIA55.US Dutch registration info) References: Message-ID: "Marjolein Katsma" a ?crit dans le message de news:Xns9465AB20AFEE8homesitehelp@216.154.195.61 > R. P. McCormick (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt6m64$94t$1 > @news.spamcop.net: > > > Anyone know a reverse phone lookup for German numbers? > > Not likely; privacy law would probably forbid this (as it is > forbidden in the Netherlands). > > > -- > Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ > Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. > Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. > The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. > http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html Not necessarily. In Belgium you may call Information asking either "What is the phone number of Mr. Soandso, at streetname- number in postcode-township?" or "Who is connected to 02-345-6789?" and they will answer in both cases, UNLESS the phone subscriber in question has asked not to be mentioned in the yearbook (and paid for it). Regards, Tony. From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 16:29:09 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Jeff) Date: Sat Jan 3 18:30:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] new comments I now use with Spamcop reports Message-ID: I now add the following comment to all the comment blocks when sending spam reports. WARNING! This spam is in violation of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (S. 877) (Burns-Wyden). http://www.spamlaws.com/federal/108s877.html You are hereby warned to cease and desist IMMEDIATELY or face federal prosecution. From michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com Sun Jan 4 00:06:08 2004 From: michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com (Michael Lefevre) Date: Sat Jan 3 19:10:13 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports References: Message-ID: Jeff wrote: > I now add the following comment to all the comment blocks when sending spam > reports. > > WARNING! This spam is in violation of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (S. 877) > (Burns-Wyden). http://www.spamlaws.com/federal/108s877.html You are hereby > warned to cease and desist IMMEDIATELY or face federal prosecution. And, assuming the particular spam doesn't stop, how are you planning to cause a federal prosecution of the ISP? Adding that comment is about as worthwhile as spammers quoting laws on their spam which they claim means the recipient cannot do anything about it. You're just wasting your time and the time of the people receiving the reports, and making Spamcop looks silly into the bargain. -- Michael From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 17:11:35 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Jeff) Date: Sat Jan 3 19:15:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] other spam reporting agencies Message-ID: In addition to spamcop, I also send every spam email to the Federal Trade Commission. Email address is uce@ftc.gov. More info at their website here. http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/online/inbox.htm Does anyone use any other spam reporting agencies? From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 17:14:29 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Jeff) Date: Sat Jan 3 19:15:15 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports References: Message-ID: "Michael Lefevre" wrote in message news:bt7ldg$eac$1@news.spamcop.net... > And, assuming the particular spam doesn't stop, how are you planning to > cause a federal prosecution of the ISP? > > Adding that comment is about as worthwhile as spammers quoting laws on > their spam which they claim means the recipient cannot do anything about > it. You're just wasting your time and the time of the people receiving > the reports, and making Spamcop looks silly into the bargain. Nothing wrong with sending a warning. I don't know if this has anything to do with it or not, but up till the end of December, I was getting 22 spams per day. I received no more than 8 per day during the last 3 days. From a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa Sat Jan 3 19:41:32 2004 From: a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa (John Malmberg) Date: Sat Jan 3 19:45:05 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: other spam reporting agencies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Jeff wrote: > In addition to spamcop, I also send every spam email to the Federal Trade > Commission. Email address is uce@ftc.gov. More info at their website here. > http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/online/inbox.htm > > Does anyone use any other spam reporting agencies? Yes. Nigerian 419 scams, and related Advanced fee scams should be reported to 419.fcd@usss.treas.gov. You need to put "NO FINANCIAL LOSS" in the subject. An advance fee scam is any scam which wants you to provide them with a small deposit to help them launder money. Some of the scams where they claim to be a bank asking for you to verify an account also qualify. The 419 scams are two-fold. One they try to empty your bank account, and two the original scammer sells your identity information to international organized crime to use to secure large loans which are then defaulted on. It is the latter that seems to have gotten the Secret Service involved in. Over the counter drugs are reported to otcfraud@cder.fda.gov and illegal prescription drug web sites are reported to webcomplaints@ora.fda.gov They seem to have a spam filter that is rejecting most of the ones that Brightmail lets through if you forward them as attachments. People claiming to sell Microsoft software at a discount can be reported to piracy@microsoft.com and the web form at www.bsa.org. The BSA.ORG represents a lot of software vendors. No one operating a computer in the U.S. wants an audit from the BSA or the SPA. The BSA and other copyright agencies have international influence. Hotline@mpaa.org is interested in DVD copying and also in the sale of illegal descramblers to receive MPAA.ORG members copyrighted movies. The MPAA can get web sites shut down in Russia and China. The riaa.org is supposed to be interested music piracy, but their e-mail addresses have not been functional for several months. The MPAA, RIAA, BSA, all claim to pay rewards based on what they collect from the pirates or those actively supporting the spammer. Help the underpaid abuse desk know how they can collect some extra bucks by reporting their customers. Stock newsletters or other information that you did not request is called a "Pump and Dump" scam. The spammer is trying to trick people in to buying the stock to cause a small rise in it's value, at which point the spammer sells. Stock scams are to be reported to enforcement@sec.gov Pointing out in the spamcop.net comments that you have reported the stock scam to the SEC.GOV seems to speed up when the spammer has to find a new host. -John wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only From michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com Sun Jan 4 00:57:54 2004 From: michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com (Michael Lefevre) Date: Sat Jan 3 20:00:20 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports References: Message-ID: Jeff wrote: > "Michael Lefevre" wrote in message > news:bt7ldg$eac$1@news.spamcop.net... >> And, assuming the particular spam doesn't stop, how are you planning to >> cause a federal prosecution of the ISP? >> >> Adding that comment is about as worthwhile as spammers quoting laws on >> their spam which they claim means the recipient cannot do anything about >> it. You're just wasting your time and the time of the people receiving >> the reports, and making Spamcop looks silly into the bargain. > > Nothing wrong with sending a warning. There is if it's a warning of something that's not going to happen - at best, it just makes the person giving the warning look silly. Giving some kinds of legal warnings (I'm not suggesting this applies to yours) and not following up on them can actually get you into legal difficulties. > I don't know if this has anything to > do with it or not, but up till the end of December, I was getting 22 spams > per day. I received no more than 8 per day during the last 3 days. 3 days is a rather short time in which to judge. If many people are seeing a reduction in spam after a month or so that would be significant. In fact, people I've seen discussing it have said they haven't seen any difference in spam volumes since 1st January. -- Michael From glnews030922 at highspot.net Sat Jan 3 19:47:37 2004 From: glnews030922 at highspot.net (Graeme Leith) Date: Sat Jan 3 20:45:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Jeff wrote: [snip] > Nothing wrong with sending a warning. I don't know if this has anything to > do with it or not, but up till the end of December, I was getting 22 spams > per day. I received no more than 8 per day during the last 3 days. You were just seeing the annual Christmas spamming rush. SpamCop has only been graphing for about 6 months. However, you can see that the number of reported spams is still higher than it has been for any month apart from December. http://alpha.cesmail.net/graphics/spamyear.gif -- 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 spamcop001 at bellsouth.net Sat Jan 3 20:05:39 2004 From: spamcop001 at bellsouth.net (Bo Briggs) Date: Sat Jan 3 21:10:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: the real deal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Merlyn wrote: > "Bo Briggs" wrote in message > news:bsoc2g$fia$1@news.spamcop.net... > >> >>Merlyn wrote: >> >>[snip] >> >>>It's only $1.58 in our area (I just checked a can). I am sure you have > > spent > >>>more than that trying other food. It's really pretty good. Give it a > > try > >>>:-) >>> Picked up my first can today. $1.69 here. Must be rampant inflation :) Someone please impeach Nixon...Sorry, blast from the past hit me. >> >>It was in my hands...but I put it back on the shelf. You need to be a > > Hormel > >>rep. Anyway you've convinced me. I'll pick one up on my next trip and > > report > >>back. Should I go with Classic SPAM? or another variety: >> >>http://spam.com/sp.htm >> > > > > The only one I ever buy is classic. > > Have fun, enjoy. > 'twill be lunch tomorrow. Looking forward to it. I have English muffins, SPAM, lettuce, and Durkees. The can looks mouth-watering. -- Bo Briggs From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 21:15:48 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (R. P. McCormick) Date: Sat Jan 3 21:21:23 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DIA55.US Dutch registration info References: Message-ID: > > I remember whilst in NL my home phone went from four > > digits to five digits to six digits in just a few years. > > All 10 digits since many years now - whether all those numbers are > needed or not locally. I like consistency ;-) Yea - me, too. In some ways - its really all the same. I've spent some time in New Zealand as well ... and they too have standardised their numbering: all numbers are the same length and one-digit area codes. But during this conversion I was in a tiny town on the west coast of the south island. Very remote and isolated. Here all the numbers started with the digit 7 ... and the numbers were three digits long. I made a joke to someone that there may be more phones in the single motel in town - and they laughed back ... saying it could be true! Yes - in the North American numbering plan ... you can get an ISDN PRI type service ... (as well as the older T1 type lines) ... where you buy blocks of numbers from the phone company. These are sequential - typically in groups of 100. So a company could have numbers like: XXX-555-2000 to XXX-555-2099 (or as many blocks as they could justify) Inbound calls would be delivered from the telephone company to the organisation's in-house telephone switch ... which would then translate the last N-digits of the incoming number being called to the appropriate local extension. But all numbers (as in NL) *have* to be: NPA = 3-digit area code NXX = 3-digit exchange code NNNN = 4-digit local number > In the US, I never could work out what/how to dial! > (That is, if I even could work out how to operate the phone...) So you go to a phone box to make a call - long distance. You dial 1.800.555.5555 to reach a long distance company. you then dial 011.31.2.xxxxxxx to get a number in AMS ... and after the "bong" tone you enter yet another 10-digits from your calling card. By now you are ready to see the doctor for stress on your dialing finger ... > There's more to it: partial postal codes also correspond to > neighborhoods in cities and towns, highway exits around cities > are labelled with corresponding 3-number codes, and the > numbers (for larger areas) are used on the ticket machines > at railway stations, etc. For instance my parents have postal > code 9718 SG, and to order a ticket to Groningen, where > they live, I punch in 9700. And my postal code is 1056 KA, > so you take exit (or "city route") 105 into town from the circular > road. Stop it! You make me home sick! Especially for consistency. Arrrrgggghhhhh !!! Well, my first house in NL was 1241 L-something (I forgot!). Then I lived in a small hotel for some months at 1241 CM. (The owners adopted me - I got to work at the bar ... it was a great experience!) And my final years in NL at 3738 JV. R P McCormick SpamCop user From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 19:45:52 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Jeff) Date: Sat Jan 3 21:50:18 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports References: Message-ID: "Michael Lefevre" wrote in message news:bt7oei$hf1$1@news.spamcop.net... > There is if it's a warning of something that's not going to happen - at > best, it just makes the person giving the warning look silly. Giving some > kinds of legal warnings (I'm not suggesting this applies to yours) and not > following up on them can actually get you into legal difficulties. Good. The longer they think nothing will happen and the more they continue to spam after warnings have been given, the more money there is for me. There's always been some money to be made from the spammers for state offenses in certain states, but now that it's a federal offense, it's now worth my while to take action as long as they keep sending me email with false return addresses and deceptive subjects and message bodies. From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 19:48:18 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Jeff) Date: Sat Jan 3 21:50:46 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports References: Message-ID: this guy made some money from the spammers by invoking state laws. http://www.aboutspam.com/payup.php From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 03:13:50 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Spam Cat) Date: Sat Jan 3 22:15:19 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Submit email not parsing Message-ID: I directed, via my registrar and DNS provider, EasyDNS, several of my oft-spammed email address to my paid SpamCop submit address. My intent is to have SpamCop parse them, the I review and manually LART. (I could Quick submit, but there is a very slight chance of someone sending a legitimate email to one of these email accounts, e.g. "info@mydomain.com") Since the email is directed to SpamCop I don't have access to the complete original message. Is there something unusual about mail re-directed by a DNS server? Are they all different? All of these emails forwarded by the DNS provider are being rejected by SpamCop with the message which follows --- SpamCop encountered errors while saving spam for processing: Message forwarded in html wrapper. When forwarding spam, use a MIME attachment or text-type message with the spam enclosed. Do not send spam in HTML format. Sometimes this error is caused by using a "resend" feature to forward spam. HTML spam should be sent in text (source code) format. The email which triggered this auto-response had the following headers: Delivered-To: spamcop@sc-app1.verio.ironport.com Received: from vmx1.spamcop.net (sc-smtp1.verio.ironport.com [192.168.11.200]) by sc-app1.verio.ironport.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3BA4F298 for ; Fri, 2 Jan 2004 23:47:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.easydns.com (HELO spidey.easydns.com) (216.220.40.247) by vmx1.spamcop.net with ESMTP; 02 Jan 2004 23:47:40 -0800 Received: from info (unknown [80.51.255.14]) by spidey.easydns.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 431BE72980 for ; Sat, 3 Jan 2004 02:46:17 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: From: "Dsmith" Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 08:47:58 +0100 To: info@xxxxxxxxdomain.com Subject: Power of winner - V.lAGR.A MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 -- I am not I. The horse is not mine. And, I'm not the coachman. From MikeE at ster.invalid Sat Jan 3 19:49:48 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sat Jan 3 22:55:07 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Watching Spirit Message-ID: Nice article http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52852-2004Jan3.html Bracing for 'Six Minutes From Hell' NASA's Spirit Spacecraft Attempts Perilous Landing on Surface of Mars After Six-Month Journey "I feel calm. I feel ready. I can only conclude that's because I don't have a full grasp of the situation," deputy mission manager Mark Adler said. -- Mike Easter From nobody at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 21:57:18 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Sat Jan 3 23:00:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports References: Message-ID: <843fvvooj20vbmjb8k3gd9lgi1omqt3dko@4ax.com> On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 00:06:08 +0000 (UTC), Michael Lefevre wrote: >You are hereby >> warned to cease and desist IMMEDIATELY or face federal prosecution. > >And, assuming the particular spam doesn't stop, how are you planning to >cause a federal prosecution of the ISP? I must be missing something here, because I see no warning being issued to an ISP. What I see is a warning that the sender of the spam (as defined by the referenced law) will confront (i.e., face) federal prosecution. As to how an individual might do this-- an individual can lodge a legal complaint with the enforcement agency (which I hope is what sending copies of spam reports to the FTC e-mail address does). While this, in and of itself, is not enough, follow up and insistence that the FTC enforce the law in any given instance could be cause, particularly if backed by a court-registered complaint... In short, we do have a number of means (some can be quite expensive) at our disposal to push for enforcement. As to how many of us actually will put out the money and effort is another matter. Having said all that, I do believe that a "warning" is a bit of a reach, but what I've done is simply add in the comment field something along the following lines (as appropriate): FTC - Track and prosecute - spam sent through open proxy, no opt-out information, no contact information, etc. If it was one of the many medical spams, the instead of "FTC -", I use "FTC and FDA -" I don't know if that will have any effect, but at least I have identified some of the key elements involved with the new law. I have also been opting out, but only when clear contact information has been provided... and those I am tracking to make sure that the same "spam" source takes me off their list. From spamcop001 at bellsouth.net Sat Jan 3 22:34:28 2004 From: spamcop001 at bellsouth.net (Bo Briggs) Date: Sat Jan 3 23:35:12 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Spamhaus on the new Can Spam Act In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: "Michael Vilain " wrote: > In article , "Jeff" > wrote: > > >>http://www.spamhaus.org/position/CAN-SPAM_Act_2003.html >> >> > > > Their server seems to be down. I can ping the host and traceroute, but > there's no web site running. How to contact? > Loads extremely fast here. Shift-Reload? -- Bo Briggs From robb at funSPAMLESSchords.com.invalid Sat Jan 3 20:41:22 2004 From: robb at funSPAMLESSchords.com.invalid (Robb Topolski) Date: Sat Jan 3 23:45:27 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports References: Message-ID: "Jeff" wrote in message news:bt7j8d$ckv$1@news.spamcop.net... > I now add the following comment to all the comment blocks when sending spam > reports. > > WARNING! This spam is in violation of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (S. 877) > (Burns-Wyden). http://www.spamlaws.com/federal/108s877.html You are hereby > warned to cease and desist IMMEDIATELY or face federal prosecution. Who is hereby warned to cease and desist? 1. Spamcop reports go to the ISP, not to the spammer. Your warning goes to the wrong people -- and does not solicit cooperation of the ISP (and we count on that cooperation). 2. Naturally, we use spamcop to report spam -- even if it doesn't violate CAN-SPAM. It only violates CAN-SPAM if the spam: a. uses a header that is either forged or created by exploiting a relay/proxy b. uses a deceptive subject line c. does not include a valid return address or e-mail address (either) d. continues to arrive after you have unsubscribed e. is porn without an FTC warning (which the FTC has not defined yet) 3. The enforcers of CAN-SPAM are about a dozen federal and state commissions and offices -- none of which are you. You, obviously, may not commence federal prosecution of anyone. Don't use the comment feature to threaten the ISPs. Use it to help the ISP do their job. Just my 2c. Robb From MikeE at ster.invalid Sat Jan 3 21:02:25 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sun Jan 4 00:10:32 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Watching Spirit References: Message-ID: Spirit transmitting from Mars. So far so good. Still lots of things to do, get rid of air bags and start getting itself 'situated'. -- Mike Easter From reply at in.news.group Sat Jan 3 23:14:21 2004 From: reply at in.news.group (Mike Vollmer) Date: Sun Jan 4 00:10:59 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Watching Spirit References: Message-ID: Does Spirit have an email address, or is Mars still spam-free? From tatlin at spamcop.net Sat Jan 3 21:11:18 2004 From: tatlin at spamcop.net (Keith Higgins) Date: Sun Jan 4 00:15:06 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: anti-Spamcop trick.. http:\\ In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Marjolein Katsma wrote: > Ellen wrote in news:bt1f33$5qt$1@news.spamcop.net: > > >>ooops must have missed that -- so someone send a complete copy/paste >>with headers of a spam and I'll get it put on the fix list I just wanted to note that the problem noted in the first post of this thread is still extant, although a somewhat-related one (in the "part II" sub-thread) may have been fixed. The problem seems to occur with http:\\[username]@[hostname] URLs, they are interpreted by the parser as e-mail addresses when I submit them, and no MX is found, so no abuse address is found. I posted a second example, FWIW, under Marjolein's example in .spam. From notgiven at nodomain.net Sun Jan 4 00:18:40 2004 From: notgiven at nodomain.net (C. S.) Date: Sun Jan 4 00:21:05 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Problems on M$'s end: piracy@microsoft.com Message-ID: I noticed the thread a short while back, regarding something about the piracy@microsoft.com address returning bounce errors. I'm here to confirm it; I just got a bounce. Is there any particular significance to the "Status: 5.2.2" item? [Note to John Malmberg: One of your posts refers to a website form at www.bsa.org. I did some digging, and found software@bsa.org for their US offices. I'll post here if it bounces, too.] M$ BOUNCE: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reporting-MTA: dns;RED-MSG-40.redmond.corp.microsoft.com Received-From-MTA: dns;inet-hub-05.redmond.corp.microsoft.com Arrival-Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 20:39:36 -0800 Final-Recipient: rfc822;piracy@microsoft.com Action: failed Status: 5.2.2 X-Display-Name: Anti Piracy Hotline-Lead Submissions From: X@yahoo.com To: uce@ftc.gov, piracy@microsoft.com, piracy@adobe.com, piracy@symantec.com Message-ID: <20040104043935.1709.qmail@web14903.mail.yahoo.com> Subject: Fwd: clearance sa-le for software parturiunt adjectival figural From glnews030922 at highspot.net Sat Jan 3 23:25:30 2004 From: glnews030922 at highspot.net (Graeme Leith) Date: Sun Jan 4 00:26:33 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Watching Spirit In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > Spirit transmitting from Mars. So far so good. Still lots of things to > do, get rid of air bags and start getting itself 'situated'. All this and Fox News reporting that it doesn't land for another three hours about 15 minutes after NASA got the signal from it on the ground. Couldn't happen to a better station. ;-) -- 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 reply at in.news.group Sat Jan 3 23:44:31 2004 From: reply at in.news.group (Mike Vollmer) Date: Sun Jan 4 00:41:26 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: other spam reporting agencies References: Message-ID: How essential is the "NO FINANCIAL LOSS" part of it? Has the Treasury Dept. indicated that they won't look at it otherwise? I need to report the spew as thoroughly as necessary with minimal impact on my time .... Thanks for the other suggestions -- there were 3 new (for me) reporting addresses in there. > Nigerian 419 scams, and related Advanced fee scams should be reported to > 419.fcd@usss.treas.gov. > > You need to put "NO FINANCIAL LOSS" in the subject. From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 01:01:44 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Cat) Date: Sun Jan 4 02:06:42 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Comcast revisited Message-ID: <3FF7BA57.FE1E9602@spamcop.net> After all the recent discussion about Comcast in the newsgroup and my less than productive conversation with a particularly rude and snotty abuse admin on the phone yesterday who tried to write off Comcast's spam problems as a virus on the spam victims' computers, I really wish we could do something about Comcast. I also mentioned some spam fighting concerns to the woman on the phone, and she said she refused to address any of that. I wish I had written her name down, because now I can't remember it. She claims that they do close spammers down but that it takes them anywhere from a week to a month to investigate. I told her I wasn't gullible enough to believe that since a reputible ISP would shut down a spammer immediately and that I was tired of her excuses. Anyway, I really need a Comcast bitch list so that my spam complaints will hopefully get through to someone with half a brain cell. If anyone here has a Comcast bitch list, please post it here. From tdy at blackhole.aosake.net Sun Jan 4 01:29:23 2004 From: tdy at blackhole.aosake.net (N. Miller) Date: Sun Jan 4 04:33:43 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Too many errors; giving up on SpamCop Message-ID: Maybe not; but I am tired of losing reports to the evil "Connection closed by remote server" errors. I never know if the reports made it through. In general, though, I have wasted too much time on reporting spam. I am seriously on the verge of killing every email account I have, and telling my friends and family to spend that $.37 if they reall want to reach me. Spammers own the Internet, and they own email. I am tired of playing. -- Norman ~I'll be there, by your side ~in the land of Twilight. ~In your dream I will go ~'till we find the Sunlight. From billk at no.spam Sun Jan 4 01:49:52 2004 From: billk at no.spam (Bill K.) Date: Sun Jan 4 04:55:29 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] SC tricked with too many invalid links Message-ID: http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z239581191z6250625e8e6bab702ae8201286aaaba6z Only the http://www.easy5544.com/yt4/ listed seems legitimate. From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Sun Jan 4 11:26:06 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Sun Jan 4 05:35:59 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports References: Message-ID: On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 19:48:18 -0700, Jeff wrote: > this guy made some money from the spammers by invoking state laws. > > http://www.aboutspam.com/payup.php U-CAN-SPAM specifically denies individuals the right to legal action against spammers and overrides state laws such as those in CA. -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- Notice spotted in a field: THE FARMER ALLOWS WALKERS TO CROSS THE FIELD FOR FREE, BUT THE BULL CHARGES From MikeE at ster.invalid Sun Jan 4 03:25:54 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sun Jan 4 06:31:47 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Too many errors; giving up on SpamCop References: Message-ID: N. Miller wrote: > In general, though, I have wasted too much time on reporting > spam. I am seriously on the verge of killing every email account I > have, and telling my friends and family to spend that $.37 if they > reall want to reach me. Spammers own the Internet, and they own email. > I am tired of playing. Something must've gone wrong with your approach to handling your email. My recommended strategy is to primarily handle your mail conveniently, securely, and pledged to not aid a spammer. Whether you have one account or multiple, you can accomplish that by proper configuration and behavior. The overview is that with filters or message rules, all of your spam goes into a Junk folder and only your desired mail is in the Inbox or further subsorted. What you do with the Junk folder is your pleasure, massively delete it, feed it to spamcop, or use it for spamfighting sport. Pledged spammees not fighting spam have no business opening or previewing spam; the Junk folder should simply be 'overseen' for filter adjustment and its content massively deleted. 'Amateur' and non-amateur spamfighters can feed spamcop, but the amateurs should do so securely, as mentioned above. If you get a lot of spam, one efficient way to segregate would be to use a transparent proxy like SpamPal between you and your provider's server to tag your spam for message ruling into its own folder. If you also feed spamcop /and/ use the SCbl for filtering, you aid your own processes by feedback. Another way to perform that type of filtration and reporting would be to subscribe to the spamcop mail service. How hard or trying can that be? -- Mike Easter From MikeE at ster.invalid Sun Jan 4 03:39:37 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sun Jan 4 06:46:25 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: SC tricked with too many invalid links References: Message-ID: Bill K. wrote: > http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z239581191z6250625e8e6bab702ae8201286aaaba6 z > > Only the http://www.easy5544.com/yt4/ listed seems legitimate. Trackers only display the header parse, not the body. If you want to discuss body parsing the entire spam item, including complete headers, should be posted in spamcop.spam, *not* here, and discussed here, not there. -- Mike Easter From redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com Sun Jan 4 11:44:01 2004 From: redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com (Redstone) Date: Sun Jan 4 06:47:12 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Slow listwashing attempt? References: Message-ID: John Malmberg wrote in news:bt7599$pge$1@news.spamcop.net: > > Ask them to post all the I.P. addresses that they send e-mail from > on news.admin.net-abuse.blocklisting and that will make sure that > everyone that does not want their e-mail will be unsubscribed. > I like it.. a turbo unsubscribe function. :-) From redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com Sun Jan 4 11:46:05 2004 From: redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com (Redstone) Date: Sun Jan 4 06:50:08 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: People really buy from these subjects..? References: Message-ID: eddie wrote in news:pan.2004.01.03.18.41.01.732000@spamcop.net: > I am beginning to think that most of the spam sales are to > spammers, like a pyramid or MLM scheme/scam. The spam we are > receiving is the bottom of the pile - just some fill to make the > scam look legit, just as most MSL scams do have a real product > that a few people actually buy. But most of the big money must be > made at the top of this pyramid, by the people who make and > distribute the address lists. Much of the spam I receive points to > a URL that is not even functioning, which supports my theory, and > much is so obfuscated that only IE can read the junk. Anyone using > a browser that conforms to internet standards will not even get to > the website, even if it is functional. > Just my opinion, however - nothing scientific That is what pisses me off. Browsers that try to fix intentionally "b0rken" links. Should leave them as they are, non-functional.. since they lead to nothing useful. From redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com Sun Jan 4 11:50:09 2004 From: redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com (Redstone) Date: Sun Jan 4 06:55:05 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Spamhaus on the new Can Spam Act References: Message-ID: "Jeff" wrote in news:bt7h85$ahu$1 @news.spamcop.net: > http://www.spamhaus.org/position/CAN-SPAM_Act_2003.html > > I agree with it. It's law without any teeth on it. Meaning the blocklists will remain active regardless. For those who receive 100 spams per day.. unsubscribing is not a practical measure. From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 06:54:33 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (R. P. McCormick) Date: Sun Jan 4 06:55:17 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Problems on M$'s end: piracy@microsoft.com References: Message-ID: > I noticed the thread a short while back, regarding > something about the piracy@microsoft.com address > returning bounce errors. > > I'm here to confirm it; I just got a bounce. > > Is there any particular significance to the "Status: 5.2.2" > item? I regularly report to piracy-@-microsoft.com and piracy-@-adobe.com and have not received a problem. In fact, I think in all cases I've gotten a reply from the Microsoft address. Are you just copying them on SpamCop reports? Or sending a manual lart? (I always manually send the headers and body.) Try again ... R P McCormick SpamCop user From martis.N0sPaM at ntlworld.com Sun Jan 4 12:01:49 2004 From: martis.N0sPaM at ntlworld.com (Martin S) Date: Sun Jan 4 07:05:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Comcast revisited References: <3FF7BA57.FE1E9602@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Cat" wrote in message news:3FF7BA57.FE1E9602@spamcop.net... > After all the recent discussion about Comcast in the newsgroup and my > less than productive conversation with a particularly rude and snotty > abuse admin on the phone yesterday who tried to write off Comcast's spam > problems as a virus on the spam victims' computers, I really wish we > could do something about Comcast. I also mentioned some spam fighting > concerns to the woman on the phone, and she said she refused to address > any of that. I wish I had written her name down, because now I can't > remember it. She claims that they do close spammers down but that it > takes them anywhere from a week to a month to investigate. I told her I > wasn't gullible enough to believe that since a reputible ISP would shut > down a spammer immediately and that I was tired of her excuses. > > Anyway, I really need a Comcast bitch list so that my spam complaints > will hopefully get through to someone with half a brain cell. If anyone > here has a Comcast bitch list, please post it here. Have u thought of using comcast.blackholes.us to filter ur emails, its about the best u can do for unhelpful admins, shame reputable ISP's don't use this filter and save us the effort, may also make comcast do more. Martin From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 23:13:56 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Petzl) Date: Sun Jan 4 07:15:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Hotmail References: Message-ID: On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 19:39:19 -0600, Doug wrote: >Joe wrote: > >> John Marion wrote: >> >>> Wow! I've gone from 30 spams a day to 1 a day! Whatever they are now >>> doing at Hotmail is way overdue but it seems to be working. >>> >> >> My understanding is that the spam load got so great that the sysadmins >> were finally able to overcome the legal department's fears. They've >> instituted a proprietary blocklist. I'm getting all this second and >> third-hand, so it may not be correct. >> >That may well be the case. My own hotmail spamtrap address has dropped >from 100 per day to one ovry other day or so. I may be able to resume >using it as a good email address after four years of only getting >garbage in it. I think the next question is how many false positives (if any) Petzl -- "AVG 6.0 Free Edition" Anti-Virus Check your computer for "Spy Bots" (free) Block spamvertised websites (free) a good firewall for windows(free version available) From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 13:13:59 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 08:15:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DIA55.US Dutch registration info References: Message-ID: R. P. McCormick (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt7t0i$mfr$1 @news.spamcop.net: > So you go to a phone box to make a call - long distance. > You dial 1.800.555.5555 to reach a long distance company. > you then dial 011.31.2.xxxxxxx to get a number in AMS ... > and after the "bong" tone you enter yet another 10-digits > from your calling card. By now you are ready to see the > doctor for stress on your dialing finger ... Eeerr - calling card ??? Actually, my last employer gave me a calling card to use (from Amsterdam) to dial in to international phone meetings. Too many numbers ... and half the time it didn't work. It was easier just to dial the number directly and expense the international phone costs. :) Apart from the billing issue, I've never seen the advantage of a calling card. I just dial the number. ;-) > Stop it! You make me home sick! Especially for consistency. > Arrrrgggghhhhh !!! Oh, sorry ... :) -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 13:18:39 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 08:20:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: RED-DNS.INFO BLUE-DNS.INFO (was: DIA55.US Dutch registration info) References: Message-ID: Antoine J. Mechelynck (antoine.mechelynck@skynet.be) wrote in news:bt7hjr$auu$1@news.spamcop.net: > Not necessarily. In Belgium you may call Information asking either > "What is the phone number of Mr. Soandso, at streetname- number in > postcode-township?" or "Who is connected to 02-345-6789?" and they > will answer in both cases, UNLESS the phone subscriber in question has > asked not to be mentioned in the yearbook (and paid for it). *Paid* for it? Shudder. Here, while being listed is the default, whether you want to be listed or not is a free choice; no cost either way. One should never have to pay for privacy options. I think reverse lookup is still forbidden even when you call directory assistance; there certainly is no web interface. If you want to know who's at the end of the line, just call thw number. ;-) -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com Sun Jan 4 13:33:36 2004 From: michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com (Michael Lefevre) Date: Sun Jan 4 08:35:06 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports References: Message-ID: Jeff wrote: > "Michael Lefevre" wrote in message > news:bt7oei$hf1$1@news.spamcop.net... >> There is if it's a warning of something that's not going to happen - at >> best, it just makes the person giving the warning look silly. Giving some >> kinds of legal warnings (I'm not suggesting this applies to yours) and not >> following up on them can actually get you into legal difficulties. > > Good. The longer they think nothing will happen and the more they continue > to spam after warnings have been given, the more money there is for me. > There's always been some money to be made from the spammers for state > offenses in certain states, but now that it's a federal offense, it's now > worth my while to take action as long as they keep sending me email with > false return addresses and deceptive subjects and message bodies. Except that under the new law, you have no right to take action, unless you're an ISP. Depending which state law you're referring to, the new law may actually mean you don't have a right of action when you did before. -- Michael From nospam at got2gosomewhere.com Sun Jan 4 08:44:29 2004 From: nospam at got2gosomewhere.com (Wayne) Date: Sun Jan 4 08:35:23 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] hello - test Message-ID: From nospam at got2gosomewhere.com Sun Jan 4 08:45:26 2004 From: nospam at got2gosomewhere.com (Wayne) Date: Sun Jan 4 08:35:31 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Easy Spam Cop Question Message-ID: Is spamcop.com and spamcop.net one in the same? thx Wayne From michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com Sun Jan 4 13:44:29 2004 From: michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com (Michael Lefevre) Date: Sun Jan 4 08:45:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports References: <843fvvooj20vbmjb8k3gd9lgi1omqt3dko@4ax.com> Message-ID: Tom wrote: > On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 00:06:08 +0000 (UTC), Michael Lefevre > wrote: > >>You are hereby >>> warned to cease and desist IMMEDIATELY or face federal prosecution. >> >>And, assuming the particular spam doesn't stop, how are you planning to >>cause a federal prosecution of the ISP? > > I must be missing something here, because I see no warning being > issued to an ISP. What I see is a warning that the sender of the spam > (as defined by the referenced law) will confront (i.e., face) federal > prosecution. His note says "you". Spamcop reports are usually sent to the internet providers of spammers, not the spammers themselves. In fact, the vast majority of reports currently go to providers of computers that have been abused by spammers, or to providers in countries around the world (e.g. China) that are hosting the websites. > As to how an individual might do this-- an individual can lodge a > legal complaint with the enforcement agency (which I hope is what > sending copies of spam reports to the FTC e-mail address does). Sending copies of spam reports to the FTC files them in the FTC's database of spam - they can then query the database for things they think are of interest. > While this, in and of itself, is not enough, follow up and insistence > that the FTC enforce the law in any given instance could be cause, > particularly if backed by a court-registered complaint... That's my point though - there no way of making the FTC do anything, unless you can find some reason to take them to court... -- Michael From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Sun Jan 4 07:44:38 2004 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Sun Jan 4 08:45:16 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: hello - test References: Message-ID: <5u+dq3Ht1Apw@eisner.encompasserve.org> Please use the spamcop.test newsgroup for such purposes. In article , "Wayne" writes: From mikegray at avoidpsamdsl.pipex.com Sun Jan 4 13:47:05 2004 From: mikegray at avoidpsamdsl.pipex.com (Mike Gray) Date: Sun Jan 4 08:50:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Easy Spam Cop Question References: Message-ID: > Is spamcop.com and spamcop.net one in the same? No. Mike From nospam at got2gosomewhere.com Sun Jan 4 08:57:46 2004 From: nospam at got2gosomewhere.com (Wayne Fusco) Date: Sun Jan 4 08:50:14 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: hello - test References: <5u+dq3Ht1Apw@eisner.encompasserve.org> Message-ID: I'm sorry! Didnt know it accually went out. "Larry Kilgallen" wrote in message news:5u+dq3Ht1Apw@eisner.encompasserve.org... > Please use the spamcop.test newsgroup for such purposes. > > In article , "Wayne" writes: From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 13:50:51 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 08:55:08 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Spamhaus on the new Can Spam Act References: Message-ID: Bo Briggs (spamcop001@bellsouth.net) wrote in news:bt854k$u21$1 @news.spamcop.net: >> Their server seems to be down. I can ping the host and traceroute, but >> there's no web site running. How to contact? >> > > Loads extremely fast here. Shift-Reload? Network problem. Server responds to pings, but routing server along the way is down (past 12.96.160.44). Try later... (I've had trouble reaching somer other US sites earlier today.) -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nospam at got2gosomewhere.com Sun Jan 4 09:02:43 2004 From: nospam at got2gosomewhere.com (Wayne Fusco) Date: Sun Jan 4 08:55:24 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Easy Spam Cop Question References: Message-ID: Thank you~! "Mike Gray" wrote in message news:bt95gk$ajj$1@news.spamcop.net... > > Is spamcop.com and spamcop.net one in the same? > > No. > > Mike > > From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 13:54:19 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 08:55:30 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports References: Message-ID: Jeff (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt7lte$f5p$1@news.spamcop.net: > Nothing wrong with sending a warning. I don't know if this has > anything to do with it or not, but up till the end of December, I was > getting 22 spams per day. I received no more than 8 per day during > the last 3 days. Not. I saw a slight lull between Christmas and new year, now they're catching up. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 14:02:55 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 09:05:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: other spam reporting agencies References: Message-ID: Jeff (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt7lo0$ev2$1@news.spamcop.net: > Does anyone use any other spam reporting agencies? Any spam sent by a Dutch company, or from a Dutch address, or otherwise involving a Dutch ISP goes to meldpunt at spamvrij.nl -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com Sun Jan 4 14:03:02 2004 From: michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com (Michael Lefevre) Date: Sun Jan 4 09:05:17 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Spamhaus on the new Can Spam Act References: Message-ID: Marjolein Katsma wrote: > Bo Briggs (spamcop001@bellsouth.net) wrote in news:bt854k$u21$1 > @news.spamcop.net: > >>> Their server seems to be down. I can ping the host and traceroute, but >>> there's no web site running. How to contact? >> >> Loads extremely fast here. Shift-Reload? > > Network problem. Server responds to pings, but routing server along the > way is down (past 12.96.160.44). To look at network issues, it would help if people would say what IP they are attempting to connect to. The spamhaus.org website is served from several locations (and also moves around quite a bit), due to DDoS attacks. -- Michael From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 08:04:51 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Sun Jan 4 09:05:24 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Comcast revisited References: <3FF7BA57.FE1E9602@spamcop.net> Message-ID: On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 01:01:44 -0600, Cat wrote: >After all the recent discussion about Comcast in the newsgroup and my >less than productive conversation with a particularly rude and snotty >abuse admin What? You think you're special? (just kidding) Comcast is not responsive, whether you have a complaint on spam from unsecured/compromised machines on their network or their programming on cable. It is so bad that here in the Northwestern Chicago 'burbs, a political cartoon ran in the local newspaper showing a television screen with the old hammer and sickle logo and "Commiecast" behind it. Not a pretty thing to see in the paper, but it does convey the frustration a lot of Comcast customers (and victims of their system) conveys. The biggest problem is that Comcast is a monopoly with almost no regulation to make them responsive. There is a lot of anger over their refusal to do anything more than to raise rates, drop programming choices, and try to force everyone to higher-cost programming packages. Their misleading anti-dish commercials are a good example of some of their tactics and unfortunately, I haven't seen many pro-dish commercials except when I visit friends and watch a program on their system (a dish). If I had a clear shot to the satellites (I don't and live in a condo where I don't have the choice of where the dish would go), I'd be on dish now... From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 08:10:16 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Sun Jan 4 09:15:31 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports References: <843fvvooj20vbmjb8k3gd9lgi1omqt3dko@4ax.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 13:44:29 +0000 (UTC), Michael Lefevre wrote: >His note says "you". Ah... meaning to those to whom he is sending the message. Now, I get it. Thanks, Tom From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 09:20:10 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Sun Jan 4 09:20:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: People really buy from these subjects..? References: Message-ID: "eddie" wrote in message news:pan.2004.01.03.18.41.01.732000@spamcop.net... > On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 17:18:32 +0000, Larry Jandro wrote: > > > Recent spam subject... > > > > Subject: embryo arhat ailanthus eurasia convalescent > > > > So this really gets people to buy a high interest rate mortgage or fake > > viagra or pirated software..? > > > > Are spammers THAT stupid, or is the public THAT stupid..? > > I am beginning to think that most of the spam sales are to spammers, like > a pyramid or MLM scheme/scam. The spam we are receiving is the bottom of > the pile - just some fill to make the scam look legit, just as most MSL > scams do have a real product that a few people actually buy. I agree with you - also non-scientific. A lot of the non-functional spam is probably sent once by a wannaberich who bought in, finds out that it doesn't work (or is more work than they can handle), and is either cancelled or the "Millions CD's" start gathering dust just like the Sheets volumes on how to get rich selling real estate. I once got a spam offering to sell me the CD /and/ the products to sell (IIRC, How to get rich on eBay, herbal remedies, and other almost-but-not-quite fraudelent products). Miss Betsy, an almost new internet user From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 09:25:26 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Sun Jan 4 09:25:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Hotmail References: Message-ID: "Petzl" wrote in message news:tq0gvvse39empjja6l2k8lp6hi9gem72a9@4ax.com... > I think the next question is how many false positives (if any) > I wondered about that also. Perhaps most people who use Hotmail already use the whitelist feature. I know that a new listing comes up that says "mail from your contacts" (or something similiar) as well as "new messages" Probably if you complain about losing an email, the bot will tell you to use the whitelist feature. So far I have received order confirmations all right. Miss Betsy, an almost new internet user From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 14:57:38 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 10:00:24 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Spamhaus on the new Can Spam Act References: Message-ID: Michael Lefevre (michael.spamcop@michaellefevre.com) wrote in news:bt96em $bn7$1@news.spamcop.net: >> Network problem. Server responds to pings, but routing server along >> the way is down (past 12.96.160.44). > > To look at network issues, it would help if people would say what IP > they are attempting to connect to. The spamhaus.org website is served > from several locations (and also moves around quite a bit), due to > DDoS attacks. Resolves to 64.5.39.40 (at least from here) - which VisualRoute shows to be in Dallas; Network let it through briefly, now it's unreachable again... -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From me at privacy.net Sun Jan 4 15:08:34 2004 From: me at privacy.net (John McLusky) Date: Sun Jan 4 10:10:13 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] New BL at spamhaus.org Message-ID: "The Spamhaus Exploits Block List (XBL) is a realtime database of IP addresses of illegal 3rd party exploits, including open proxies (HTTP, socks, AnalogX, wingate, etc), worms/viruses with built-in spam engines, and other types of trojan-horse exploits." http://www.spamhaus.org/xbl/ Might be worth a look... John. From not at home.today Sun Jan 4 15:21:18 2004 From: not at home.today (Ant) Date: Sun Jan 4 10:25:05 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: the real deal References: Message-ID: "Bo Briggs" wrote... > Picked up my first can today. $1.69 here. Must be rampant inflation :) > Someone please impeach Nixon...Sorry, blast from the past hit me. > 'twill be lunch tomorrow. Looking forward to it. I have English muffins, > SPAM, lettuce, and Durkees. The can looks mouth-watering. Looks like the spam phenomenon promotes Hormel's brand awareness, and causes the curious to try their SPAM. They will be pleased! From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 10:29:20 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (B McDonald) Date: Sun Jan 4 10:30:14 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Too many errors; giving up on SpamCop References: Message-ID: "N. Miller" wrote in message news:t2nfvvs9j4eiib20p4d1h28uh0t9rrvc8p@4ax.com... > Maybe not; but I am tired of losing reports to the evil "Connection > closed by remote server" errors. I never know if the reports made it > through. In general, though, I have wasted too much time on reporting > spam. I am seriously on the verge of killing every email account I > have, and telling my friends and family to spend that $.37 if they > reall want to reach me. Spammers own the Internet, and they own email. > I am tired of playing. > > -- > > Norman Are you reporting using the web interface only? I would suggest spampal with the quarantine plug in (for WinX machines), and maybe upgrading to a paid reporting account (its really pretty cheap). Cuts reporting time to a few minutes. B McDonald spamcop "amateur" user From nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de Sun Jan 4 16:29:18 2004 From: nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de (Frank Ellermann) Date: Sun Jan 4 10:35:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Who is 'mail15' spammer? References: <3FE155D2.5AFC@xyzzy.claranet.de> <3FE2F50A.117A@xyzzy.claranet.de> <3FE372B7.2B50@xyzzy.claranet.de> <3FE4FA62.1E37@xyzzy.claranet.de> <3FEEAE45.4423@xyzzy.claranet.de> Message-ID: <3FF8314E.5FE4@xyzzy.claranet.de> Old alphabetical list (chipsz@mail15 and yoshz@mail15): Beghy.biz Carlz.us Clearz.biz Controlz.us Dia9.us Dillz.biz Dubnh.us Dudez.biz Dukez.biz Fisha.biz Ghkp.us Gono.us H-e-r-b-a-l.us Herbal7.biz Horty.biz Hpsalez.biz Informatixs.biz Jakesdns.biz Jamacaz.us Juictk.biz Kpth.us M3k.biz Pityz.biz Rollie.biz Sdf123.biz Securepaypad.biz Unone.us Yunoz.biz Additions: hfg3.biz (hp1@mail15.com) Dec 26, jakedns.biz hgee1.info (bill_hall11@yahoo.com) Jan 01, red-dns-info red-dns.info (admin@blue-dns.info) Jan 01, jakedns.biz blue-dns.info (admin@blue-dns.info) Jan 01, jakedns.biz The hgee1.info host is "new" (Jan 1). Blue-dns, jakedns, and all (?) other *.biz + *.us are apparently down. Bye, Frank From nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de Sun Jan 4 16:53:22 2004 From: nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de (Frank Ellermann) Date: Sun Jan 4 10:55:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] red- and blue-dns.info, jakedns.biz (was: Who is 'mail15' spammer?) References: <3FE155D2.5AFC@xyzzy.claranet.de> <3FE2F50A.117A@xyzzy.claranet.de> <3FE372B7.2B50@xyzzy.claranet.de> <3FE4FA62.1E37@xyzzy.claranet.de> <3FEEAE45.4423@xyzzy.claranet.de> <3FF8314E.5FE4@xyzzy.claranet.de> Message-ID: <3FF836F2.389E@xyzzy.claranet.de> More names for the new (Jan 01) *.info flood: amyz.info (bill_hall11@yahoo.com) red-dns.info hgee1.info (bill_hall11@yahoo.com) red-dns.info infomatrixz.us (eddie_vos@hotmail.com) red-dns.info red-dns.info (admin@blue-dns.info) jakedns.biz blue-dns.info (admin@blue-dns.info) jakedns.biz The same products resp. subdirectories as before: alpha / bracelet / breast / cleanact / hang / hgh / patch / pher / vp / vpoil / welo and (empty) stats. Bye, Frank From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 17:17:16 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (nobody@spamcop.net) Date: Sun Jan 4 11:20:12 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] reporting agencies: The Netherlands/Europe (Holland) References: Message-ID: Because most of the spam is send from the Netherlands to us in Germany/Europe (CHELLO.NL) we are reporting selecting from these addresses to: SPAM, Chello ; SPAM, Chello ; SPAM Netherlands/Europe (419-police) ; SPAM Holland ; SPAM Holland ; SPAM Holland ; reacties@spamvrij.nl ; CHELLO- SPAM ; CHELLO- SPAM ; CHELLO- SPAM ; From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 20:28:14 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Berny) Date: Sun Jan 4 11:30:06 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Hotmail References: Message-ID: "Miss Betsy" wrote in message news:bt97kv$dr8$1@news.spamcop.net... > > "Petzl" wrote in message > news:tq0gvvse39empjja6l2k8lp6hi9gem72a9@4ax.com... > > > I think the next question is how many false positives (if any) > > > > I wondered about that also. Perhaps most people who use Hotmail > already use the whitelist feature. I know that a new listing comes > up that says "mail from your contacts" (or something similiar) as > well as "new messages" > > Probably if you complain about losing an email, the bot will tell > you to use the whitelist feature. > > So far I have received order confirmations all right. > > Miss Betsy, an almost new internet user It's an interesting question, since people come in here bitching about being blocked to AOL, and a myriad of other ISP's, no one has complained about hotmail blocking them!!---yet, ....and yes i know hotmail is probably not sending people here if they are blocked, but nevertheless people seem to google their way over here anyway From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 10:30:34 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (John Anderson) Date: Sun Jan 4 11:30:35 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DIA55.US Dutch registration info References: Message-ID: > -- > Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ > Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. > Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. > The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. > http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html I am amazed at the number of sites such as this with no index.html default pages! From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 10:32:58 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (John Anderson) Date: Sun Jan 4 11:35:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Too many errors; giving up on SpamCop References: Message-ID: "B McDonald" wrote in message news:bt9bgl$ho7$1@news.spamcop.net... > "N. Miller" wrote in message > news:t2nfvvs9j4eiib20p4d1h28uh0t9rrvc8p@4ax.com... > > Maybe not; but I am tired of losing reports to the evil "Connection > > closed by remote server" errors. I never know if the reports made it > > through. In general, though, I have wasted too much time on reporting > > spam. I am seriously on the verge of killing every email account I > > have, and telling my friends and family to spend that $.37 if they > > reall want to reach me. Spammers own the Internet, and they own email. > > I am tired of playing. > > > > -- > > > > Norman We may all have to go the 37 cent solution with the spammers friends in control of congress !! From agent01413 at my-deja.com Sun Jan 4 09:37:07 2004 From: agent01413 at my-deja.com (Socks the Whitehouse Cat) Date: Sun Jan 4 11:40:16 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: Message-ID: I can't believe that John McLusky really had the following to say that was worth commenting on: > "The Spamhaus Exploits Block List (XBL) is a realtime database of IP > addresses of illegal 3rd party exploits, including open proxies (HTTP, > socks, AnalogX, wingate, etc), worms/viruses with built-in spam > engines, and other types of trojan-horse exploits." > > http://www.spamhaus.org/xbl/ > > Might be worth a look... > > John. > > discussion on nanae says that people uisng it so far are experiencing good results, as in more spam blocked and less false positives. -- tired of reading posts from morphing kooks? get a real news reader - http://xnews.newsguy.com From Merlyn at Spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 11:44:14 2004 From: Merlyn at Spamcop.net (Merlyn) Date: Sun Jan 4 11:45:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: Message-ID: "Socks the Whitehouse Cat" wrote in message news:Xns946661D894671agent01413mydejacom@216.154.195.61... > I can't believe that John McLusky really had the following to say that > was worth commenting on: > > > "The Spamhaus Exploits Block List (XBL) is a realtime database of IP > > addresses of illegal 3rd party exploits, including open proxies (HTTP, > > socks, AnalogX, wingate, etc), worms/viruses with built-in spam > > engines, and other types of trojan-horse exploits." > > > > http://www.spamhaus.org/xbl/ > > > > Might be worth a look... > > > > John. > > > > > > discussion on nanae says that people uisng it so far are experiencing good > results, as in more spam blocked and less false positives. > Like it says on the page if you are already using the CBL you will not need to use this one. As I have been using the CBL for a while now with excellent results I think this is just Spamhaus placing their name on it to make it more credible. It is fantastic. -- Regards, Merlyn A Spamcop advocate All replies will be made specifically to the newsgroup From Merlyn at Spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 11:50:57 2004 From: Merlyn at Spamcop.net (Merlyn) Date: Sun Jan 4 11:55:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DIA55.US Dutch registration info References: Message-ID: "John Anderson" wrote in message news:bt9f0h$m1q$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > -- > > Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ > > Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. > > Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. > > The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. > > http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html > > I am amazed at the number of sites such as this with no index.html > default pages! > Almost all web servers can be configured by site to make the default page anything you want. Actually I prefer default.htm or default.html -- Regards, Merlyn A Spamcop advocate All replies will be made specifically to the newsgroup From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Sun Jan 4 17:52:10 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Sun Jan 4 11:55:27 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: RED-DNS.INFO BLUE-DNS.INFO (was: DIA55.US Dutch registration info) References: Message-ID: On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 13:18:39 +0000, Marjolein Katsma wrote: > *Paid* for it? Shudder. Here, while being listed is the default, whether > you want to be listed or not is a free choice; no cost either way. One > should never have to pay for privacy options. You used to have to pay for it here (France) too but you can now have an unlisted number at no extra cost. About bleedin' time too if you ask me... I agree that you shouldn't have to pay extra for privacy. > I think reverse lookup is still forbidden even when you call directory > assistance; there certainly is no web interface. Reverse lookup is possible but it costs money. Forward lookup is free on the web or on the dreaded "minitel" (the cause of France's Internet retardedness). -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- Some marriages are made in heaven, but they all have to be maintained on earth... From MikeE at ster.invalid Sun Jan 4 08:57:45 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sun Jan 4 12:05:35 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: Message-ID: John McLusky wrote: > "The Spamhaus Exploits Block List (XBL) is a realtime database of IP > addresses of illegal 3rd party exploits, including open proxies (HTTP, > socks, AnalogX, wingate, etc), worms/viruses with built-in spam > engines, and other types of trojan-horse exploits." > > http://www.spamhaus.org/xbl/ As soon as I headed over there I was wondering how it would compare to cbl, and sure enough.... "The XBL wholly incorporates the highly-trusted CBL (Composite Block List) from cbl.abuseat.org, " and goes on to say that using both would do nothing. So they must be one and the same. -- Mike Easter From simon.hawking at noucetalk21.com Sun Jan 4 17:05:06 2004 From: simon.hawking at noucetalk21.com (Simon Hawking) Date: Sun Jan 4 12:10:19 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: joker: 530000x.net freeadultranch.com 2004hosting.org cdevfr.biz References: Message-ID: Looks like these domains have been terminated. Reporting via SC reports that SC cannot reslove these domains (and his others as well). Joker appears to have removed these domain from their nameservers - probably as a result of the domain being report to ICANN for using false registrant details. Looks like Yahoo and Hotmail have also acted in terminating his mail accounts, so hopefully the spam should cease. Simon. remove nouce to mail From simon.hawking at noucetalk21.com Sun Jan 4 17:09:03 2004 From: simon.hawking at noucetalk21.com (Simon Hawking) Date: Sun Jan 4 12:10:45 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: joker: 530000x.net freeadultranch.com 2004hosting.org cdevfr.biz References: Message-ID: "Simon Hawking" wrote in message news:bt9h40$p9v$1@news.spamcop.net... > Looks like Yahoo and Hotmail have also acted in terminating his mail > accounts, so hopefully the spam should cease. > By that I mean he will have no valid mail addy for his registration, so violates ICANN rules. I didn't mean that these ISPs were used as the origin for the spam - we all know it wasnt ;-) Simon. remove nouce to mail From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 17:28:24 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 12:30:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: reporting agencies: The Netherlands/Europe (Holland) References: Message-ID: (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt9eca$l3g$1@news.spamcop.net: > Because most of the spam is send from the Netherlands to us in > Germany/Europe (CHELLO.NL) we are reporting selecting from these > addresses to: > SPAM, Chello ; A2000 = Chello = UPC; one reporting address for spam from A2000/chello.nl is likely enough. Abuse info for a2000.nl gives abuse@chello.nl (A2000 was taken over by UPC; their cable internet service is called Chello.) > SPAM, Chello ; How does this relate to _Dutch_ spam? > SPAM Netherlands/Europe (419-police) ; 419 scams - *only* if they originate in the Netherlands -, should be reported to: Korps Landelijke Politie Diensten afdeling Landelijk Bureau Fraude Erik Blok/Cees Schep tel 079 - 345 8901 / 079 - 345 8902 fax 079 - 345 8792 e-mail lbf@planet.nl More here (in Dutch): http://spamvrij.nl/werkwijze/faq-aanmelden.php#aanmelden > SPAM Holland ; This is the 'Dutch Complaints Bureau for Discrimination on the Internet'. If a Dutch spam is _also_ discriminatory or racist (rare) then send here, too. Other spam should NOT be reported here. > SPAM Holland ; This is exclusively for notification of child pornography. Don't send them any other spam. > SPAM Holland ; This is the address I gave for ALL Dutch spam (Dutch sender/Dutch provider/Dutch company) - regardless of language, BTW. > reacties@spamvrij.nl ; This is a general addy for information about the foundation or reactions about the *website* of spamvrij.nl. Do NOT use this to report spam. They're busy enough handling spam reports coming in at their reporting address. > CHELLO- SPAM ; Don't see what this has to do with Dutch spam? > CHELLO- SPAM ; A2000 = Chello = UPC; one reporting address for spam from A2000/chello.nl is likely enough. See above. > CHELLO- SPAM ; Do you ever get spam sent *from* this domain? Sounds unlikely. For spam coming from any of the chello domains, just use the abuse address for the tld-specific chello domain (they operate in a number of countries, each with their own tld). See above. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From hanasaki at hanaden.com Sun Jan 4 11:32:24 2004 From: hanasaki at hanaden.com (hanasaki) Date: Sun Jan 4 12:32:27 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] spamcop says my server is misconfigured. how do i get off that list? Message-ID: <3FF84E28.2030202@hanaden.com> Hello all, This is being sent back to my MTA for all incoming email. Its likely becase the config was hosed for a day or two. What is the real source? Now that the config is right, I think, how can status be restored? FYI: My IP is not listed "65.30.34.80 not listed in bl.spamcop.net" thanks ========== 550-Your mail has been rejected because the server you are sending to is 550 misconfigured) From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 17:31:26 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 12:35:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: Message-ID: Merlyn (Merlyn@Spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt9fsu$nal$1@news.spamcop.net: > Like it says on the page if you are already using the CBL you will not > need to use this one. As I have been using the CBL for a while now > with excellent results I think this is just Spamhaus placing their > name on it to make it more credible. Yup. Good results; have it activated *after* the SCBL and it catches a whole bunch SC doesn't. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 17:32:55 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net ([H]omer) Date: Sun Jan 4 12:35:22 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Russian Joe-Job Message-ID: Spam posted in spamcop.spam under same subject. I've just been Joe-Jobbed and received a mailer-daemon reject from mx6.mail.ru. The Spammer used my Spamcop address as the return address. The spam looks like it was a bulk-mailing to hundreds of russian addresses. The message body looks like it's base64 encoded and is probably in russian anyway, so I have no idea what it's supposed to be. Since I never give out (or directly use) my Spamcop address, for anything other than forwarding from my primary email account, it's my guess that this Spammer is just working his way through a dictionary attack on Spamcop users. Also, due to a new strategy involving a sub-domain, I haven't received any genuine spam for months, and have therefore not done any reporting for months, so this Spammer is probably not reacting to an abuse report ... made by me anyway. Anyone else here seeing these Joe-Jobs? How do I go about investigating and reporting the source? - [H]omer From me at privacy.net Sun Jan 4 17:33:31 2004 From: me at privacy.net (John McLusky) Date: Sun Jan 4 12:35:33 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: Message-ID: "Merlyn" wrote in message news:bt9fsu$nal$1@news.spamcop.net... > > Like it says on the page if you are already using the CBL you will not need > to use this one. As I have been using the CBL for a while now with > excellent results I think this is just Spamhaus placing their name on it to > make it more credible. > > It is fantastic. I've added it to my SpamPal configuration. I hadn't actually heard of CBL before but I'll be using it from now on. John. From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 17:33:40 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 12:35:39 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Too many errors; giving up on SpamCop References: Message-ID: John Anderson (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt9f51$mdj$1 @news.spamcop.net: > We may all have to go the 37 cent solution with the spammers friends in > control of congress !! Just trying to imagine what that would look like with the various mail lists I'm subscribed to... and 37 cents won't do it for international mail either... :) -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 17:36:03 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 12:40:16 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DIA55.US Dutch registration info References: Message-ID: John Anderson (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt9f0h$m1q$1 @news.spamcop.net: > I am amazed at the number of sites such as this with no index.html > default pages! Not a site with no index pages; in this case, only a directory. What did you want an index.html for? -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From spamtrap at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 10:37:15 2004 From: spamtrap at spamcop.net (Spam Trap) Date: Sun Jan 4 12:40:32 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: spamcop says my server is misconfigured. how do i get off that list? References: Message-ID: On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 11:32:24 -0600, hanasaki wrote: >Hello all, > >This is being sent back to my MTA for all incoming email. Its likely >becase the config was hosed for a day or two. What is the real source? > Now that the config is right, I think, how can status be restored? > >FYI: My IP is not listed "65.30.34.80 not listed in bl.spamcop.net" > >thanks > >========== > >550-Your mail has been rejected because the server you are sending to >is >550 misconfigured) You might look at http://openrbl.org/ and http://moensted.dk/spam/?addr=65.30.34.80&Submit=Submit to see which, if any, of the BLs list your IP 65.30.34.80 It looks like more than one list it as a dynamic or dial-up IP http://www.dnsbl.sorbs.net/cgi-bin/lookup?IP=65.30.34.80 seems to say it was a spam source Each of the BLs will describe their unlisting processes -- A user, not a reporting address... From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 17:39:05 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 12:40:37 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DIA55.US Dutch registration info References: Message-ID: Merlyn (Merlyn@Spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt9g9h$ntb$1@news.spamcop.net: > Almost all web servers can be configured by site to make the default > page anything you want. Actually I prefer default.htm or default.html Except when it's a bit of hosting space that comes free with an access contract. ;-) The default actually _is_ index.html here (possibly with alternatives; I've never tested). That doesn't mean I have to use it in every directory. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 17:45:01 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 12:45:18 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: RED-DNS.INFO BLUE-DNS.INFO (was: DIA55.US Dutch registration info) References: Message-ID: Godwin Stewart (gstewart@loopback.sgms-centre.com) wrote in news:pan.2004.01.04.16.52.09.485635@loopback.sgms-centre.com: > Forward lookup is free on > the web or on the dreaded "minitel" (the cause of France's Internet > retardedness). Ah, yes, minitel. Quite advanced when they started (before the web), and a huge success. There even was a Dutch version for a while, which soon floundered when the web took off. I used it, too, with my 14K4 modem. :) But by then there were already so many minitel terminals around in France, they were hard to replace - and expensive, too, if you didn't already have a computer! Isn't there still a web site where you can access minitel, or have they scuppered that? -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From MikeE at ster.invalid Sun Jan 4 09:42:43 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sun Jan 4 12:50:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: spamcop says my server is misconfigured. how do i get off that list? References: Message-ID: hanasaki wrote: > This is being sent back to my MTA for all incoming email. That looks like a 550 reject by the recipient's receiving server, and it would be passed on to you by the server which was trying to send an /outgoing/ mail. > 550-Your mail has been rejected because the server you are sending to > is 550 misconfigured) Ha! That's very funny. It would seem to mean that the server you are sending /from/ is misconfigured; but in this case, it is /true/ -- the server you are sending /to/ is misconfigured in its 550 report. But, I think that what is going on is that that is a 'generic' 550 which is applied to rejecting an smtp transaction for some reason that isn't 'stated'. In this case, my guess would be that 65.30.34.80 rDNS CPE-65-30-34-80.kc.rr.com would be rejected because it is in a great big block of presumably dynamically assigned IPs. That is, many servers will reject those as DUL blocks, as if they were dialups, even tho' it is actually a cable modem. The question is, why are you serving from a RR IP? You may have a hard time getting various servers to accept your mail if it isn't coming from a 'legitimate' RR smtp server. -- Mike Easter From MikeE at ster.invalid Sun Jan 4 09:44:34 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sun Jan 4 12:50:18 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: Message-ID: John McLusky wrote: > I've added it to my SpamPal configuration. I hadn't actually heard > of CBL before but I'll be using it from now on. It always pops up on the SpamCop parse; spamcop queries it during the header parse process, and will 'kill' the parse chain on the basis of the cbl listing, as it won't chain past a proxy or its equivalent. -- Mike Easter From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 12:49:13 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Brent) Date: Sun Jan 4 12:50:26 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Limit on emails as attachments? References: Message-ID: Godwin Stewart scribed: > No single e-mail attachment should be greater than 50KB, and the > entire e-mail containing all the attachments shouldn't be bigger than > 100KB IIRC. I believe the 50 KB *size* maximum refers to a single spam *message*, regardless of whether it is pasted into the web form, or forwarded as a single, stand-alone attachment in a single-attachment e-mail message, or forwarded along with other messages attached in a multiple-attachment e-mail message. I've never heard of a 100 KB, or any other amount, maximum for the *size* of a single e-mail message, regardless of the number of attachments it may contain. In fact, I *routinely* send single e-mail messages greater than 100 KB. These messages, of course, contain multiple pieces of spam which add up to several hundred KB in some cases. Going through my history, I see the largest e-mail message I've sent to SC is 419 KB, which is the sum of all its attached spam messages. Including this example, I've sent 38 "greater than 100 KB" e-mail messages to SC within the past two months. So, in short, I've never personally encountered *any* ceilings of *any* sort on *any* e-mail sent to SC. No rejections. No error messages. No warnings. Good job SC! :-) From Merlyn at Spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 12:49:05 2004 From: Merlyn at Spamcop.net (Merlyn) Date: Sun Jan 4 12:55:17 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: spamcop says my server is misconfigured. how do i get off that list? References: Message-ID: "hanasaki" wrote in message news:mailman.118.1073237548.14687.spamcop-list@news.spamcop.net... > Hello all, > > This is being sent back to my MTA for all incoming email. Its likely > becase the config was hosed for a day or two. What is the real source? > Now that the config is right, I think, how can status be restored? > > FYI: My IP is not listed "65.30.34.80 not listed in bl.spamcop.net" > > thanks > > ========== > > 550-Your mail has been rejected because the server you are sending to > is > 550 misconfigured) 65.30.34.80 is a Road Runner Dynamically allocated IP address. Most email admins will not accept mail from Dial-Up/Cable/DSL IP Range - Use your providers SMTP Gateway. This IP address is in many other blocklists. See: http://www.moensted.dk/spam/?addr=65.30.34.80&Submit=Submit -- Regards, Merlyn A Spamcop advocate All replies will be made specifically to the newsgroup From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 12:52:27 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Brent) Date: Sun Jan 4 12:55:27 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Limit on emails as attachments? References: Message-ID: Ramba Zamba scribed: > JC-Rules wrote: >> Is there any limit on the quantity of spam emails that can be sent to >> SpamCop as an attachment? >> ... > > according to the FAQ the limit is 500 emails per day: > http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/350.html FWIW, regarding the maximum number of attachments (i.e. pieces of spam) a single e-mail message may contain, from my history I see that SC has successfully processed a single e-mail message containing 114 attachments. From MikeE at ster.invalid Sun Jan 4 09:55:37 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sun Jan 4 13:00:18 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: spamcop says my server is misconfigured. how do i get off that list? References: Message-ID: Merlyn wrote: > 65.30.34.80 is a Road Runner Dynamically allocated IP address. Most > email admins will not accept mail from Dial-Up/Cable/DSL IP Range - > Use your providers SMTP Gateway. I'm thinking about a problem. It is my understanding that RR has a different policy for its 'business' or commercial accounts, and not only assigns them a static IP, but I think also permits serving for them, which it doesn't for its residential accounts. I wonder how the issue of the IP 'assignment' is handled. To the best of my knowledge the business account IPs are or may be all in the same 'family' as those IPs which are 'statically' dynamic, which is the way the residential accounts are. What I mean by statically dynamic is that a residential IP may 'stick' to one for many many months, or even years, without changing, but it is actually dynamic, and could change at any time. -- Mike Easter From newsgroups at jc-rules.com Sun Jan 4 12:08:14 2004 From: newsgroups at jc-rules.com (JC-Rules) Date: Sun Jan 4 13:10:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Limit on emails as attachments? References: Message-ID: Thanks Brent for your input. I sent one with 128 attachments yesterday with no problem. However, I left town and just got back to finde 254 more in my Junk Mail folder... LOL... Rather than send these to SC and have to process them on the website, I just deleted them and will resume reporting tomorrow. Sure wish SC would allow us to choose to enter our own ISP into our profile so that it would always be ignored, then allow us to auto-report all the spam we get each day without having to confirm each and every one of them. Jerry "Brent" wrote in message news:bt9jt2$ut4$1@news.spamcop.net... > Ramba Zamba scribed: > > JC-Rules wrote: > >> Is there any limit on the quantity of spam emails that can be sent to > >> SpamCop as an attachment? > >> ... > > > > according to the FAQ the limit is 500 emails per day: > > http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/350.html > > FWIW, regarding the maximum number of attachments (i.e. pieces of spam) > a single e-mail message may contain, from my history I see that SC has > successfully processed a single e-mail message containing 114 > attachments. > From usenet1 at DE.LETE.THISljvideo.com Sun Jan 4 18:20:57 2004 From: usenet1 at DE.LETE.THISljvideo.com (Larry Jandro) Date: Sun Jan 4 13:25:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Analysis of a spammer's CD of email addresses References: Message-ID: Waiving the right to remain silent, wayne said: > A very large percentage of the email addresses appeared to be > things like scraped message-ids and random text that happened to > have an @ in it. How much of it looks like it was poisioned by things such as WebPoision..? -- Larry Jandro - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail "Lord, are we worthy of the task that lies before us, or are we just jerking off..?" From keythumper at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 10:34:44 2004 From: keythumper at spamcop.net (Gary) Date: Sun Jan 4 13:35:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Spamhaus on the new Can Spam Act References: Message-ID: On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 14:03:02 +0000, Michael Lefevre wrote: > Marjolein Katsma wrote: >> Bo Briggs (spamcop001@bellsouth.net) wrote in news:bt854k$u21$1 >> @news.spamcop.net: >> >>>> Their server seems to be down. I can ping the host and traceroute, but >>>> there's no web site running. How to contact? >>> >>> Loads extremely fast here. Shift-Reload? >> >> Network problem. Server responds to pings, but routing server along the >> way is down (past 12.96.160.44). > > To look at network issues, it would help if people would say what IP they > are attempting to connect to. The spamhaus.org website is served from > several locations (and also moves around quite a bit), due to DDoS > attacks. This will not load from my connection: 204.174.17.37 Our bandwidth provider (Telus) has icmp turned off, so I can't traceroute. From keythumper at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 10:37:11 2004 From: keythumper at spamcop.net (Gary) Date: Sun Jan 4 13:35:16 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Spamhaus on the new Can Spam Act References: Message-ID: On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:34:44 -0800, Gary wrote: > On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 14:03:02 +0000, Michael Lefevre wrote: > >> Marjolein Katsma wrote: >>> Bo Briggs (spamcop001@bellsouth.net) wrote in news:bt854k$u21$1 >>> @news.spamcop.net: >>> >>>>> Their server seems to be down. I can ping the host and traceroute, but >>>>> there's no web site running. How to contact? >>>> >>>> Loads extremely fast here. Shift-Reload? >>> >>> Network problem. Server responds to pings, but routing server along the >>> way is down (past 12.96.160.44). >> >> To look at network issues, it would help if people would say what IP they >> are attempting to connect to. The spamhaus.org website is served from >> several locations (and also moves around quite a bit), due to DDoS >> attacks. > > > This will not load from my connection: 204.174.17.37 > > Our bandwidth provider (Telus) has icmp turned off, so I can't traceroute. ...works now ... From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 13:38:11 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (R. P. McCormick) Date: Sun Jan 4 13:40:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: joker: 530000x.net freeadultranch.com 2004hosting.org cdevfr.biz References: Message-ID: Maybe Joker has gotten 'enuf complains and 'enuf months have gone by that they've done somethiing, albiet not much. Here's what Joker's whois has to say ... and what b.gtld-servers.net also has to say 530000x.net - whois nameserver now invalid-address.joker.com - gtld returns invalid-address.joker.com - this domain will not resolve - cached entries may still exist freeadultranch.com - whois nameservers ns1.lmihosting.com and ns2.lmihosting.com - gtld returns authoritative nameserver addresses: 200.206.187.138 DSL cnx in Brazil (no response) 200.206.191.19 DSL cnx in Brazil (no response) 61.251.190.246 Asian IP (no response) 61.252.159.18 Asian IP (no response) 61.104.86.122 Asian IP - this one works but with bogus responses 2004hosting.org - whois nameserver now invalid-address.joker.com - gtld returns NO authoritative nameservers cdevfr.biz - lots of perfectnameservers.xxx (like ns2.perfectnameservers.com) - gtld redirects to x.GTLD.biz name servers - A.GTLD.biz nameserver response with perfectnameservers 61.251.19.203 Asian IP - allows ZONE transfer for cdevfr.biz !!! 221.232.160.95 - timeout, not accessible So ... as you can see ... two of those domains are (right now) not resolving (and yes, thanks to Joker). But the others are up and running as usual. I suspect that the freeadultranch.com may actually be attempting to run DNS on hijacked systems based on the addresses that are indicated for authoritative name servers. R P McCormick SpamCop user From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 18:40:58 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 13:45:16 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: RED-DNS.INFO BLUE-DNS.INFO (was: DIA55.US Dutch registration info) References: Message-ID: Marjolein Katsma (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:Xns9466BEBCF908Fhomesitehelp@216.154.195.61: > Isn't there still a web site where you can access minitel, or have they > scuppered that? Google found it for me, of course: http://www.minitel.fr/ With a header that declares: minitel.com :) Hmm - a quick bit of exploration reveals only paid-for (per minute) pages. I thought there used to be free pages? -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 19:40:32 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (nobody@spamcop.net) Date: Sun Jan 4 13:45:36 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: reporting agencies: The Netherlands/Europe (Holland) References: Message-ID: "Marjolein Katsma" schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:Xns9466BBEC37F01homesitehelp@216.154.195.61... > > Because most of the spam is send from the Netherlands to us in > > Germany/Europe (CHELLO.NL) we are reporting selecting from these > > addresses to: > > SPAM, Chello ; > > A2000 = Chello = UPC; one reporting address for spam from > A2000/chello.nl is likely enough. > Abuse info for a2000.nl gives abuse@chello.nl > > (A2000 was taken over by UPC; their cable internet service is called > Chello.) > > > SPAM, Chello ; > > How does this relate to _Dutch_ spam? PRIMACOM is the german representative for theman dcomplaining there works better then direct to them. > > SPAM Netherlands/Europe (419-police) ; > > 419 scams - *only* if they originate in the Netherlands -, should be > reported to: > > Korps Landelijke Politie Diensten > afdeling Landelijk Bureau Fraude > Erik Blok/Cees Schep > tel 079 - 345 8901 / 079 - 345 8902 > fax 079 - 345 8792 > e-mail lbf@planet.nl > IT's a NEW information! Thank you! > More here (in Dutch): > http://spamvrij.nl/werkwijze/faq-aanmelden.php#aanmelden > > > SPAM Holland ; > > This is the 'Dutch Complaints Bureau for Discrimination on the > Internet'. If a Dutch spam is _also_ discriminatory or racist (rare) > then send here, too. Other spam should NOT be reported here. > > > SPAM Holland ; > > This is exclusively for notification of child pornography. Don't send > them any other spam. > > > SPAM Holland ; > > This is the address I gave for ALL Dutch spam (Dutch sender/Dutch > provider/Dutch company) - regardless of language, BTW. > > > reacties@spamvrij.nl ; > > This is a general addy for information about the foundation or reactions > about the *website* of spamvrij.nl. > Do NOT use this to report spam. They're busy enough handling spam > reports coming in at their reporting address. > > > CHELLO- SPAM ; > > Don't see what this has to do with Dutch spam? We've got this information some time agi from a journalist, because the "mother company" is named "UnitedGlobal" as he told us. > > CHELLO- SPAM ; > > A2000 = Chello = UPC; one reporting address for spam from > A2000/chello.nl is likely enough. See above. A2000 = Chello = UPC ??? So this is the some company? Some people told that A2000 and CHELLO are not the same company but "in the house" of UPC. > > CHELLO- SPAM ; > > Do you ever get spam sent *from* this domain? Sounds unlikely. For spam > coming from any of the chello domains, just use the abuse address for > the tld-specific chello domain (they operate in a number of countries, > each with their own tld). See above. THANK YOU for these detailed informations about! But from CHELLO- abuse there never had been a reply at all nor stopping any spams. They are not cooperative, are they? From Merlyn at Spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 13:57:27 2004 From: Merlyn at Spamcop.net (Merlyn) Date: Sun Jan 4 14:00:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: spamcop says my server is misconfigured. how do i get off that list? References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" wrote in message news:bt9k8v$vj2$1@news.spamcop.net... > Merlyn wrote: > > 65.30.34.80 is a Road Runner Dynamically allocated IP address. Most > > email admins will not accept mail from Dial-Up/Cable/DSL IP Range - > > Use your providers SMTP Gateway. > > I'm thinking about a problem. It is my understanding that RR has a > different policy for its 'business' or commercial accounts, and not only > assigns them a static IP, but I think also permits serving for them, > which it doesn't for its residential accounts. I wonder how the issue > of the IP 'assignment' is handled. To the best of my knowledge the > business account IPs are or may be all in the same 'family' as those IPs > which are 'statically' dynamic, which is the way the residential > accounts are. > > What I mean by statically dynamic is that a residential IP may 'stick' > to one for many many months, or even years, without changing, but it is > actually dynamic, and could change at any time. > > -- I agree, they could also keep their own servers setup and use RR as a "smarthost" or "gateway" to send through. -- Regards, Merlyn A Spamcop advocate All replies will be made specifically to the newsgroup From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 19:06:33 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 14:10:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: reporting agencies: The Netherlands/Europe (Holland) References: Message-ID: (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt9moc$3au$1@news.spamcop.net: >> > SPAM, Chello ; >> >> How does this relate to _Dutch_ spam? > > PRIMACOM is the german representative for theman dcomplaining there > works better then direct to them. I'm sure there's a typo in there but I can't parse it. Primacom is a representative for who/what? >> > CHELLO- SPAM ; >> >> Don't see what this has to do with Dutch spam? > > We've got this information some time agi from a journalist, because > the "mother company" is named "UnitedGlobal" as he told us. Mother company of what company? > A2000 = Chello = UPC ??? > So this is the some company? > Some people told that A2000 and CHELLO are not the same company but > "in the house" of UPC. A2000 was a local (Amsterdam, mainly) cable TV company, also offering Internet access and telephony, all under the same name; one of teh first companies to offer cable internet in the Netherlands. A2000 was taken over by UPC, a European company; the Internet access company is Chello (also European; Chello already existed, and absorbed the A2000 Internet activities); cable TV is UPC, telephony is Priority Telecom. Mother company of all is UPC (based in Austria, I think). Since abuse info for a2000.nl (some servers are still in that domain, I think) points to abuse@chello.nl, that's the only one you should use for spam reports. (BTW, http://www.a2000.nl/ redirects to http://www.upc.nl/.) > But from CHELLO- abuse there never had been a reply at all nor > stopping any spams. They are not cooperative, are they? I'm hearing noises they are getting more active but don't have any personal experience. Unless you're larting manually, or have your preferences set to receive all reactions, you shouldn't expect any; that doesn't mean they don't do anything. FWIW, I receive spams from chello.at much more often than from chello.nl; at least two of their mail (.at) servers are listed every now and then, but only shortly, which means they are shutting down spammers, just not quite as quickly as they should. (Just happened to look that up when I received mail from a friend in Austria and noted the chello.at address. Told him he was in danger of getting blocked very now and then...) -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 19:11:19 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 14:15:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Spamhaus on the new Can Spam Act References: Message-ID: Gary (keythumper@spamcop.net) wrote in news:pan.2004.01.04.18.37.08.368577 @spamcop.net: > ...works now ... Lucky you ;-) Still the same problem from here. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 14:30:49 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Brent) Date: Sun Jan 4 14:35:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: People really buy from these subjects..? References: Message-ID: MaddSybil scribed: [...] > The stupids are the people paying these spammers. And the ultimate stupids are the consumers (i.e. end users) buying the product. No sale = no profit motive = no spam. Yes, it *is* that simple! What is *not* simple is convincing the hundreds or thousands of consumers not to buy. From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 14:49:15 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Brent) Date: Sun Jan 4 14:50:06 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports References: Message-ID: Robb Topolski scribed: [...] > Don't use the comment feature to threaten the ISPs. Use it to help > the ISP do their job. [...] Robb, surely you say this under the condition that the ISP is neither: a) a de facto spammer nor b) a spammer-friendly ISP Right? From maddsybil at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 14:55:27 2004 From: maddsybil at spamcop.net (MaddSybil) Date: Sun Jan 4 15:00:23 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: Message-ID: "Merlyn" wrote in message news:bt9fsu$nal$1@news.spamcop.net... > "Socks the Whitehouse Cat" wrote in message > news:Xns946661D894671agent01413mydejacom@216.154.195.61... > > I can't believe that John McLusky really had the following to say that > > was worth commenting on: > > > > > "The Spamhaus Exploits Block List (XBL) is a realtime database of IP > > > addresses of illegal 3rd party exploits, including open proxies (HTTP, > > > socks, AnalogX, wingate, etc), worms/viruses with built-in spam > > > engines, and other types of trojan-horse exploits." > > > > > > http://www.spamhaus.org/xbl/ > > > > > > Might be worth a look... > > > > > > John. > > > > > > > > > > discussion on nanae says that people uisng it so far are experiencing good > > results, as in more spam blocked and less false positives. > > > > > Like it says on the page if you are already using the CBL you will not need > to use this one. As I have been using the CBL for a while now with > excellent results I think this is just Spamhaus placing their name on it to > make it more credible. > > It is fantastic. > > -- > > Regards, > Merlyn > > A Spamcop advocate > All replies will be made specifically to the newsgroup > from http://cbl.abuseat.org/ "The CBL takes its source data from very large spamtraps, and only lists IPs exhibiting characteristics which are specific to open proxies of various sorts (HTTP, socks, AnalogX, wingate etc) which have been abused to send spam, worms/viruses that do their own direct mail transmission, or some types of trojan-horse or "stealth" spamware, without doing open proxy tests of any kind. What does this mean in terms of what we report? Most of my spam is from open proxies, does this catch most of those proxies, some, or a few? I guess if Spamcop uses it in parsing, then that is the answer, yes, when the SC parser says 'open proxy', it decided that by using the CBL? So, the more CBL gets used, the less valuable an open proxy will be to spammers? AWESOME It would be fantastic if it actually puts a monkey-wrench in spammer's activities enough to make them find other ways to send spam besides open proxies. I will be promoting this and hoping it helps! -Syb Interzone Agent Provocateur www.paulgraham.com/ffbfaq.html From Merlyn at Spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 15:01:07 2004 From: Merlyn at Spamcop.net (Merlyn) Date: Sun Jan 4 15:05:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: Message-ID: "MaddSybil" wrote in message news:bt9r3m$83t$1@news.spamcop.net... [snipped] > It would be fantastic if it actually puts a monkey-wrench in spammer's > activities enough to make them find other ways to send spam besides open > proxies. > I will be promoting this and hoping it helps! For a few months now the CBL has caught over 50% of our spam with no false positives. -- Regards, Merlyn A Spamcop advocate All replies will be made specifically to the newsgroup From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 20:02:18 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 15:05:15 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: anti-Spamcop trick.. http:\\ References: Message-ID: Keith Higgins (tatlin@spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt879n$js$1 @news.spamcop.net: > I just wanted to note that the problem noted in the first post of this > thread is still extant, although a somewhat-related one (in the "part > II" sub-thread) may have been fixed. The problem seems to occur with > http:\\[username]@[hostname] URLs, they are interpreted by the parser > as e-mail addresses when I submit them, and no MX is found, so no > abuse address is found. I posted a second example, FWIW, under > Marjolein's example in .spam. And your sample looks very much like mine! My conclusion is that there are/were several types of URIs using \\ instead of // and not all are being parsed as a URL (yet) with correction of the slashes. Paging Ellen : Round two... -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 20:06:36 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 15:10:15 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: Message-ID: Merlyn (Merlyn@Spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt9re3$8ph$1@news.spamcop.net: > For a few months now the CBL has caught over 50% of our spam with no > false positives. For me it's about 20% of what SCBL caught: _after_ SCBL. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From Merlyn at Spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 15:08:36 2004 From: Merlyn at Spamcop.net (Merlyn) Date: Sun Jan 4 15:10:31 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: Message-ID: "Marjolein Katsma" wrote in message news:Xns9466D6BDE3A49homesitehelp@216.154.195.61... > Merlyn (Merlyn@Spamcop.net) wrote in news:bt9re3$8ph$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > For a few months now the CBL has caught over 50% of our spam with no > > false positives. > > For me it's about 20% of what SCBL caught: _after_ SCBL. > Yes! All depends on the checking order :-) -- Regards, Merlyn A Spamcop advocate All replies will be made specifically to the newsgroup From nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de Sun Jan 4 21:13:38 2004 From: nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de (Frank Ellermann) Date: Sun Jan 4 15:15:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: red- and blue-dns.info, jakedns.biz References: <3FE155D2.5AFC@xyzzy.claranet.de> <3FE2F50A.117A@xyzzy.claranet.de> <3FE372B7.2B50@xyzzy.claranet.de> <3FE4FA62.1E37@xyzzy.claranet.de> <3FEEAE45.4423@xyzzy.claranet.de> <3FF8314E.5FE4@xyzzy.claranet.de> <3FF836F2.389E@xyzzy.claranet.de> Message-ID: <3FF873F2.C1C@xyzzy.claranet.de> Additions from two parallel threads and fresh spam: 12hen.info (bill_hall11@yahoo.com) red-dns.info amyz.info (bill_hall11@yahoo.com) red-dns.info dia55.us (eddie_vos@hotmail.com) red-dns.info hgee1.info (bill_hall11@yahoo.com) red-dns.info infomatrixz.us (eddie_vos@hotmail.com) red-dns.info red-dns.info (admin@blue-dns.info) jakedns.biz blue-dns.info (admin@blue-dns.info) jakedns.biz Jakedns is the old (Dec 6) @mail15 stuff with numerous names. Bye, Frank From nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de Sun Jan 4 21:30:56 2004 From: nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de (Frank Ellermann) Date: Sun Jan 4 15:35:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: reporting agencies: The Netherlands/Europe (Holland) References: Message-ID: <3FF87800.774A@xyzzy.claranet.de> Marjolein Katsma wrote: >> PRIMACOM is the german representative for theman >> dcomplaining there works better then direct to them. > I'm sure there's a typo in there but I can't parse it. > Primacom is a representative for who/what? "theman dcomplaining" = "the main domain - complaining" (I'm just guessing) > Internet access company is Chello (also European; Chello > already existed, and absorbed the A2000 Internet > activities) For some obscure reasons chello.nl is a major pain in the u-know, the other chello.* are more tolerable. There are also major differences between tiscali.*, and telia used to be completely ignorant, but sonera is white hat (now that's one telia-sonera, and I hope that the sonera inheritance is bigger... ;-) > I'm hearing noises they are getting more active but don't > have any personal experience. Chello.NL is an extraterritorial part of Nigeria ;-) > I receive spams from chello.at much more often than from > chello.nl Makes sense, somehow. Bye, Frank From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Sun Jan 4 21:33:08 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Sun Jan 4 15:35:28 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: RED-DNS.INFO BLUE-DNS.INFO (was: DIA55.US Dutch registration info) References: Message-ID: On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 18:40:58 +0000, Marjolein Katsma wrote: > Google found it for me, of course: > http://www.minitel.fr/ > With a header that declares: minitel.com :) You can't expect France Telecom to get everything right, can you? > Hmm - a quick bit of exploration reveals only paid-for (per minute) > pages. I thought there used to be free pages? No, none. Well, not exactly. If you dialled up 3611 to access the phone directory, the first 3 minutes were free. So, the idea, if you had more than one number to look up, was to connect, look up one or two numbers, disconnect, reconnect, look up another number or two, repeat, lather and rinse. -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- Doctors can be frustrating. You wait six weeks for an appointment and he says, "I wish you'd come to me sooner." From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Sun Jan 4 14:38:04 2004 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Sun Jan 4 15:40:28 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: Message-ID: In article , "MaddSybil" writes: > It would be fantastic if it actually puts a monkey-wrench in spammer's > activities enough to make them find other ways to send spam besides open > proxies. That would happen if significant numbers of spam victims used the DNSbl to mount teergrubing/tarpit defenses. From Merlyn at Spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 15:38:19 2004 From: Merlyn at Spamcop.net (Merlyn) Date: Sun Jan 4 15:40:35 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: Message-ID: "Bob W." wrote in message news:responseguard-F56C06.12265804012004@news.spamcop.net... > In article , > "Mike Easter" wrote: > > > John McLusky wrote: > > > "The Spamhaus Exploits Block List (XBL) is a realtime database of IP > > > addresses of illegal 3rd party exploits, including open proxies (HTTP, > > > socks, AnalogX, wingate, etc), worms/viruses with built-in spam > > > engines, and other types of trojan-horse exploits." > > > > > > http://www.spamhaus.org/xbl/ > > > > As soon as I headed over there I was wondering how it would compare to > > cbl, and sure enough.... > > > > "The XBL wholly incorporates the highly-trusted CBL (Composite Block > > List) from cbl.abuseat.org, " > > > > and goes on to say that using both would do nothing. So they must be > > one and the same. > > Not logically speaking... "wholly incorporates" could mean that the XBL > includes the CBL, but also has additional listings, so using both would > be redundant... but using the XBL instead of the CBL would provide > greater coverage. > I don't think so, when you place an IP to lookup in the XBL page it takes you to the CBL site. -- Regards, Merlyn A Spamcop advocate All replies will be made specifically to the newsgroup From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 20:45:58 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 15:50:05 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: reporting agencies: The Netherlands/Europe (Holland) References: <3FF87800.774A@xyzzy.claranet.de> Message-ID: Frank Ellermann (nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de) wrote in news:3FF87800.774A@xyzzy.claranet.de: >> I receive spams from chello.at much more often than from >> chello.nl > > Makes sense, somehow. Bye, Frank how? ;-) -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From tdy at blackhole.aosake.net Sun Jan 4 12:51:28 2004 From: tdy at blackhole.aosake.net (N. Miller) Date: Sun Jan 4 15:55:06 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: spamcop says my server is misconfigured. how do i get off that list? References: Message-ID: On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 11:32:24 -0600, hanasaki wrote: >This is being sent back to my MTA for all incoming email. Its likely >becase the config was hosed for a day or two. What is the real source? > Now that the config is right, I think, how can status be restored? > >FYI: My IP is not listed "65.30.34.80 not listed in bl.spamcop.net" Even so, your IP address returns the following from a Sam Spade lookup: 01/04/04 12:45:22 dns 65.30.34.80 nslookup 65.30.34.80 Canonical name: CPE-65-30-34-80.kc.rr.com Addresses: 65.30.34.80 There are mail system operators who use a regex check, something like, "^CPE*.kc.rr*" (horribly simplified, but you should get the idea), and block every rDNS lookup that matches. As others mentioned, you will be rejected on the basis of being in what appears to be a block of dynamically assigned IP addresses. One of the special ironies of life is that AOL is (or was) blocking RoadRunner dynamic blocks. The irony? Guess who owns both companies! Does RoadRunner offer an SMTP AUTH server? I have the same problem as you do, with an SBC dynamic IP address, but I get to use an SMTP AUTH server, so I can relay from my address to the "smarthost" server, which will relay on to the world. -- Norman ~I'll be there, by your side ~in the land of Twilight. ~In your dream I will go ~'till we find the Sunlight. From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 09:55:39 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Anony Mouse) Date: Sun Jan 4 15:55:19 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] No Spam & mail15 spammer Message-ID: <3FF87DCB.6070908@spamcop.net> My spam has dropped to virtually nil... I went away for three days and returned to one spam. The only one since just before Christmas day. This spam was from an organisation that did not try and hide its identity and not to my normal email address. It came in an email address that gets no spam. So it looks like the Can Spam act has put the activities of the recidivist offenders that annoy me on hold. Last week I took action against DirectI in relation to the mail15 spammer. Several emails were exchanged between Dan Halloran and I and Dan spanked DirectI which caused them to send me a personal email assuring me that they were taking action against domains with false whois. I have not checked yet however posts in the mail15 thread indicate that a lot of the domains this spammer had have been whacked. It has been a few years since my inbox has been so empty... I hope it stays that way. From wayne at midwestcs.com Sun Jan 4 14:58:12 2004 From: wayne at midwestcs.com (wayne) Date: Sun Jan 4 16:00:16 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Analysis of a spammer's CD of email addresses References: Message-ID: In Larry Jandro writes: > How much of it looks like it was poisioned by things such as > WebPoision..? Good question! How would I tell? (I have never even investigated WebPoison.) Are there other patterns I should look for? -wayne From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 21:02:24 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 16:05:15 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: RED-DNS.INFO BLUE-DNS.INFO (was: DIA55.US Dutch registration info) References: Message-ID: Godwin Stewart (gstewart@loopback.sgms-centre.com) wrote in news:pan.2004.01.04.20.33.07.461047@loopback.sgms-centre.com: >> http://www.minitel.fr/ >> With a header that declares: minitel.com :) > > You can't expect France Telecom to get everything right, can you? Actually, it _is_ right. http://minitel.com/ = http://www.minitel.fr/ No redirect, just the same page. (Just tried that.) > If you dialled up 3611 to access the phone directory, the first 3 > minutes were free. So, the idea, if you had more than one number to > look up, was to connect, look up one or two numbers, disconnect, > reconnect, look up another number or two, repeat, lather and rinse. Ah, memory slowly seeping back. I think I only ever looked at one or two pages in the French minitel system; if I remember correctly, accessible from the Dutch minitel, which (I'm sure) did have a few free pages. Something only vaguely useful, can't remember what, only that I tried a few times and then didn't return. But it's all a long time ago - 1990 or thereabouts... when BBSs were much more useful! (BTW, minitel.nl exists, but it's parked domain.) -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From spamcop001 at bellsouth.net Sun Jan 4 15:04:36 2004 From: spamcop001 at bellsouth.net (Bo Briggs) Date: Sun Jan 4 16:05:34 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: spamcop says my server is misconfigured. how do i get off that list? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: hanasaki wrote: > Hello all, > > This is being sent back to my MTA for all incoming email. Its likely > becase the config was hosed for a day or two. What is the real source? > Now that the config is right, I think, how can status be restored? > > FYI: My IP is not listed "65.30.34.80 not listed in bl.spamcop.net" > > thanks > > ========== > > 550-Your mail has been rejected because the server you are sending to > is > 550 misconfigured) > http://www.altohiway.com/cgi-bin/knowledge/118.html http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/postfix/2002-12/0595.html Someone still using orbz? -- B Briggs From MikeE at ster.invalid Sun Jan 4 13:05:55 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Sun Jan 4 16:10:21 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: Message-ID: Bob W. wrote: > "Mike Easter" >> As soon as I headed over there I was wondering how it would compare >> to cbl, and sure enough.... >> >> "The XBL wholly incorporates the highly-trusted CBL (Composite Block >> List) from cbl.abuseat.org, " >> >> and goes on to say that using both would do nothing. So they must be >> one and the same. > > Not logically speaking... "wholly incorporates" could mean that the > XBL includes the CBL, but also has additional listings, so using both > would be redundant... but using the XBL instead of the CBL would > provide greater coverage. Not logically or 'grammatically' but 'goes on to say' is this, which I didn't paste: "therefore mail servers already using cbl.abuseat.org should NOT also use xbl.spamhaus.org or you will be making 'double' queries to basically the same data source and only one DNSBL will appear to work, the other will appear to not catch anything. For additional FAQs and information on the CBL see http://cbl.abuseat.org/" -- Mike Easter From tdy at blackhole.aosake.net Sun Jan 4 13:09:33 2004 From: tdy at blackhole.aosake.net (N. Miller) Date: Sun Jan 4 16:10:34 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Too many errors; giving up on SpamCop References: Message-ID: <0bvgvvkfac6el4udghgj4ak4lptbipmmof@4ax.com> On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 03:25:54 -0800, "Mike Easter" wrote: >N. Miller wrote: >> In general, though, I have wasted too much time on reporting >> spam. I am seriously on the verge of killing every email account I >> have, and telling my friends and family to spend that $.37 if they >> reall want to reach me. Spammers own the Internet, and they own email. >> I am tired of playing. > >Something must've gone wrong with your approach to handling your email. No. I expect I am just taking the stupid stuff too personally. About every tenth SpamCop report throws a "Connection closed by remote server" at me when I click on the "Send reports" button. I probably got a little too frustrated over a minor technical glitch. >My recommended strategy is to primarily handle your mail conveniently, >securely, and pledged to not aid a spammer. Whether you have one >account or multiple, you can accomplish that by proper configuration and >behavior. The overview is that with filters or message rules, all of >your spam goes into a Junk folder and only your desired mail is in the >Inbox or further subsorted. Oddly enough, I've been doing just that for a couple of years. About three years ago I shipped all of my subscriptions over to Sneakemail, and locked down everything else. Through the end of last summer I was getting 8-10 spam email messages a month, tops, to the ISP account. About the time that Osirusoft and Monkeys shut down under DDoS attacks, spam to my ISP account increased by a factor of 10. And a nearly spam free Netscape account jumped to somewhere around 15-20 a month. Netscape Web Mail is not opened with the Netscape mail client. It is moved, unopened, to a local IMAP server. The ISP email is picked up by the Mercury Mail POP Distributing client. All messages are filtered in Mercury Mail, and 90% of email destined for my accounts is automatically deleted. For another user I am not so Draconian, out of fear of false positives. I am trying to report the 10%, or so, that survives all of that. But, you see, I have a lot of correspondents. Maybe a dozen people who send me a dozen email messages, each, tops, in any given year. While one of the spam blocking services recently claimed that spam just edged over 50% of all email sent, my spam ratio exceeded 75% over two years ago, and is currently about 95%, based on the Mercury Mail download logs. Such spam as I report by means other than SpamCop is handled with Pegasus Mail. Alas, you have to open the message to get to the raw view; but PM does not render lazy HTML without your explicit approval. You can't trip web bugs in Pegasus Mail. But I think it is the frequent error when trying to send the SpamCop reports. Often enough that I feel like just packing it in and slipping over to the "Auto-JHD" side; and be done with it. -- Norman ~I'll be there, by your side ~in the land of Twilight. ~In your dream I will go ~'till we find the Sunlight. From reply at in.news.group Sun Jan 4 15:18:57 2004 From: reply at in.news.group (Mike Vollmer) Date: Sun Jan 4 16:15:08 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Too many errors; giving up on SpamCop References: Message-ID: Try to do less and follow through. Focus on the newest spams only in order minimize your time expended. The older a spam is, the more likely it is that others have already reported it. "N. Miller" wrote in message news:t2nfvvs9j4eiib20p4d1h28uh0t9rrvc8p@4ax.com... > through. In general, though, I have wasted too much time on reporting From tdy at blackhole.aosake.net Sun Jan 4 13:15:21 2004 From: tdy at blackhole.aosake.net (N. Miller) Date: Sun Jan 4 16:20:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Too many errors; giving up on SpamCop References: Message-ID: On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 10:29:20 -0500, "B McDonald" wrote: >"N. Miller" wrote in message >news:t2nfvvs9j4eiib20p4d1h28uh0t9rrvc8p@4ax.com... >> Maybe not; but I am tired of losing reports to the evil "Connection >> closed by remote server" errors. I never know if the reports made it >> through. In general, though, I have wasted too much time on reporting >> spam. I am seriously on the verge of killing every email account I >> have, and telling my friends and family to spend that $.37 if they >> reall want to reach me. Spammers own the Internet, and they own email. >> I am tired of playing. >Are you reporting using the web interface only? I would suggest spampal >with the quarantine plug in (for WinX machines), and maybe upgrading to >a paid reporting account (its really pretty cheap). Cuts reporting time >to a few minutes. I am, and have been for some years, only reporting selected spam. Mostly by forwarding as attachments, when using SpamCop. Of course, I have to use the web interface to finish up the reports. I only receive 30 pieces of email correspondence a year, tops, from friends and family. I do receive additional email messages from a couple of companies I have made online purchases from, but they also have telephone order lines I could use. And some subscribed commercial advertisements, which I could live without. I don't think SpamCop is cheap enough for that kind of email load. Counting only the 30 pieces as the most important, and worth the price, I'd be paying $1 per year per message! USPS is only charging $.37 per message. -- Norman ~I'll be there, by your side ~in the land of Twilight. ~In your dream I will go ~'till we find the Sunlight. From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 21:22:42 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 16:25:25 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Analysis of a spammer's CD of email addresses References: Message-ID: wayne (wayne@midwestcs.com) wrote in news:x4wu87e8ij.fsf@footbone.midwestcs.com: >> How much of it looks like it was poisioned by things such as >> WebPoision..? > > Good question! How would I tell? (I have never even investigated > WebPoison.) Are there other patterns I should look for? Some Googling would probably reveal some WebPoison pages. Whwn you *look* at such pages there is a kind of pattern, but likely recognizable only to the human eye (i.e., not by RE). Still, when you've seen a few such pages, you might recognize such addresses as "possible webpoison" in this material. Other possible patterns would be dictionary attacks (if you can sort by domain, these should stand out). If you're still in that discussion with Rejo Zenger you might want to ask him about WebPoison "patterns" as well. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 21:27:04 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 16:30:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Too many errors; giving up on SpamCop References: <0bvgvvkfac6el4udghgj4ak4lptbipmmof@4ax.com> Message-ID: N. Miller (tdy@blackhole.aosake.net) wrote in news:0bvgvvkfac6el4udghgj4ak4lptbipmmof@4ax.com: > But I think it is the frequent error when trying to send the SpamCop > reports. Often enough that I feel like just packing it in and slipping > over to the "Auto-JHD" side; and be done with it. So, just do that for a bit: take a vacation. When you've recovered, come back and report some more. There are times when life is more important than spam reporting. ;-) -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 21:31:01 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 16:35:18 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: Message-ID: Mike Easter (MikeE@ster.invalid) wrote in news:bt9vdp$fgg$1 @news.spamcop.net: > "therefore mail servers already using cbl.abuseat.org should NOT also > use xbl.spamhaus.org or you will be making 'double' queries to basically > the same data source and only one DNSBL will appear to work, the other > will appear to not catch anything. For additional FAQs and information > on the CBL see http://cbl.abuseat.org/" Yes, I read that, too. And wondered: then why use the Spamhaus.org "version"? Only thing I can imagine is that they're planning to distribute the CBL like the "other" Spamhaus BLs under the Spamhaus aegis and using the existing Spamhaus mirror network. But that's pure guesswork. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 21:59:03 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 17:00:18 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Too many errors; giving up on SpamCop References: Message-ID: N. Miller (tdy@blackhole.aosake.net) wrote in news:s80hvv0nvb7940fuol50brfjmh3lki3pm0@4ax.com: > I only receive 30 pieces of email correspondence a year, tops, from > friends and family. I do receive additional email messages from a > couple of companies I have made online purchases from, but they also > have telephone order lines I could use. And some subscribed commercial > advertisements, which I could live without. I don't think SpamCop is > cheap enough for that kind of email load. Counting only the 30 pieces > as the most important, and worth the price, I'd be paying $1 per year > per message! And using a reporting-only account you're paying $1 per Megabyte. That _is_ cheap. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From newsgroups at jc-rules.com Sun Jan 4 16:01:42 2004 From: newsgroups at jc-rules.com (JC-Rules) Date: Sun Jan 4 17:05:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: No Spam & mail15 spammer References: <3FF87DCB.6070908@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Not sure what world you are living in, but I am still getting 2-300 per day on average. -- Jerry Phelps - President JC Rules Computing, Inc. Metro 817-498-4890 NRA Lifetime Member TSRA Lifetime Member LEAA Lifetime Member http://www.JC-rules.com The best weapon is ANYTHING that makes your enemy change his or her mind. (Do NOT reply via email but to this Group ONLY. Emails to embedded email address are set to bounce back to sender.) "Anony Mouse" wrote in message news:3FF87DCB.6070908@spamcop.net... > My spam has dropped to virtually nil... > > I went away for three days and returned to one spam. > The only one since just before Christmas day. > > This spam was from an organisation that did not try and hide its > identity and not to my normal email address. It came in an email address > that gets no spam. > > So it looks like the Can Spam act has put the activities of the > recidivist offenders that annoy me on hold. > > Last week I took action against DirectI in relation to the mail15 > spammer. Several emails were exchanged between Dan Halloran and I and > Dan spanked DirectI which caused them to send me a personal email > assuring me that they were taking action against domains with false whois. > > I have not checked yet however posts in the mail15 thread indicate that > a lot of the domains this spammer had have been whacked. > > It has been a few years since my inbox has been so empty... > > I hope it stays that way. > From maddsybil at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 17:03:47 2004 From: maddsybil at spamcop.net (MaddSybil) Date: Sun Jan 4 17:05:13 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: People really buy from these subjects..? References: Message-ID: "Brent" wrote in message news:bt9pmg$6n4$1@news.spamcop.net... > MaddSybil scribed: > > [...] > > > The stupids are the people paying these spammers. > > And the ultimate stupids are the consumers (i.e. end users) buying the > product. No sale = no profit motive = no spam. Yes, it *is* that simple! > What is *not* simple is convincing the hundreds or thousands of > consumers not to buy. > It is Our Duty to protect the consumers from themselves! The Innocent Sheep know not what they do! No spam = no idea the website is out there = no incentive to spam -Syb Interzone Agent Provocateur www.paulgraham.com/ffbfaq.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 22:09:13 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Sun Jan 4 17:10:05 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: People really buy from these subjects..? References: Message-ID: MaddSybil (maddsybil@spamcop.net) wrote in news:bta2kb$jts$1 @news.spamcop.net: > No spam = no idea the website is out there = no incentive to spam Alas, not quite. There -are_ still search engines. Shutting down spam doesn't necessarily shut down the websites peddling scamware which could still be found. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 15:14:04 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Jeff) Date: Sun Jan 4 17:15:19 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: other spam reporting agencies References: Message-ID: Thanks a BUNCH!!! I'll have use for all of them! From maddsybil at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 17:15:25 2004 From: maddsybil at spamcop.net (MaddSybil) Date: Sun Jan 4 17:20:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: Message-ID: "Larry Kilgallen" wrote in message news:LTDxUmuI5pbL@eisner.encompasserve.org... > In article , "MaddSybil" writes: > > > It would be fantastic if it actually puts a monkey-wrench in spammer's > > activities enough to make them find other ways to send spam besides open > > proxies. > > That would happen if significant numbers of spam victims used the DNSbl > to mount teergrubing/tarpit defenses. Hackbusters says tarpits are potentially illegal now? I thought you had to be a mailserver admin to set one up. -Syb Interzone Agent Provocateur www.paulgraham.com/ffbfaq.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 15:20:02 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Jeff) Date: Sun Jan 4 17:25:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports References: Message-ID: "Michael Lefevre" wrote in message news:bt94ng$97f$1@news.spamcop.net... > Except that under the new law, you have no right to take action, unless > you're an ISP. Depending which state law you're referring to, the new law > may actually mean you don't have a right of action when you did before. > > -- > Michael You know, you've repeatedly tried to discourage me from taking action against the spammers in all of your replies to me, and you've done nothing to offer any positive advice. I'm sure the spammers appreciate that, but don't like that at all. By the way, your reply above is total BULLSHIT! I'm not even going to waste my time explaining why. From newsgroups at jc-rules.com Sun Jan 4 16:21:29 2004 From: newsgroups at jc-rules.com (JC-Rules) Date: Sun Jan 4 17:25:20 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Why Not Allow More Automated Reporting by SC??? Message-ID: Anyone have any idea why SC can't just add a field to our paid member profile that contains our own ISP information? This would tag any entries that match our ISP information as not being a spam source and avoid our inadvertantly reporting ourselves. Then, simply allow us to click ONE TIME to process and report all qeued spam or at least display a list of all of our qeued spam in one list for us to review before clicking the "Report Spam" button ONE TIME to process and report all of them. I have been a paying member for a few years now and have also purchased and tried numerous third party tools to ease the methods of reporting but have not really been satisfied with any of them. Obviously, several hundreds of dollars later, I am still getting 2-300 spams per day on average. Bottom line is, I think SC should trust us to be responsible for our own actions. If we do not pay attention and end up reporting ourselves, then it should be up to us to get it cleared up with our ISP. I do not mind paying the money to get the spam reported in hopes of it someday having a positive effect on reducing the volume. Likewise, I do not mind spending a reasonable amount of my time to report them. However, my time is entirely too valuable to continue wasting by having to report each single spam one at a time. FWISW, the new Outlook 2003 spam filtering appears to be the best offered out there so far. Of course, this only gets it into a Junk Email folder and still needs to be dealt with. Bottom line is... I should be able to review my Junk Email folder in Outlook 2003 to confirm that they are all truly "spam". Once I am convinced that they are all truly spam, I should be able to highlight all of them and click my "SpamSource" button which grabs them all, forwards them to SC in the format they prefer, marks them as Read, and then Deletes them. A few minutes later I should receive the confirmation email from SC advising me that SC has ### spam emails ready for me to process/report. I should then be able to log into SC and pull up those same ### emails and review them again in one single list. I should then be able to click ONE single button to process them all. Who knows, maybe I am just dreaming... LOL -- Jerry Phelps - President JC Rules Computing, Inc. Metro 817-498-4890 NRA Lifetime Member TSRA Lifetime Member LEAA Lifetime Member http://www.JC-rules.com The best weapon is ANYTHING that makes your enemy change his or her mind. (Do NOT reply via email but to this Group ONLY. Emails to embedded email address are set to bounce back to sender.) From nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de Sun Jan 4 23:20:55 2004 From: nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de (Frank Ellermann) Date: Sun Jan 4 17:25:30 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: reporting agencies: The Netherlands/Europe (Holland) References: <3FF87800.774A@xyzzy.claranet.de> Message-ID: <3FF891C7.590@xyzzy.claranet.de> Marjolein Katsma wrote: >>> I receive spams from chello.at much more often than from >>> chello.nl >> Makes sense, somehow > how? ;-) Trying to cross at least one border to muddy the waters, it would be too easy for you to handle spam from chello.nl And it confuses anybody sorting spam "by country" instead of "by ISP". Bye, Frank (tired after reporting 100 SWENs) From nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de Sun Jan 4 23:25:38 2004 From: nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de (Frank Ellermann) Date: Sun Jan 4 17:30:15 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: No Spam & mail15 spammer References: <3FF87DCB.6070908@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <3FF892E2.D5B@xyzzy.claranet.de> Anony Mouse wrote: > Last week I took action against DirectI in relation to the > mail15 spammer. They moved their spam operations to red-dns.info (see parallel threads) > a lot of the domains this spammer had have been whacked. jakedns.biz is still online (used by red- and blue-dns.info) Bye, Frank From nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de Sun Jan 4 23:35:50 2004 From: nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de (Frank Ellermann) Date: Sun Jan 4 17:40:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: Message-ID: <3FF89546.65A8@xyzzy.claranet.de> MaddSybil wrote: > Hackbusters says tarpits are potentially illegal now? Being excessively slow in a SMTP dialogue isn't "illegal". Only being extremely fast could violate RfC 28??. > I thought you had to be a mailserver admin to set one up. ACK. Of course you could run your own "teergrube" when you're online, it's just a very slow smtpd, still following all SMTP rules. Bye, Frank From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Sun Jan 4 16:47:04 2004 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Sun Jan 4 17:50:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: Message-ID: <6omrt69WMWYz@eisner.encompasserve.org> In article , "MaddSybil" writes: > "Larry Kilgallen" wrote in message > news:LTDxUmuI5pbL@eisner.encompasserve.org... >> In article , "MaddSybil" > writes: >> >> > It would be fantastic if it actually puts a monkey-wrench in spammer's >> > activities enough to make them find other ways to send spam besides open >> > proxies. >> >> That would happen if significant numbers of spam victims used the DNSbl >> to mount teergrubing/tarpit defenses. > > Hackbusters says tarpits are potentially illegal now? Please give a full reference. http://www.hackbusters.com redirects to urlcollections.com and then hangs my internet connection. http://www.hackbusters.org shows a page that says nothing about legality. What changed to make "now" different from "before". > I thought you had to be a mailserver admin to set one up. Of course. From maddsybil at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 17:47:09 2004 From: maddsybil at spamcop.net (MaddSybil) Date: Sun Jan 4 17:50:15 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: <3FF89546.65A8@xyzzy.claranet.de> Message-ID: "Frank Ellermann" wrote in message news:3FF89546.65A8@xyzzy.claranet.de... > MaddSybil wrote: > > > Hackbusters says tarpits are potentially illegal now? > > Being excessively slow in a SMTP dialogue isn't "illegal". > Only being extremely fast could violate RfC 28??. > > > I thought you had to be a mailserver admin to set one up. > > ACK. Of course you could run your own "teergrube" when > you're online, it's just a very slow smtpd, still following > all SMTP rules. > Bye, Frank > > It furthermore makes it a criminal offense if a person knowingly "possesses, uses, manufactures, assembles, distributes, leases, transfers, or sells" an "unlawful communication device... for the commission of a theft of a communication service or to receive, disrupt, transmit, decrypt, or acquire... any communication service without the express consent or express authorization of the communication service provider, or to conceal or to assist another to conceal from any communication service provider or from any lawful authority the existence or place of origin or destination of any communication". Slowing down is considered 'disrupting'. Is there a lawyer in da howwwse? -Syb Interzone Agent Provocateur www.paulgraham.com/ffbfaq.html From nobody at nowhere.com Sun Jan 4 14:48:22 2004 From: nobody at nowhere.com (GregR) Date: Sun Jan 4 17:50:25 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] OK, I give up - what are they selling?... ;-) Message-ID: <3FF89836.2FF90F9A@nowhere.com> This has got to be the *weirdest* spam I've ever gotten - full text in .spam under same subject header. Seems like a awful lot of effort just to dodge message filters, so much that the sales pitch is basically indecipherable. Why anyone in their right mind would wade through all that gobbelty-gook to order the product is beyond me, but I also understand that Barnum was an optimist. :-) -- GregR - Another Beemer Biker ...o&o> [This space for rent - inquire within] From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Sun Jan 4 16:49:42 2004 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Sun Jan 4 17:50:37 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Why Not Allow More Automated Reporting by SC??? References: Message-ID: In article , "JC-Rules" writes: > Anyone have any idea why SC can't just add a field to our paid member > profile that contains our own ISP information? This would tag any entries > that match our ISP information as not being a spam source and avoid our > inadvertantly reporting ourselves. And what would you do to prevent _other_ reporting mistakes ? Pure self-interest seems an inappropriate motive for correctness. From hanasaki at hanaden.com Sun Jan 4 16:57:20 2004 From: hanasaki at hanaden.com (hanasaki) Date: Sun Jan 4 17:57:24 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] more on spamcop saying server is misconfigured Message-ID: <3FF89A50.8020803@hanaden.com> Actualy, I am using the provider's gateway and a smarthost. Quoting my last email "This is being sent back to my MTA for all incoming email." The operative word here is "incoming" This means that any/all addresses I look up are returning the same msg from spamcop: " 550-Your mail has been rejected because the server you are sending to is 550 misconfigured) " I interpret this to mean that spamcop is trying to tell those sending TO me that My server is misconfigured. It is not an issue with my outgoing mail. It is an issue with ALL incoming mail. From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 17:59:04 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Sun Jan 4 18:00:18 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Too many errors; giving up on SpamCop References: Message-ID: "N. Miller" wrote in message news:s80hvv0nvb7940fuol50brfjmh3lki3pm0@4ax.com... > >> I am tired of playing. > I only receive 30 pieces of email correspondence a year, tops, from > friends and family. I do receive additional email messages from a > couple of companies I have made online purchases from, but they also > have telephone order lines I could use. And some subscribed commercial > advertisements, which I could live without. I don't think SpamCop is > cheap enough for that kind of email load. Counting only the 30 pieces > as the most important, and worth the price, I'd be paying $1 per year > per message! USPS is only charging $.37 per message. > Unless you have a server, reporting spam is mostly a hobby. I changed my email address and am now spamfree. I have a lot more email correspondence than you do, but not as much as some. I never did use the spamcop email service because I don't think I should have to pay for spam protection. I do like reporting spam, but do it just as a hobby when I have time (I have a Hotmail account that started getting spam when qwest passed a manual report to the spammer) and if I can read the headers myself. I also carry a trash bag when I walk and pick up trash. Changing your email address is like using a filter to automatically JHD, but as an end user with little email traffic, it doesn't really bother anyone either way. When I retire, it is #11 on my list to get my own server and be able to really /play/. Miss Betsy, an almost new internet user From nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de Sun Jan 4 23:57:54 2004 From: nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de (Frank Ellermann) Date: Sun Jan 4 18:00:36 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: <3FF89546.65A8@xyzzy.claranet.de> Message-ID: <3FF89A72.2F91@xyzzy.claranet.de> MaddSybil wrote: >> > It furthermore makes it a criminal offense if a person > knowingly "possesses, uses, manufactures, assembles, > distributes, leases, transfers, or sells" an "unlawful > communication device... for the commission of a theft of a > communication service or to receive, disrupt, transmit, > decrypt, or acquire... any communication service without > the express consent or express authorization of the > communication service provider, or to conceal or to > assist another to conceal from any communication service > provider or from any lawful authority the existence or > place of origin or destination of any communication". WTH is an "unlawful communication device" in the internet ? A teergrube follows rfc282?, so it can't be "unlawful", even if you'd quote some weird piece of PATRIOT backwards. If it pleases you you can answer incoming SMTP connections at port 25 manually taking a minute per character. > Slowing down is considered 'disrupting'. LOL. If you don't like the speed close the connection. Bye. From NXBSGVWQHCKY at spammotel.com Sun Jan 4 22:59:13 2004 From: NXBSGVWQHCKY at spammotel.com (Mathew Hendry) Date: Sun Jan 4 18:00:43 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: Message-ID: <6g6hvvkpgtc0632a4vb68mp78r7hg023a7@4ax.com> On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 15:08:34 -0000, "John McLusky" wrote: >"The Spamhaus Exploits Block List (XBL) is a realtime database of IP >addresses of illegal 3rd party exploits, including open proxies (HTTP, >socks, AnalogX, wingate, etc), worms/viruses with built-in spam engines, and >other types of trojan-horse exploits." > >http://www.spamhaus.org/xbl/ > >Might be worth a look... Isn't it just a mirror of cbl.abuseat.org? -- Mat. From mikegray at avoidpsamdsl.pipex.com Sun Jan 4 23:01:52 2004 From: mikegray at avoidpsamdsl.pipex.com (Mike Gray) Date: Sun Jan 4 18:05:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OK, I give up - what are they selling?... ;-) References: <3FF89836.2FF90F9A@nowhere.com> Message-ID: > Why anyone in their right mind would wade through all that gobbelty-gook > to order the product is beyond me, but I also understand that Barnum was > an optimist. :-) I see mails like this all the time. The really mad ones have huge wordlists before and after the message in an attempt to get past the Bayesian filters, which means (to me) that they're doing their job. Spammers are having to dilute their message massively, and even then it's not getting through. :) My bayesian filter is currently getting 99.2% of my spam, with 0 false positives. The question does remain as to how dumb you'd have to be to buy from these, though. Mike From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 18:03:54 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Sun Jan 4 18:05:16 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Hotmail References: Message-ID: "Berny" wrote in message news:bt9euv$m13$1@news.spamcop.net... > > It's an interesting question, since people come in here bitching about being > blocked to AOL, and a myriad of other ISP's, no one has complained about > hotmail blocking them!!---yet, ....and yes i know hotmail is probably not > sending people here if they are blocked, but nevertheless people seem to > google their way over here anyway > Well, it hasn't been in effect that long and I would venture to guess that Hotmail won't send error messages. What they will do is to tell you to whitelist any correspondent whom you have difficulty in getting emails from. The only way you will know that you aren't getting emails is if your correspondent phones you and says, "Why didn't you answer my email?" The HM 'bot will never admit that he was blocked, but just tell you to use the whitelist for "optimum" performance. Miss Betsy From spamcop001 at bellsouth.net Sun Jan 4 17:11:58 2004 From: spamcop001 at bellsouth.net (Bo Briggs) Date: Sun Jan 4 18:15:27 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: more on spamcop saying server is misconfigured In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: hanasaki wrote: > Actualy, I am using the provider's gateway and a smarthost. > > Quoting my last email > "This is being sent back to my MTA for all incoming email." > > The operative word here is "incoming" This means that any/all addresses > I look up are returning the same msg from spamcop: > " > 550-Your mail has been rejected because the server you are > sending to is > 550 misconfigured) > " > > I interpret this to mean that spamcop is trying to tell those sending TO > me that My server is misconfigured. > > It is not an issue with my outgoing mail. It is an issue with ALL > incoming mail. > A couple of things would help here. 1. Did you see my earlier post? I noticed that you are running a mail server on your ip of 65.30.34.80, announcing itself as cognition.home.hanaden.com. I also notice that you're using blacklists because when I tried to connect from my dynamic IP I was blocked there by SORBS/dul. Which blacklists are you using? The message that you are getting was commonly used by orbz, which blocks everything...OR... 2. Please post a FULL message, not just the 550 error message. -- Bo Briggs From maddsybil at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 18:15:15 2004 From: maddsybil at spamcop.net (MaddSybil) Date: Sun Jan 4 18:20:29 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: <6omrt69WMWYz@eisner.encompasserve.org> Message-ID: "Larry Kilgallen" wrote in message news:6omrt69WMWYz@eisner.encompasserve.org... > In article , "MaddSybil" writes: > > "Larry Kilgallen" wrote in message > > news:LTDxUmuI5pbL@eisner.encompasserve.org... > >> In article , "MaddSybil" > > writes: > >> > >> > It would be fantastic if it actually puts a monkey-wrench in spammer's > >> > activities enough to make them find other ways to send spam besides open > >> > proxies. > >> > >> That would happen if significant numbers of spam victims used the DNSbl > >> to mount teergrubing/tarpit defenses. > > > > Hackbusters says tarpits are potentially illegal now? > > Please give a full reference. > > http://www.hackbusters.com redirects to urlcollections.com and > then hangs my internet connection. > > http://www.hackbusters.org shows a page that says nothing about > legality. > > What changed to make "now" different from "before". > > > I thought you had to be a mailserver admin to set one up. > > Of course. http://www.hackbusters.net/ so sorry, didn't know there were so many busting hacks! He had to stop offering LaBrea because of POTENTIAL illegality. 'Some may not agree with my decision to pull LaBrea from my site. I've had several people tell me that making programs like LaBrea illegal certainly isn't the intent behind this law. While that may be true, the unintended consequences of the Federal Digital Millennium Copyright Act are legion. http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/unintended_consequences.php LaBrea both disrupts communication and conceals the true origin of communication in an attempt to protect a network from attack. -Syb Interzone Agent Provocateur www.paulgraham.com/ffbfaq.html From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 16:16:34 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Jeff) Date: Sun Jan 4 18:20:46 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OK, I give up - what are they selling?... ;-) References: <3FF89836.2FF90F9A@nowhere.com> Message-ID: "Mike Gray" wrote in message news:bta60r$pu3$1@news.spamcop.net... > The question does remain as to how dumb you'd have to be to buy from these, > though. I often wonder if these spammers are already rich and are not really trying to make money at all. Spamming is just a game to them because they have nothing better to do than fuck with people and ruin their internet experience. To them, spamming is like going on a fishing trip to see how many bites you can get. From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Sun Jan 4 17:16:45 2004 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Sun Jan 4 18:20:55 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: <3FF89546.65A8@xyzzy.claranet.de> Message-ID: In article , "MaddSybil" writes: > It furthermore makes it a criminal offense if a person knowingly "possesses, > uses, manufactures, assembles, distributes, leases, transfers, or sells" an > "unlawful communication device... for the commission of a theft of a > communication service or to receive, disrupt, transmit, decrypt, or > acquire... any communication service without the express consent or express > authorization of the communication service provider, or to conceal or to > assist another to conceal from any communication service provider or from > any lawful authority the existence or place of origin or destination of any > communication". > > Slowing down is considered 'disrupting'. The "express consent of the communication service provider" is provided, since it is the "communications service provider" (operator of the target IP address) doing the slowing down. From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 18:23:27 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Sun Jan 4 18:25:20 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OK, I give up - what are they selling?... ;-) References: <3FF89836.2FF90F9A@nowhere.com> Message-ID: "Jeff" wrote in message news:bta6sk$rck$1@news.spamcop.net... > "Mike Gray" wrote in message > news:bta60r$pu3$1@news.spamcop.net... > > The question does remain as to how dumb you'd have to be to buy from > these, > > though. > > I often wonder if these spammers are already rich and are not really trying > to make money at all. Spamming is just a game to them because they have > nothing better to do than fuck with people and ruin their internet > experience. To them, spamming is like going on a fishing trip to see how > many bites you can get. > I already made comments in the other thread where this is being discussed, but, without any evidence, I think that there are spammers, like virus writers, who just want to f*** with people. And the majority of the rest of spammers are wanneberich's who bought a package. The money that spammers make is from selling lists, not from selling products. Miss Betsy From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 18:22:51 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (sol) Date: Sun Jan 4 18:25:31 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Brent wrote: > Robb Topolski scribed: > > [...] > > >>Don't use the comment feature to threaten the ISPs. Use it to help >>the ISP do their job. > > > [...] > > Robb, surely you say this under the condition that the ISP is neither: > > a) a de facto spammer > > nor > > b) a spammer-friendly ISP > > Right? Well, if the ISP is either a de facto spammer or is spammer-friendly, then our spamcop complaints will simply be deleted and ignored. However, if the ISP is neither of the above, then the comments will be read and should therefore be constructive, not threatening. I believe that this is the point Robb was trying to make. -- Sol slips beneath the waves and fades away amid majestic colors. From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Sun Jan 4 17:29:26 2004 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Sun Jan 4 18:30:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Teergrubing/Tarpitting References: <6omrt69WMWYz@eisner.encompasserve.org> Message-ID: In article , "MaddSybil" writes: > "Larry Kilgallen" wrote in message > news:6omrt69WMWYz@eisner.encompasserve.org... >> In article , "MaddSybil" > writes: >> > Hackbusters says tarpits are potentially illegal now? >> >> Please give a full reference. >> >> http://www.hackbusters.com redirects to urlcollections.com and >> then hangs my internet connection. >> >> http://www.hackbusters.org shows a page that says nothing about >> legality. >> >> What changed to make "now" different from "before". > http://www.hackbusters.net/ > so sorry, didn't know there were so many busting hacks! > > He had to stop offering LaBrea because of POTENTIAL illegality. > > 'Some may not agree with my decision to pull LaBrea from my site. I've had > several people tell me that making programs like LaBrea illegal certainly > isn't the intent behind this law. While that may be true, the unintended > consequences of the Federal Digital Millennium Copyright Act are legion. > http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/unintended_consequences.php > > LaBrea both disrupts communication and conceals the true origin of > communication in an attempt to protect a network from attack. That does not sound like the teergrubing/tarpit defenses I know (just slowing down SMTP performance when communication comes from a disreputable source). From maddsybil at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 18:35:04 2004 From: maddsybil at spamcop.net (MaddSybil) Date: Sun Jan 4 18:40:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: <3FF89546.65A8@xyzzy.claranet.de> Message-ID: "Larry Kilgallen" wrote in message news:SrVGZ5Et7l40@eisner.encompasserve.org... > In article , "MaddSybil" writes: > > > It furthermore makes it a criminal offense if a person knowingly "possesses, > > uses, manufactures, assembles, distributes, leases, transfers, or sells" an > > "unlawful communication device... for the commission of a theft of a > > communication service or to receive, disrupt, transmit, decrypt, or > > acquire... any communication service without the express consent or express > > authorization of the communication service provider, or to conceal or to > > assist another to conceal from any communication service provider or from > > any lawful authority the existence or place of origin or destination of any > > communication". > > > > Slowing down is considered 'disrupting'. > > The "express consent of the communication service provider" is provided, > since it is the "communications service provider" (operator of the target > IP address) doing the slowing down. This is the part where the lawyer comes in. BOTH parties are a "communications service provider", eh? Spammer's provider is the injured 'disrupted' party. -Syb Interzone Agent Provocateur www.paulgraham.com/ffbfaq.html From newspamtrap at aol.com Sun Jan 4 23:57:03 2004 From: newspamtrap at aol.com (Trappaspam) Date: Sun Jan 4 19:00:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] cubex.net.pk - Gone ??? Message-ID: http://cubex.net.pk - Too good to be true :-) - But - the whole block & route seems to have been down for at least 24 hours :-) Anyone know if cubex.com.pk are the same outfit ? (details below) --- 01/04/04 23:45:19 GMT Standard Time --- IP lookup on http://cubex.net.pk --- resolving host "cubex.net.pk", please wait... --- resolve error: host not found --- 01/04/04 23:48:22 GMT Standard Time --- pinging cubex.net.pk, please wait... --- Ping error: host not found Samples: --- IP lookup on 202.63.201.180/31 --- resolving IP [202.63.201.180], please wait... --- resolve error: no data record found --- 01/04/04 23:49:37 GMT Standard Time --- pinging 202.63.223.255, please wait... --- sending to 202.63.223.255 [202.63.223.255], error, ping 1 timed out... error, ping 2 timed out... error, ping 3 timed out... error, ping 4 timed out... cubex.COM.pk is however up at:- 66.78.3.211 (related - anybody know ?) --- smart whois on "66.78.3" Virtual Development INC NETBLK-VDI-3 (NET-66-78-0-0-1) 66.78.0.0 - 66.78.63.255 Interserver, Inc INTERSERVER-66-78-3-0-24 (NET-66-78-3-0-1) 66.78.3.0 - 66.78.3.255 Regs Jon NS From martis.N0sPaM at ntlworld.com Mon Jan 5 00:00:49 2004 From: martis.N0sPaM at ntlworld.com (Martin S) Date: Sun Jan 4 19:05:45 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: Message-ID: "Marjolein Katsma" wrote in message news:Xns9466E50E24EC9homesitehelp@216.154.195.61... > > Yes, I read that, too. And wondered: then why use the Spamhaus.org > "version"? > If u use sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org the u are querying both Spamhaus and CBL databases in one query, so makes more sense than doing 2 lookups. Martin From newspamtrap at aol.com Mon Jan 5 00:07:36 2004 From: newspamtrap at aol.com (Trappaspam) Date: Sun Jan 4 19:13:23 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: cubex.net.pk - Gone ??? & PS References: Message-ID: With apologies in advance for the re-post :-) P.S. Forgot to mention - this October nanae thread with these idiots. START Spews Admins, Our block is listed at spews, needless to mention due to a spammer's "cubex.net.pk" vicious activies. We had met with concerned ppl responsible for this and have gotten the assurances that they would not get invovle in such activities in future. Please remove our block 202.125.128.0/19 from your filters. Thanks in advance, Farukh END Rest of thread - for a quick laugh :-) http://tinyurl.com/yuv3f Regs Jon NS "Trappaspam" wrote in message news:bta982$ugi$1@news.spamcop.net... > http://cubex.net.pk - Too good to be true :-) > - But - the whole block & route seems to have been down for at least 24 > hours :-) > Anyone know if cubex.com.pk are the same outfit ? (details below) > > --- 01/04/04 23:45:19 GMT Standard Time > --- IP lookup on http://cubex.net.pk > --- resolving host "cubex.net.pk", please wait... > --- resolve error: host not found > > --- 01/04/04 23:48:22 GMT Standard Time > --- pinging cubex.net.pk, please wait... > --- Ping error: host not found > > Samples: > --- IP lookup on 202.63.201.180/31 > --- resolving IP [202.63.201.180], please wait... > --- resolve error: no data record found > --- 01/04/04 23:49:37 GMT Standard Time > --- pinging 202.63.223.255, please wait... > --- sending to 202.63.223.255 [202.63.223.255], > error, ping 1 timed out... > error, ping 2 timed out... > error, ping 3 timed out... > error, ping 4 timed out... > > cubex.COM.pk is however up at:- 66.78.3.211 (related - anybody know ?) > > --- smart whois on "66.78.3" > Virtual Development INC NETBLK-VDI-3 (NET-66-78-0-0-1) > 66.78.0.0 - 66.78.63.255 > Interserver, Inc INTERSERVER-66-78-3-0-24 (NET-66-78-3-0-1) > 66.78.3.0 - 66.78.3.255 > > Regs > Jon NS > > From a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa Sun Jan 4 19:18:15 2004 From: a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa (John Malmberg) Date: Sun Jan 4 19:20:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Hotmail In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Miss Betsy wrote: > > Well, it hasn't been in effect that long and I would venture to > guess that Hotmail won't send error messages. So unless someone has a packet analyzer between Hotmail and the sending mail server, they do not know who dropped the message. And with out knowing who or why, no one can threaten cartooneys. > What they will do is > to tell you to whitelist any correspondent whom you have difficulty > in getting emails from. The only way you will know that you aren't > getting emails is if your correspondent phones you and says, "Why > didn't you answer my email?" SMTP does not guarantee notifications as you know. > The HM 'bot will never admit that he > was blocked, but just tell you to use the whitelist for "optimum" > performance. Call closed with "Unreproducable problem". Repeat as needed. No one harrassing your block list providers or your filter providers with cartooneys. Competent mail server operators will prevent the spam from going through. If the spammers threaten legal action, more mail servers will go into the quietly drop mode and pretend that they have no idea why it was not delivered, and will only investigate cases of users complaining of missing e-mails. -John wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only From newsgroups at jc-rules.com Sun Jan 4 19:04:59 2004 From: newsgroups at jc-rules.com (JC-Rules) Date: Sun Jan 4 20:05:07 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Why Not Allow More Automated Reporting by SC??? References: Message-ID: Larry, What "other" reporting mistakes are you referring to? If there are other mistakes being made (excluding reporting myself), then I may be making them and not knowing it. Any enlightenment offered would be appreciated. -- Jerry Phelps - President JC Rules Computing, Inc. Metro 817-498-4890 NRA Lifetime Member TSRA Lifetime Member LEAA Lifetime Member http://www.JC-rules.com The best weapon is ANYTHING that makes your enemy change his or her mind. (Do NOT reply via email but to this Group ONLY. Emails to embedded email address are set to bounce back to sender.) "Larry Kilgallen" wrote in message news:mECkRdPlns6M@eisner.encompasserve.org... > In article , "JC-Rules" writes: > > Anyone have any idea why SC can't just add a field to our paid member > > profile that contains our own ISP information? This would tag any entries > > that match our ISP information as not being a spam source and avoid our > > inadvertantly reporting ourselves. > > And what would you do to prevent _other_ reporting mistakes ? > > Pure self-interest seems an inappropriate motive for correctness. From someone at microsoft.com Sun Jan 4 20:10:57 2004 From: someone at microsoft.com (hello) Date: Sun Jan 4 20:15:06 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OK, I give up - what are they selling?... ;-) References: <3FF89836.2FF90F9A@nowhere.com> Message-ID: Whut is ut thet yu dunnot unerstan? I wud sey from lukking at it that ther jes se$$in V1@Gaa. An the blue foxes bark at the moon yu cen gettit at a dsscuun, which means appropriately albert shuns the water et is Cheep. From pwillener at ScPiAnMcCoOmP.com Mon Jan 5 10:12:26 2004 From: pwillener at ScPiAnMcCoOmP.com (Pat Willener) Date: Sun Jan 4 20:15:25 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: People really buy from these subjects..? References: Message-ID: "Brent" wrote in message news:bt9pmg$6n4$1@news.spamcop.net... > MaddSybil scribed: > > [...] > > > The stupids are the people paying these spammers. > > And the ultimate stupids are the consumers (i.e. end users) buying the > product. No sale = no profit motive = no spam. Yes, it *is* that simple! > What is *not* simple is convincing the hundreds or thousands of > consumers not to buy. Of course not, since these spam offers are _so_ tempting! From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Sun Jan 4 19:37:18 2004 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Sun Jan 4 20:40:20 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Why Not Allow More Automated Reporting by SC??? References: Message-ID: In article , "JC-Rules" writes: > "Larry Kilgallen" wrote in message > news:mECkRdPlns6M@eisner.encompasserve.org... >> In article , "JC-Rules" > writes: >> > Anyone have any idea why SC can't just add a field to our paid member >> > profile that contains our own ISP information? This would tag any > entries >> > that match our ISP information as not being a spam source and avoid our >> > inadvertantly reporting ourselves. >> >> And what would you do to prevent _other_ reporting mistakes ? >> >> Pure self-interest seems an inappropriate motive for correctness. > What "other" reporting mistakes are you referring to? If there are other > mistakes being made (excluding reporting myself), then I may be making them > and not knowing it. Any enlightenment offered would be appreciated. Anything else that could be determined by reviewing the spam. E.g., innocent bystander web sites. From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 19:56:01 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Cat) Date: Sun Jan 4 21:00:58 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Comcast revisited References: <3FF7BA57.FE1E9602@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <3FF8C431.BE6F5321@spamcop.net> Martin S wrote: > > "Cat" wrote in message > news:3FF7BA57.FE1E9602@spamcop.net... > > Anyway, I really need a Comcast bitch list so that my spam complaints > > will hopefully get through to someone with half a brain cell. If anyone > > here has a Comcast bitch list, please post it here. > > Have u thought of using comcast.blackholes.us to filter ur emails, its about > the best u can do for unhelpful admins, shame reputable ISP's don't use this > filter and save us the effort, may also make comcast do more. Considering I don't have my own mail server to enforce such a block, exactly how do you propose I do that? Also, I recently cancelled an old dial up account that I'd been using only occasionally since I've had DSL the past two and a half years. That account was getting a lot of Comcast spam. My current ISP account doesn't get any spam (knock on wood), and all of my other e-mail addresses forward to my Yahoo account. Besides, you obviously missed the point of my post. I'm asking for a bitch list of Comcast addresses so that hopefully someone with half a brain cell who works there will take notice that people are tired of Comcast supporting spam abuse. Yes, it's good for Comcast to see how many people are blocking access from their users, but I'm not looking to completely block them. I'm looking for a way to let them know that I'm not going to just ignore their spamming abuse. I need some way to grab their attention by using a bitch list. By the way, you forgot the y and the o in "you" and "your." From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 20:05:19 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Cat) Date: Sun Jan 4 21:05:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Comcast revisited References: <3FF7BA57.FE1E9602@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <3FF8C65F.D2C5D642@spamcop.net> Tom wrote: > > On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 01:01:44 -0600, Cat wrote: > > >After all the recent discussion about Comcast in the newsgroup and my > >less than productive conversation with a particularly rude and snotty > >abuse admin > > What? You think you're special? (just kidding) :-P > Comcast is not responsive, whether you have a complaint on spam from > unsecured/compromised machines on their network or their programming > on cable. It is so bad that here in the Northwestern Chicago 'burbs, a > political cartoon ran in the local newspaper showing a television > screen with the old hammer and sickle logo and "Commiecast" behind it. > Not a pretty thing to see in the paper, but it does convey the > frustration a lot of Comcast customers (and victims of their system) > conveys. Yeah, that's exactly why I need a bitch list. I want to make some sort of impression on them. Also, if everyone starts using bitch list addresses for Comcast, maybe it would eventually have some effect. Where I live, if there isn't a clear path to the satellite from your own apartment, they install them on the roof in a place that does. I guess not every place is willing to do that. Some places do install them right outside an apartment/condo window, but some will put them on the roof where anyone in the building who signs up with that satellite service can just be wired into it. It also helps in my apartment complex that our satellite guy is the landlord's nephew. Sometime before I moved in here, he installed satellite dishes in satellite accessable areas of each building in the complex. All he had to do when I moved in was to hook up my receiver that I used in my old apartment since the apartment building was already wired for satellite. From newspamtrap at aol.com Mon Jan 5 02:12:49 2004 From: newspamtrap at aol.com (Trappaspam) Date: Sun Jan 4 21:15:19 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] [media] "New spam law delivers no quick fix" Message-ID: New spam law delivers no quick fix - Chris Gaither - The Boston Globe - Monday, January 5, 2004 SAN FRANCISCO The first federal antispam law in the United States has been in effect for a few days, yet computer inboxes are still cluttered with tacky advertisements and unwanted solicitations. http://www.iht.com/articles/123660.html Regs Jon NS From lykanth at netscape.net Mon Jan 5 02:41:16 2004 From: lykanth at netscape.net (lykanth@netscape.net) Date: Sun Jan 4 21:45:17 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Useful base64 decoder tool: References: Message-ID: Graeme Leith wrote in news:bspr9m$r52$1@news.spamcop.net: > Robb Topolski wrote: > > [snip] >> More and more text of spam messages is obfuscated into base64 to make it >> difficult for humans to read. This tool decodes it. > > Anyone using Mozilla may want to install the Mnenhy plugin. Amongst > other things, it allows you to decode Base64 in the browser, message and > source view windows without any cutting and pasting. Just highlight, > right click and select decode. > > http://mnenhy.mozdev.org/index.html > Bear in mind that you need to make sure that the version of mozilla you're using is compatible with the mnenhy plug-in. (the plug-in is known to make version 1.5 of mozilla to crash and burn on a regular basis) From pwillener at ScPiAnMcCoOmP.com Mon Jan 5 12:04:52 2004 From: pwillener at ScPiAnMcCoOmP.com (Pat Willener) Date: Sun Jan 4 22:05:28 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Why Not Allow More Automated Reporting by SC??? References: Message-ID: "JC-Rules" wrote in message news:btad7r$3a3$1@news.spamcop.net... > > What "other" reporting mistakes are you referring to? If there are other > mistakes being made (excluding reporting myself), then I may be making them > and not knowing it. Any enlightenment offered would be appreciated. The most common mistake is to report messages that are not spam. I made the mistake to report a SpamCop Quick report, and got an appropriate message from a deputy. There was no damage done by this mistake, but I learned how easy it is to mistakenly report something that was clearly not spam. In other cases, perfectly innocent people may lose their emal address or Internet connection due to such mistaken reporting. This is why it is essential that we check each and every message we report. From glnews030922 at highspot.net Sun Jan 4 21:18:17 2004 From: glnews030922 at highspot.net (Graeme Leith) Date: Sun Jan 4 22:15:07 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Useful base64 decoder tool: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: lykanth@netscape.net wrote: > Graeme Leith wrote in > news:bspr9m$r52$1@news.spamcop.net: [snip] >>http://mnenhy.mozdev.org/index.html >> > > > Bear in mind that you need to make sure that the version of mozilla you're > using is compatible with the mnenhy plug-in. (the plug-in is known to make > version 1.5 of mozilla to crash and burn on a regular basis) I noticed that. It's more of a general extension problem with 1.5 than a problem with Mnenhy though. The latest version of the Enigmail extension has a workaround until Moz' is fixed. Upgrading to Enigmail 0.82.6 made the crashes stop for me. So, if you're having Mozilla startup crash problems, installing Enigmail may help you. From the Enigmail ng on Mozdev: Mozilla people finally found the cause for the crashes that occur (mostly at startup) when Enigmail and other extensions are installed -- thanks to dbaron and brendan! There is a bug in Mozilla that will be fixed in one of the next releases. But knowing the reason for the crash, I am able to prevent Enigmail from triggering it, which is why I release this version :-) This version contains just a fix for the mentioned crash, no other changes. It works with Mozilla 1.5, 1.6b, Thunderbird 0.4 and 0.5a. The mirrors should be updated in some hours; if you're impatient, pick the new XPI directly from here: http://downloads.us-east3.mozdev.org/enigmail/enigmail-0.82.6.xpi -- 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 nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 22:16:38 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Sun Jan 4 22:15:29 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Hotmail References: Message-ID: "John Malmberg" wrote in message news:btaag8$o6$1@news.spamcop.net... > Competent mail server operators will prevent the spam from going > through. If the spammers threaten legal action, more mail servers will > go into the quietly drop mode and pretend that they have no idea why it > was not delivered, and will only investigate cases of users complaining > of missing e-mails. I suppose that it is simpler for mail server operators that way, but I would infinitely prefer that the end user had a choice in which black lists were used (or at least be aware that their email is subject to blocking for good reason). Nevertheless, I would expect Hotmail to not tell the end user what was happening no matter what the standards were. Miss Betsy From MikeVieira777 at webtv.net Sun Jan 4 22:47:33 2004 From: MikeVieira777 at webtv.net (Mike Vieira) Date: Sun Jan 4 22:55:05 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Comcast revisited References: <3FF7BA57.FE1E9602@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <9405-3FF8DE55-253@storefull-3174.bay.webtv.net> You know something I am so glad that comcast has been reported here cause I get a lot of spam from them myself I think the webtv staff should talk to comcast & try to work something out & if they cant they should block all mail from that spam producing network. The Comcast staff should be embarresed that so much spam is coming from thier network, if they aren't willing to do something about it then spamcop should blacklist them. Besides webtv other networks should start blocking comcast mail so it can one day become a network for spammers & then they can spam each other for eternity. From Luis at niet.dk Sun Jan 4 22:00:02 2004 From: Luis at niet.dk (Luis) Date: Sun Jan 4 23:05:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). Message-ID: Received: by user2.cybercity.dk (mbox dsl78643) (with Cubic Circle's cucipop (v1.31 1998/05/13) Mon Jan 5 04:52:13 2004) X-From_: service@admin.spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 08:06:17 2004 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dsl78643@vip.cybercity.dk Delivered-To: dsl78643@vip.cybercity.dk Received: from cicero2.cybercity.dk (cicero2.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.53]) by user1.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id C46A074F8D5 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 08:06:17 +0100 (CET) Received: from vmx1.spamcop.net (vmx1.spamcop.net [206.14.107.113]) by cicero2.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CF5318F9BC for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 08:06:17 +0100 (CET) Received: from unknown (HELO spamcop.net) (192.168.11.201) by vmx1.spamcop.net with SMTP; 03 Jan 2004 23:06:15 -0800 X-SpamCop-Return-Path: Delivered-To: spamcop@sc-app1.verio.ironport.com Received: from vmx1.spamcop.net (sc-smtp1.verio.ironport.com [192.168.11.200]) by sc-app1.verio.ironport.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41E17F26B for <552084808@reports.spamcop.net>; Sat, 3 Jan 2004 23:06:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from 54-112.202-68.se.rr.com (68.202.112.54) by vmx1.spamcop.net with SMTP; 03 Jan 2004 23:05:53 -0800 Received: from [206.130.82.117] by 54-112.202-68.se.rr.com with ESMTP id <416305-47230>; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 11:01:34 +0400 Message-ID: From: "Florine Swartz" Reply-To: "Florine Swartz" To: <552084808@reports.spamcop.net> Subject: I found this site that helped me payback my Xmas debt ykm Date: Sun, 04 Jan 04 11:01:34 GMT X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2616 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="5DB_7.D_E0_" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-PMFLAGS: 570950016 0 1 PMIEVMS5.CNM --5DB_7.D_E0_ Content-Type: text/plain; Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Are you a stay at home mom? Do you have 1-4hrs of extra time on your hand= s a week? Do you like to work with your computer. Are you on holidays? Are you unem= ployed. Are you bored with your current job? Are you looking to expore new moneym= aking methods. We've got an easy answer for you. Make money now. Whie you sit there, do= ing nothing, producing nothing, hundreads of our members are earning $10-$= 130USD per hour working from home,using their computer. Cliq below to find out how easy it is to make money with technology: http://www2.2004surveys.com/cgi/click?a=3D330009&s=3D14&p=3D1&banner=3Dlap= 1 Cliq above... No want to make money? Cliq below http://www.addsad.com/rm.html --5DB_7.D_E0_-- From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 22:07:23 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Sun Jan 4 23:10:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Comcast revisited References: <3FF7BA57.FE1E9602@spamcop.net> <3FF8C65F.D2C5D642@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <9nohvvsfui2g9qsl2ek73s0e2f19tr5dmd@4ax.com> On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 20:05:19 -0600, Cat wrote: >Where I live, if there isn't a clear path to the satellite from your own >apartment, they install them on the roof in a place that does. I guess >not every place is willing to do that. Some places do install them right >outside an apartment/condo window, but some will put them on the roof >where anyone in the building who signs up with that satellite service >can just be wired into it. It also helps in my apartment complex that >our satellite guy is the landlord's nephew. Sometime before I moved in >here, he installed satellite dishes in satellite accessable areas of >each building in the complex. All he had to do when I moved in was to >hook up my receiver that I used in my old apartment since the apartment >building was already wired for satellite. Long story... taking it to .social From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 22:11:53 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Cat) Date: Sun Jan 4 23:15:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: Message-ID: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> Luis wrote: > I don't understand why you ignored the "no spam posting" rule at http://spamcop.net/forum.shtml and posted spam here anyway. Please don't do that. The people who read and post here get enough spam of their own without having to see yours in a place where they are promised a spam free environment. If you need to post a copy of spam, please post it only in spamcop.spam then refer to it here. Please cancel your original post since spam does not belong in this newsgroup. From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 22:16:50 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Sun Jan 4 23:20:26 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Too many errors; giving up on SpamCop References: <0bvgvvkfac6el4udghgj4ak4lptbipmmof@4ax.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 21:27:04 +0000 (UTC), Marjolein Katsma wrote: >So, just do that for a bit: take a vacation. When you've recovered, come >back and report some more. There are times when life is more important >than spam reporting. ;-) That's the approach I take, Marjolein. I'll actively report spam for a period of time and when too many other things need attention, I'll back off for a bit. In a way, it has provided a good "check" against spam increases. Nothing, whether I'm actively reporting or not, whether I'm having the system munge the addresses or not, seems to make any difference in the level of spam or type -- slowly, but steadily increasing with most of the same characteristics reported in this forum... From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 22:25:30 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Sun Jan 4 23:30:16 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: [media] "New spam law delivers no quick fix" References: Message-ID: On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 02:12:49 -0000, "Trappaspam" wrote: >New spam law delivers no quick fix About the only encouraging thing in the article is that the senators who wrote the law are asking the FTC to take immediate action... Well, maybe allegedly asking the FTC... We'll have to see what comes of this... in the meantime, I plan on keeping a close eye on things and watching the stats at Spamcop is one way to do so... From Luis at niet.dk Sun Jan 4 22:30:09 2004 From: Luis at niet.dk (Luis) Date: Sun Jan 4 23:35:05 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] And by the way Julian... I think block time frames should be escalating. Message-ID: I have mentioned that before. Not in this formulation: Back then it was a question. Now it is a request. Please! Please!!! In my humble opinion: I'm running into the same IP numbers again and again. Those SMTP hosts that have been blocked over and over again, but some 48 hours after being listed (and subsequently delisted) they appear again. Current practice for white-hat ISP's confronting a Spammer is: One warning, then one yellow card, and then Good Bye. I use Spamcop both on the Input and on the Output side. I do both reporting and use DNS lookup for listed hosts via bl.spamcop.net. But it is becoming extremely boring to find the same hosts re-appearing after not less than 48 hours. Again and again. I think that there should be a penalty for every re-listing with a time factor of at least 1:1.5. Else we have a perpetuum mobile listing-delisting game. Of course, those who use Spamcop on the input AND output side (which is the idea, NOT?) will not report the bugger until it re-surfaces. /Lu From Luis at niet.dk Sun Jan 4 22:47:06 2004 From: Luis at niet.dk (Luis) Date: Sun Jan 4 23:50:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Cat" wrote in message news:3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net... > Luis wrote: > > > > > > I don't understand why you ignored the "no spam posting" rule at > http://spamcop.net/forum.shtml and posted spam here anyway. Please don't > do that. The people who read and post here get enough spam of their own > without having to see yours in a place where they are promised a spam > free environment. If you need to post a copy of spam, please post it > only in spamcop.spam then refer to it here. Please cancel your original > post since spam does not belong in this newsgroup. The rules say: Quote on// No spam. Please do not post copies of spam or other commercials except in the spamcop.spam group specifically designated for it. SpamCop provides "tracking URL"s for posting spam samples. Please use them. Quote off\\ You don't get it. How should I use "tracking URL"s for a message received from: Received: from vmx1.spamcop.net (vmx1.spamcop.net [206.14.107.113]) .... That contains spam? (And which was a reply to a spam report?) How can I both declare my issue here and at the same time stick to the rules. Thank You. From a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa Sun Jan 4 23:48:38 2004 From: a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa (John Malmberg) Date: Sun Jan 4 23:50:23 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: [media] "New spam law delivers no quick fix" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Tom wrote: > About the only encouraging thing in the article is that the senators > who wrote the law are asking the FTC to take immediate action... Well, > maybe allegedly asking the FTC... The FTC does not have the power to fine or jail senators for passing laws that encourage fraudulant practices and discourage effective prevention of such fraud. So it will not be possible for immediate action. This is almost as bad as the do not call list. Why should I have to fill out a form for violations of the do-not-call list? All that should be required is that the telemarketers phone logs from their phone company be audited against it quarterly at the telemarketer's expense, and then the telemarketer would be automatically billed for any matches. All the information that is needed to take action against the telemarketer is already in the billing computer of the phone company that the telemarketer uses. There should be no need for any consumer to file a complaint. While you are asking the Congress people about why they passed a pro-spam bill, ask them why they do not require that the telemarketers pay for the phone company auditing their phone logs against the do-not-call list? -John wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only From usenet1 at DE.LETE.THISljvideo.com Mon Jan 5 05:19:21 2004 From: usenet1 at DE.LETE.THISljvideo.com (Larry Jandro) Date: Mon Jan 5 00:20:15 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OK, I give up - what are they selling?... ;-) References: <3FF89836.2FF90F9A@nowhere.com> Message-ID: Waiving the right to remain silent, "Jeff" said: > I often wonder if these spammers are already rich and are not > really trying to make money at all. A very tiny percentage actually make *real* money. I'm not talking about the jerks who manage to scrape up enough to put a down payment on a $400,000 house. That is not *real* money. Everone within a mile of me lives in a $400,000 house. -- Larry Jandro - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail "Lord, are we worthy of the task that lies before us, or are we just jerking off..?" From nobody at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 23:50:03 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Cat) Date: Mon Jan 5 00:51:44 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <3FF8FB0B.10327223@spamcop.net> Luis wrote: > > "Cat" wrote in message > news:3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net... > > Luis wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I don't understand why you ignored the "no spam posting" rule at > > http://spamcop.net/forum.shtml and posted spam here anyway. > The rules say: > Quote on// > No spam. Please do not post copies of spam or other commercials except in > the spamcop.spam group specifically designated for it. SpamCop provides > "tracking URL"s for posting spam samples. Please use them. > Quote off\\ > > You don't get it. What is it you think that I don't get? I "get it" perfectly well. You are the one who does not "get it." You posted spam here, despite the fact that the posting rules are to post the spam only in the spamcop.spamnewsgroup and refer to it here in the main newsgroup. Why is it so hard for you to post the spam there then post the discussion here? > How should I use "tracking URL"s for a message received from: > > Received: from vmx1.spamcop.net (vmx1.spamcop.net [206.14.107.113]) > > .... That contains spam? (And which was a reply to a spam report?) The tracking URL is the address of the page that comes up when you file the spam report through SpamCop. The tracking URL is the page that shows you details of where to send the SpamCop report. If you don't have one, then there's no need to post it here, but that still doesn't make it ok for you to post the spam here instead of in spamcop.spam where it belongs. > How can I > both declare my issue here and at the same time stick to the rules. Thank > You. Did you not read my previous reply to you? Did you not read the "no spam posting" rule from the forum page that you quoted above? What is so difficult to follow those instructions and post the spam in spamcop.spam where it belongs then post a discussion post about it in this newsgroup? From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 00:00:43 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Cat) Date: Mon Jan 5 01:05:50 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <3FF8FD8B.B1964AF0@spamcop.net> Luis wrote: > > How can I > both declare my issue here and at the same time stick to the rules. Thank > You. I also suggested that you cancel your original spam post since it doesn't belong here, but I see that you haven't done that yet. When you post spam in the wrong newsgroup, that causes everyone else to have to dig through a bunch of annoying spam posts looking for actual discussion, and the people who read the newsgroup through the mailing list also get more spam in their inbox thanks to you. I also don't get why you think someone spammed you as result of sending a spam report since you didn't post any actual request for help and only posted the spam. Are you saying that you reported the spam directly to the spammer, who spammed you in return? If that is so, then you should be more careful about who receives spam complaints from you so that you don't send the complaint directly to the spammer. Or maybe you're saying that the ISP that received the complaint forwarded your complaint to the spammer? If you had posted a clearly worded request for help while posting the spam in spamcop.spam where it belongs, someone might be more willing and able to help you. As it is, I don't see how your spam posting here proves that you received spam as a direct result of a spam complaint, but you did contribute more spam to everyone else's spam load. From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 00:18:38 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (RW) Date: Mon Jan 5 01:25:10 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Why Not Allow More Automated Reporting by SC??? References: Message-ID: <3FF901BE.ABCFDFB2@spamcop.net> JC-Rules wrote: > > Anyone have any idea why SC can't just add a field to our paid member > profile that contains our own ISP information? This would tag any entries > that match our ISP information as not being a spam source and avoid our > inadvertantly reporting ourselves. Then, simply allow us to click ONE TIME > to process and report all qeued spam or at least display a list of all of > our qeued spam in one list for us to review before clicking the "Report > Spam" button ONE TIME to process and report all of them. > > I have been a paying member for a few years now and have also purchased and > tried numerous third party tools to ease the methods of reporting but have > not really been satisfied with any of them. Obviously, several hundreds of > dollars later, I am still getting 2-300 spams per day on average. > > Bottom line is, I think SC should trust us to be responsible for our own > actions. If we do not pay attention and end up reporting ourselves, then it > should be up to us to get it cleared up with our ISP. > > I do not mind paying the money to get the spam reported in hopes of it > someday having a positive effect on reducing the volume. Likewise, I do not > mind spending a reasonable amount of my time to report them. However, my > time is entirely too valuable to continue wasting by having to report each > single spam one at a time. > > FWISW, the new Outlook 2003 spam filtering appears to be the best offered > out there so far. Of course, this only gets it into a Junk Email folder and > still needs to be dealt with. > > Bottom line is... > I should be able to review my Junk Email folder in Outlook 2003 to confirm > that they are all truly "spam". Once I am convinced that they are all truly > spam, I should be able to highlight all of them and click my "SpamSource" > button which grabs them all, forwards them to SC in the format they prefer, > marks them as Read, and then Deletes them. A few minutes later I should > receive the confirmation email from SC advising me that SC has ### spam > emails ready for me to process/report. I should then be able to log into SC > and pull up those same ### emails and review them again in one single list. > I should then be able to click ONE single button to process them all. Who > knows, maybe I am just dreaming... LOL > Julian is working on that... kinda. Not the automated reporting part, beside "Quick Report", but having a database that "knows your mail path" to prevent you from reporting your own servers. ETA isn't known yet, but I'd expect it's within weeks rather than months. Richard From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 00:24:10 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (RW) Date: Mon Jan 5 01:30:48 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: Message-ID: <3FF9030A.6E10419@spamcop.net> Luis wrote: > To: <552084808@reports.spamcop.net> This issue has been dealt with. abuse@accessconx.com will not be receiving any more SpamCop reports (at least directly). Richard From reply at in.news.group Mon Jan 5 00:36:23 2004 From: reply at in.news.group (Mike Vollmer) Date: Mon Jan 5 01:35:46 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Another control freak on the prowl... In a couple of of Cat's other posts this evening he picks at at someone else's spelling and refers to another as "particularly rude and snotty". Try looking in the mirror and improve your own demeanor first. From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 06:32:24 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Mon Jan 5 01:36:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: Message-ID: Martin S (martis.N0sPaM@ntlworld.com) wrote in news:bta9fh$ut2$1 @news.spamcop.net: > If u use sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org the u are querying both Spamhaus and CBL > databases in one query, so makes more sense than doing 2 lookups. That's the Spamhaus combination. But I don't use their SBL. So, again, wy use Spamhaus' XBL instead of the CBL? Both are one lookup, both have the same data. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 00:49:31 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Cat) Date: Mon Jan 5 01:51:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> Mike Vollmer wrote: > > Another control freak on the prowl... You obviously weren't around when the newsgroups were first created and Julian asked the regulars to help keep the newsgroup running smoothly > In a couple of of Cat's other posts > this evening he picks at at someone else's spelling and refers to another as > "particularly rude and snotty". "Cat" is an obvious female name. Try getting it right next time. Automatically assuming that someone using the name Cat is a "he" is about as ridiculous as if someone were to assume you're female despite your name being Mike. Since you mention a "he" though, I guess that means you wouldn't be referring to me. You also should get your facts straight since the "particularly rude and snotty" comment was directed at the idiots running Comcast. Don't twist my words around. It only makes you look pathetic. You're obviously just looking for some excuse to flame me over stupid stuff. > Try looking in the mirror and improve your > own demeanor first. My demeanor is just fine, no thanks to you. As for your own obnoxious behavior when several people asked you to stop top posting, I hardly think you're in any position to give someone else that sort of advice. Oh, and when I do look in the mirror, I see a female, not the male gender you so ignorantly tried to label me with at the beginning of your little flame. From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 00:51:44 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Cat) Date: Mon Jan 5 01:57:23 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <3FF90980.8B2FB404@spamcop.net> Mike Vollmer wrote: > > Another control freak on the prowl... One more thing... Maybe in all your top posting glory, you don't mind sifting through all the spam posts to find a real discussion, but the rest of us who follow the posting rules do mind. From chrispcritters at spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 22:54:05 2004 From: chrispcritters at spamcop.net (Chris Parker) Date: Mon Jan 5 01:57:33 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] X-Postal / The Mad Postman / strong-mail.com Message-ID: Anyone been hit with this one before? Body of the message is garbage. Got about 100 messages in before I got a block up. Bocking something in the neighrnorhood of 100's of messages an hour from them. Looks like a joejober. Must have offended someone... Return-Path: Received: from strong-mail.com (216.34.197.131) by munged with SMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 3.2.2) for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 22:46:47 -0800 XMailer: StrongMail 1.13.12 XMailing-Id: 10000 X-Destination-ID: Message-ID: > To: Subject: ~0!KaP=nVYcJXs=Y4qpBiyv@z- Date: Sun Jan 4 22:40:03 2004 X-Postal: 0.62 - the mad postman. X-Postal: http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ X-Postal: This is not a real email. From: From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 20:03:43 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Anony Mouse) Date: Mon Jan 5 02:06:31 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: No Spam & mail15 spammer References: <3FF87DCB.6070908@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <3FF90C4F.1040402@spamcop.net> JC-Rules wrote: > Not sure what world you are living in, but I am still getting 2-300 per day > on average. > The world were I attack them full on and let them know at every chance what I am doing to them... My inbox has been harassed mostly by the most recidivist offenders. It takes a long and intensive campaign to get the message through however it does get through in the end. (Targeting helps) I have been attacking them for over a year this time and the numbers in my inbox have gone up and down over that period but in the end the results speak for themselves, no spam today in any of the mail boxes I have. Sure they may start up again but I don't think it will be as bad as it was in the past... Do nothing and the numbers build up... Attack and they intensify there spamming to a point but when they find out you are whacking registrars in order to get at them they start getting a bit hesitant about using there intimidation tactics. From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 07:44:18 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Mon Jan 5 02:47:50 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: Message-ID: Bob W. (responseguard@hotmail.com) wrote in news:responseguard-54BA9C.23100304012004@news.spamcop.net: > "Merlyn" wrote: > >> "Marjolein Katsma" wrote in message >> news:Xns9466D6BDE3A49homesitehelp@216.154.195.61... >> > Merlyn (Merlyn@Spamcop.net) wrote in >> > news:bt9re3$8ph$1@news.spamcop.net: >> > >> > > For a few months now the CBL has caught over 50% of our spam with >> > > no false positives. >> > >> > For me it's about 20% of what SCBL caught: _after_ SCBL. >> > >> >> >> Yes! All depends on the checking order :-) > > Life is just too complicated. But statistics is so much fun! ;-) -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From someone at microsoft.com Mon Jan 5 02:44:50 2004 From: someone at microsoft.com (hello) Date: Mon Jan 5 02:48:14 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Another revolving IP address Message-ID: Seen this a couple of times; a spammer using a domain name for which the corresponding IP address shifts constantly. This time it is a relatively unambitious routine; oscillating between two hosts; 64.140.80.134 (icgcom.com) and chinanet (219.149.10.91). www.crockolate.biz Most dynamic one I have ever seen rotated among 5 different hosts at 10-sec intervals, and an hour later it would be 5 completely different hosts (apparently infected servers) From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 08:10:18 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Mon Jan 5 03:17:43 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Cat (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net: > "Cat" is an obvious female name. There's nothing obviously female about "Cat". Took me a long time to figure out what gender you are. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Mon Jan 5 11:01:28 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Mon Jan 5 05:11:53 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: <3FF89546.65A8@xyzzy.claranet.de> Message-ID: On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 18:35:04 -0500, MaddSybil wrote: > Spammer's provider is the injured 'disrupted' party. Good. -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- FAILURE IS NOT AN OPTION. It comes bundled with Microsoft software. From redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com Mon Jan 5 10:03:27 2004 From: redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com (Redstone) Date: Mon Jan 5 05:14:37 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Another revolving IP address References: Message-ID: "hello" wrote in news:btb4li$97g$1@news.spamcop.net: > Seen this a couple of times; a spammer using a domain name for > which the corresponding IP address shifts constantly. This time it > is a relatively unambitious routine; oscillating between two > hosts; 64.140.80.134 (icgcom.com) and chinanet (219.149.10.91). > > www.crockolate.biz > > Most dynamic one I have ever seen rotated among 5 different hosts > at 10-sec intervals, and an hour later it would be 5 completely > different hosts (apparently infected servers) > > > Quite a number of these scamsites hidden on compromised machines. I check to see if I get port 80 response from those IP addresses and report it if I do. From redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com Mon Jan 5 10:13:08 2004 From: redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com (Redstone) Date: Mon Jan 5 05:15:48 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: cubex.net.pk - Gone ??? & PS References: Message-ID: "Trappaspam" wrote in news:bta9ru$vgl$1@news.spamcop.net: > With apologies in advance for the re-post :-) > P.S. Forgot to mention - this October nanae thread with these > idiots. > > START > Spews Admins, > > Our block is listed at spews, needless to mention due to a > spammer's "cubex.net.pk" vicious activies. We had met with > concerned ppl responsible for this and have gotten the assurances > that they would not get invovle in such activities in future. > > Please remove our block 202.125.128.0/19 from your filters. > > Thanks in advance, > Farukh > END > > Rest of thread - for a quick laugh :-) > http://tinyurl.com/yuv3f > > Regs > Jon NS > > > After so much crud out of Cubex's netspace.. I'm inclined to think "Rule #1" before anything else. From redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com Mon Jan 5 10:16:01 2004 From: redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com (Redstone) Date: Mon Jan 5 05:23:55 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OK, I give up - what are they selling?... ;-) References: <3FF89836.2FF90F9A@nowhere.com> Message-ID: GregR wrote in news:3FF89836.2FF90F9A@nowhere.com: > This has got to be the *weirdest* spam I've ever gotten - full > text in .spam under same subject header. Seems like a awful lot of > effort just to dodge message filters, so much that the sales pitch > is basically indecipherable. > > Why anyone in their right mind would wade through all that > gobbelty-gook to order the product is beyond me, but I also > understand that Barnum was an optimist. :-) > > -- Don't you know it's all in French written backwards? :-) From foof at REMOVEherlihy.eu.com Mon Jan 5 10:20:58 2004 From: foof at REMOVEherlihy.eu.com (Philip Herlihy) Date: Mon Jan 5 05:33:35 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] "Header incomplete, aborting. No source IP address found, cannot proceed. Not full header?" Message-ID: But it's all there, clear as day. I use a macro of my own which has been unchanged for over a year. I recently started using SpamPal (which is aware of SpamCop's own blacklist) but I've checked and removed any effect that could have been having. Some adjustment to SpamCop's parsing means it no longer works. -- ###################### ## PH, London ## ###################### From redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com Mon Jan 5 10:24:43 2004 From: redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com (Redstone) Date: Mon Jan 5 05:35:41 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Russian Joe-Job References: Message-ID: "[H]omer" wrote in news:pan.2004.01.04.17.32.54.593071@spamcop.net: > Spam posted in spamcop.spam under same subject. > > I've just been Joe-Jobbed and received a mailer-daemon reject from > mx6.mail.ru. The Spammer used my Spamcop address as the return > address. The spam looks like it was a bulk-mailing to hundreds of > russian addresses. > > The message body looks like it's base64 encoded and is probably in > russian anyway, so I have no idea what it's supposed to be. > > Since I never give out (or directly use) my Spamcop address, for > anything other than forwarding from my primary email account, it's > my guess that this Spammer is just working his way through a > dictionary attack on Spamcop users. Also, due to a new strategy > involving a sub-domain, I haven't received any genuine spam for > months, and have therefore not done any reporting for months, so > this Spammer is probably not reacting to an abuse report ... made > by me anyway. > > Anyone else here seeing these Joe-Jobs? > > How do I go about investigating and reporting the source? > > - > [H]omer Joe-jobs are a bit difficult to stop. (Usually relatively easiest to weather out the storms.) You can examine any bounces you receive to find the source. (Look for the original message itself.. the bounce will usually keep the original headers.) From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Mon Jan 5 11:33:00 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Mon Jan 5 05:36:09 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 08:10:18 +0000, Marjolein Katsma wrote: >> "Cat" is an obvious female name. > > There's nothing obviously female about "Cat". Took me a long time to > figure out what gender you are. Strange. I automatically assumed Cat was female, as in Catherine, Kaitlin, Cathy, Kate... Of course, then there's Cat Stevens who comes along and muddies the waters :) -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- There are three types of people in this world: - Those who can count - Those who can't -- Walter Dnes in NANAE, 2003-JUL-26. From newsgroups at jc-rules.com Mon Jan 5 05:03:43 2004 From: newsgroups at jc-rules.com (JC-Rules) Date: Mon Jan 5 06:05:35 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Why Not Allow More Automated Reporting by SC??? References: Message-ID: "Larry Kilgallen" wrote in message news:xs2buxP425ty@eisner.encompasserve.org... > In article , "JC-Rules" writes: > > Anything else that could be determined by reviewing the spam. > E.g., innocent bystander web sites. Larry, That would be what the one single list of all qeued spam would be for so it could be reviewed before clicking the one single process/report all spam button. Jerry From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 06:17:08 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Mon Jan 5 06:18:20 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Mike Vollmer" wrote in message news:btb0ba$6tf$1@news.spamcop.net... > Another control freak on the prowl... In a couple of of Cat's other posts > this evening he picks at at someone else's spelling and refers to another as > "particularly rude and snotty". Try looking in the mirror and improve your > own demeanor first. > I am not going to debate about Cat's personal characteristics; however, I had no idea why Luis posted or what he wanted. I find the inline/bottom posting to be much better for the conversational style of a newsgroup and the posting of a complete spam to be a nuisance - not everyone needs to see the entire spam to comment. If it is necessary, then there is a place to post it. And even if Luis didn't know about. spam or can't access it for some reason, there was no reason to post the entire spam. Relevant parts would be enough to start a discussion. The question of how he posted is moot since this particular case has been fixed in spamcop, but it is not unusual for abuse desks to pass reports on to the originator and for the spammer to respond with another spam - sometimes with nasty comments embedded in the sender or subject line. Miss Betsy, an almost new internet user From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 07:42:15 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (R. P. McCormick) Date: Mon Jan 5 07:45:29 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: And by the way Julian... I think block time frames should be escalating. References: Message-ID: > I have mentioned that before. Not in this formulation: Back then it was a > question. Now it is a request. Please! Please!!! > > In my humble opinion: I'm running into the same IP numbers again and again. > Those SMTP hosts that have been blocked over and over again, but some 48 > hours after being listed (and subsequently delisted) they appear again. [snip] I agree - and second this request. Is there any (public?!) stats for how many IP's get listed ... then fall off the list - only to be listed again shortly thereafter? Things aren't fixed when hosts get listed and relisted ... Without stats its hard to substantiate ... but I would guess that abused hijacked infected systems (especially those not on the CBL) would tend to show up and disappear - as well as IP addresses that are "allocated" (by IP registries) directly to spammers ... here spammers can spread their spew across a large number of addresses. When you take into consideration that only a small amount of spam is reported through SpamCop - divide that by the spread across lots of IP's ... and my gut feeling is lots falls below the radar. Another consideration: spam a spam trap ... and really get black listed. I have no idea how many traps SpamCop has ... but there just wouldn't ever be any reason to have mail received at those addresses. If a host is seen spamming a spam trap - put them on the SpamCop BL for a good amount of time. And maybe multiply that even more for the number of spam trap receipts. I just feel that the current scheme is outmoded ... maybe it made sense when the biggest vulnerability was an open SMTP relay and an occasional abused open proxy. But today's spam spew exploits need different (more aggressive, longer black listing) schemes to help combat the problem. 48-hours was nice for those who had a legit problem and got it fixed ... but in 2004 - if you've got a problem that results in ME getting spam - you should pay the price ... I see no need for being graceful or lenient! That's my 0.02 worth ... R P McCormick SpamCop user From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 07:41:23 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Ellen) Date: Mon Jan 5 08:10:16 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: Message-ID: "Luis" wrote in message news:btangb$i08$1@news.spamcop.net... > Received: by user2.cybercity.dk (mbox dsl78643) > (with Cubic Circle's cucipop (v1.31 1998/05/13) Mon Jan 5 04:52:13 2004) > X-From_: service@admin.spamcop.net Sun Jan 4 08:06:17 2004 > Return-Path: > X-Original-To: dsl78643@vip.cybercity.dk > Delivered-To: dsl78643@vip.cybercity.dk > Received: from cicero2.cybercity.dk (cicero2.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.53]) > by user1.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id C46A074F8D5 > for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 08:06:17 +0100 (CET) > Received: from vmx1.spamcop.net (vmx1.spamcop.net [206.14.107.113]) > by cicero2.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CF5318F9BC > for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2004 08:06:17 +0100 (CET) > Received: from unknown (HELO spamcop.net) (192.168.11.201) > by vmx1.spamcop.net with SMTP; 03 Jan 2004 23:06:15 -0800 > X-SpamCop-Return-Path: > Delivered-To: spamcop@sc-app1.verio.ironport.com > Received: from vmx1.spamcop.net (sc-smtp1.verio.ironport.com > [192.168.11.200]) > by sc-app1.verio.ironport.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41E17F26B > for <552084808@reports.spamcop.net>; Sat, 3 Jan 2004 23:06:01 -0800 (PST) > Received: from 54-112.202-68.se.rr.com (68.202.112.54) > by vmx1.spamcop.net with SMTP; 03 Jan 2004 23:05:53 -0800 > Received: from [206.130.82.117] by 54-112.202-68.se.rr.com with ESMTP id > <416305-47230>; Sun, 04 Jan 2004 11:01:34 +0400 > Message-ID: > From: "Florine Swartz" > Reply-To: "Florine Swartz" > To: <552084808@reports.spamcop.net> > Subject: I found this site that helped me payback my Xmas debt ykm > Date: Sun, 04 Jan 04 11:01:34 GMT > X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2616 > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > boundary="5DB_7.D_E0_" > X-Priority: 3 > X-MSMail-Priority: Normal > X-PMFLAGS: 570950016 0 1 PMIEVMS5.CNM > > This was sent to a report number address; each report that is sent from the system gets a report number that is unique to that report. The theory is that the ISP getting the report can write to that address if they need to ask you something or to acknowledge the report. It appears that abuse@accessconx.com is passing the reports they receive to the spammer or perhaps they are the spammer and people are now starting to get spam to the report number addresses. abuse@accessconx.com is no longer getting SpamCop reports and the report number email addresses become non-functional after 30 days. The headers will parse just fine and this spam was injected using a RR open proxy. Ellen From michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com Mon Jan 5 13:22:12 2004 From: michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com (Michael Lefevre) Date: Mon Jan 5 08:25:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: And by the way Julian... I think block time frames should be escalating. References: Message-ID: R. P. McCormick wrote: >> I have mentioned that before. Not in this formulation: Back then it was a >> question. Now it is a request. Please! Please!!! >> >> In my humble opinion: I'm running into the same IP numbers again and again. >> Those SMTP hosts that have been blocked over and over again, but some 48 >> hours after being listed (and subsequently delisted) they appear again. > [snip] > > I agree - and second this request. > > Is there any (public?!) stats for how many IP's get listed ... > then fall off the list - only to be listed again shortly thereafter? Nope - those stats haven't been worked out at all as far as I know. > Without stats its hard to substantiate ... but I would guess that > abused hijacked infected systems (especially those not on the CBL) > would tend to show up and disappear Many hijacked systems are on dynamic IPs anyway - I'm not sure longer listing would help with those. Best solution is probably to use a list of dynamic IPs in addition. > - as well as IP addresses > that are "allocated" (by IP registries) directly to spammers ... > here spammers can spread their spew across a large number of > addresses. When you take into consideration that only a small > amount of spam is reported through SpamCop - divide that by > the spread across lots of IP's ... and my gut feeling is lots falls > below the radar. That's probably true as well. However, IPs allocated directly to spammers tend to get listed quite quickly in blocking lists that are aimed at listing blocks allocated to spammers (e.g. SBL), so again probably best solved that way. > Another consideration: spam a spam trap ... and really get black listed. > I have no idea how many traps SpamCop has ... but there just wouldn't > ever be any reason to have mail received at those addresses. If a host > is seen spamming a spam trap - put them on the SpamCop BL for > a good amount of time. And maybe multiply that even more for > the number of spam trap receipts. While there's no really good reason to email a spam trap, the traps do seem to get a fair number of emails that aren't intentional spam (for want of a better description) - list confirmations, mail from lists with no confirmation, bounces from forged spam. Spam traps do result in longer listings. Multiple trap recipients having a multiplying effect on the score might be good though. > I just feel that the current scheme is outmoded ... maybe it made sense > when the biggest vulnerability was an open SMTP relay and an > occasional abused open proxy. But today's spam spew exploits > need different (more aggressive, longer black listing) schemes to > help combat the problem. 48-hours was nice for those who had > a legit problem and got it fixed ... but in 2004 - if you've got a problem > that results in ME getting spam - you should pay the price ... > I see no need for being graceful or lenient! Machines that have ongoing problems tend to stay listed on lists of proxies/relays/trojans (either ones which test, or the CBL). Spamcop's list is already aggressive in what it lists - it's quite possible for an IP to get listed (repeatedly) when it's not actually spamming, and it's also quite possible for an IP to repeatedly have "legit problems". Being less lenient without being more accurate would result in the list catching more spam, but it would also mean the list catching more legit mail. Seems to me it makes more sense to use different strategies rather than attempting to extend Spamcop's existing method to catch everything - Spamcop is very good at quickly catching new sources of spam. If an IP has something about it which means the spam is likely to continue, it will likely get picked up by another list before Spamcop's short-term listing runs out. -- Michael From TMHRVMFWREVN at spammotel.com Mon Jan 5 14:19:15 2004 From: TMHRVMFWREVN at spammotel.com (Canopus) Date: Mon Jan 5 09:25:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Former SpamCop User References: Message-ID: "Mike Easter" wrote in message news:bs1lrl$3et$1@news.spamcop.net... > Nobody wrote: > > I used to use SpamCop religiously about a year ago but quit because it > > seemed that reporting the spam was making the problem much worse (I > > suspect reporting the spam only confirmed it as a valid address). > > SpamCop spam reporting does virtually nothing to reduce your spamload, > if spamload is characterized as incoming spam to be handled or filtered. > *Insecure* spam handling to /feed/ spamcop can increase your spamload > significantly by identifying you as a 'spamreader' - a juicy target. > -- > Mike Easter > This doesn't seem logical. Surely if a spammer could be bothered with investigating who reported them then they would list-wash the person responsible not send them more spam, that is unless they were masochistic and liked getting kicked off IPs and possibly even get prosecuted. Rob From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 09:28:45 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Mon Jan 5 09:30:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Former SpamCop User References: Message-ID: "Canopus" wrote in message news:btbrv9$nbl$2@news.spamcop.net... > > "Mike Easter" wrote in message > news:bs1lrl$3et$1@news.spamcop.net... > > Nobody wrote: > > > I used to use SpamCop religiously about a year ago but quit because it > > > seemed that reporting the spam was making the problem much worse (I > > > suspect reporting the spam only confirmed it as a valid address). > > > > SpamCop spam reporting does virtually nothing to reduce your spamload, > > if spamload is characterized as incoming spam to be handled or filtered. > > *Insecure* spam handling to /feed/ spamcop can increase your spamload > > significantly by identifying you as a 'spamreader' - a juicy target. > > > -- > > Mike Easter > > > > This doesn't seem logical. Surely if a spammer could be bothered with > investigating who reported them then they would list-wash the person > responsible not send them more spam, that is unless they were masochistic > and liked getting kicked off IPs and possibly even get prosecuted. > > Rob > For whatever reason, some spammers do send spam in response to a spam report (see thread "Wow, spammer has guts...") Perhaps it supports the theory that some spammers are not in it for the money, but like virus writers just to wreak havoc. Miss Betsy, an almost new internet user From michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com Mon Jan 5 14:38:55 2004 From: michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com (Michael Lefevre) Date: Mon Jan 5 09:40:18 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Former SpamCop User References: Message-ID: Miss Betsy wrote: > "Canopus" wrote in message > news:btbrv9$nbl$2@news.spamcop.net... >> This doesn't seem logical. Surely if a spammer could be bothered with >> investigating who reported them then they would list-wash the person >> responsible not send them more spam, that is unless they were >> masochistic and liked getting kicked off IPs and possibly even get >> prosecuted. > > For whatever reason, some spammers do send spam in response to a > spam report (see thread "Wow, spammer has guts...") > > Perhaps it supports the theory that some spammers are not in it for > the money, but like virus writers just to wreak havoc. I haven't seen any evidence to support that theory really. All the ridiculous spam (blank messages, messages only random words, spam sent to abuse desks and spamcop reporting addresses) I've seen can be explained by clueless or careless spammers who aren't using their spamming software correctly - sending to the wrong list of addresses, or failing to load the body text of their spam into the software. -- Michael From dilbert84 at hotmail.com Mon Jan 5 10:23:56 2004 From: dilbert84 at hotmail.com (PopRivet) Date: Mon Jan 5 10:25:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: And by the way Julian... I think block time frames should be escalating. References: Message-ID: "Michael Lefevre" wrote in message news:btboe3$gmk$1@news.spamcop.net... | R. P. McCormick wrote: | >> I have mentioned that before. Not in this formulation: Back then it was a | >> question. Now it is a request. Please! Please!!! | >> | >> In my humble opinion: I'm running into the same IP numbers again and again. | >> Those SMTP hosts that have been blocked over and over again, but some 48 | >> hours after being listed (and subsequently delisted) they appear again. | > [snip] | > | > I agree - and second this request. | > | > Is there any (public?!) stats for how many IP's get listed ... | > then fall off the list - only to be listed again shortly thereafter? | | Nope - those stats haven't been worked out at all as far as I know. | | | Being less lenient without being more accurate would result in the list | catching more spam, but it would also mean the list catching more legit | mail. Seems to me it makes more sense to use different strategies rather | than attempting to extend Spamcop's existing method to catch everything - | Spamcop is very good at quickly catching new sources of spam. If an IP | has something about it which means the spam is likely to continue, it will | likely get picked up by another list before Spamcop's short-term listing | runs out. | | -- | Michael Besides, than I'd have to stop telling people that Spamcop isn't their biggest worry, wait til they get to the more un rsponsive lists! And that Spamcop is a gentler, kinder listing but check out the RED FLAGS it should be making you see! THOSE ain't so nice! Or reasonable! Or fair! From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 10:00:15 2004 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Jan 5 10:30:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: <3FF97BFF.2F316EF1@spamcop.net> hello wrote: [...] > I have a simpler theory; legislators don't fully understand the problem, and > are simply acting conservatively in legislating within an area for which > there is no precendence and where the issues are confused by questions of > free speech versus the right to privacy. And legal precedence gives the nod > to advertising as a form of free speech -- it will take some re-thinking to > fully come around to the idea that free speech need not be protected in > cases where the audience is required to pay at the whim of the speaker. The fact that free speech is not protected when the audience is forced to pay for speech it didn't ask for, is already understood. (Note the "junk fax" laws.) What the legislators don't understand is that spam _does_ cost the recipient money. They seem to have fallen for "you pay the same flat rate per month whether you receive the spam or not". The fact that (1) not everyone has flat-rate access, and has to pay for additional connection charges, (2) not everyone has flat-rate phone charges, and has to pay additional phone-line charges for the additional time it takes to download the spam, and (3) even those who play a flat-rate fee are paying a higher fee than they would if spam didn't exist, are what have been missed my the legislators. -- +---------+----------------------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth | kenbrody at spamcop.net | "The opinions expressed | | J. | http://www.hvcomputer.com | herein are not necessarily | | Brody | http://www.fptech.com | those of fP Technologies." | +---------+----------------------------------+-----------------------------+ From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 10:05:24 2004 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Jan 5 10:30:36 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? References: Message-ID: <3FF97D34.5EAD4C36@spamcop.net> John Malmberg wrote: [...] > >>Tell them that you know that the only purpose of the law was to overturn > >>the California anti-spam law that actually had teeth and prevent other > >>states from adopting it. > > > > This was the only purpose? What exactly is the benefit to the representative > > of doing this? > > The DMA and other marketing agencies have been trying to get a law > passed so that they can intimidate ISPs, and Spam Filter vendors to let > their SPEW through. > > The difference in this law, and the reason it was rushed through is that > the California law would have explicitly prohibited the opt-out spam > that Congress just passed a law for. [...] I wonder... If you could prove, via the e-mail headers, that the spam never left the State of California, couldn't you still sue using the Caliornia law? IANAL, but my understanding is that the YOU-CAN-SPAM act gets its power to override state law only because it is dealing with "interstate commerce", which is within the scope of the federal government. If you never leave the state, it's not "interstate commerce". -- +---------+----------------------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth | kenbrody at spamcop.net | "The opinions expressed | | J. | http://www.hvcomputer.com | herein are not necessarily | | Brody | http://www.fptech.com | those of fP Technologies." | +---------+----------------------------------+-----------------------------+ From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 10:16:05 2004 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Jan 5 10:30:48 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: "feature" request - redirect from vww.spamcop.net References: Message-ID: <3FF97FB5.85D3E72D@spamcop.net> Skiwi wrote: [...] > >>Is there a reason that the admin can't set up a web page or DNS redirect > >>from Vww.spamcop.net to www.spamcop.net? [...] When I saw your first post, my reaction was "why?" Then I saw your followup: > In case you didn't see it, the spamcop.COM redirect appears as follows: > > - you type in www.spamcop.com to your browser > > - it redirects to vww.spamcop.com, but you may not notice the 'v' > instead of the 'w' > > - you manually edit the URL in your browser by typing "net" to replace > the "com" > > - it tells you spamcop.net can not be found; you *think* that it is > referring to www.spamcop.net, but your browser was in fact looking for > vww.spamcop.net - hence the "false" redirect.. Now that's just plain nasty on spamcop.COM's part. (Wondering out loud...) Since NetSol was able to wildcard *.com and *.net to go to them, is it possible to wildcard *.spamcop.net to redirect to www.spamcop.net as well? -- +---------+----------------------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth | kenbrody at spamcop.net | "The opinions expressed | | J. | http://www.hvcomputer.com | herein are not necessarily | | Brody | http://www.fptech.com | those of fP Technologies." | +---------+----------------------------------+-----------------------------+ From spamtrap at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 08:43:47 2004 From: spamtrap at spamcop.net (Spam Trap) Date: Mon Jan 5 10:45:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: Message-ID: On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 07:41:23 -0500, "Ellen" wrote: ... > abuse@accessconx.com is no longer getting SpamCop reports ... Yay! Thank you, thank you, thank you! -- A user, not a reporting address... From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 11:06:05 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Jan 5 11:10:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: How to get your post read: top posting/bottom posting/inline References: <200401021514.1aCvGn7E23Nl3oX0@new.mail.atl.earthlink.net> Message-ID: "Trish Roberts-Miller" wrote in message news:mailman.86.1073086793.14687.spamcop-list@news.spamcop.net... > If you want good advice on writing technical reports, Joseph Williams' > _Style: Ten Lessons in Clarity and Grace_ is GREAT. > Heh. While I was working in a research lab and going to school part time I wrote a report for my engineer on an test I ran and to kill two birds with one stone I submitted the same report to my prof in the Technical Writing course I was taking. He gave me a "C" because it was "too technical to be understood by the average person". Fscking moron. Tech reports aren't MEANT to be read and understood by people on the street! From spamcop-list-at-news.spamcop.net at musaic.net Mon Jan 5 17:26:58 2004 From: spamcop-list-at-news.spamcop.net at musaic.net (St - Musaic.Net) Date: Mon Jan 5 11:27:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Will the new U.S. spam law help that starts as of today? In-Reply-To: <3FF97BFF.2F316EF1@spamcop.net> References: <3FF97BFF.2F316EF1@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <1198537991.20040105172658@musaic.net> > What the legislators don't understand is that spam _does_ cost the > recipient money. They seem to have fallen for "you pay the same flat > rate per month whether you receive the spam or not". The fact that > (1) not everyone has flat-rate access, and has to pay for additional > connection charges, (2) not everyone has flat-rate phone charges, and > has to pay additional phone-line charges for the additional time it > takes to download the spam, and (3) even those who play a flat-rate > fee are paying a higher fee than they would if spam didn't exist, are > what have been missed my the legislators. Exactly! Imagine: Third World - Internet Caf? - Flat Rate? Forget It! In some countries people are relying on Internet Caf?s - that is their only means of connecting to the Internet! Sitting there having to wade thru all that spam - well, rest assured it is a considerable problem! I have seen it - I have experienced it - and I hate it! -- St From wayne at midwestcs.com Mon Jan 5 10:47:35 2004 From: wayne at midwestcs.com (wayne) Date: Mon Jan 5 11:50:54 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: And by the way Julian... I think block time frames should be escalating. References: Message-ID: In Michael Lefevre writes: > Many hijacked systems are on dynamic IPs anyway - I'm not sure longer > listing would help with those. Best solution is probably to use a list of > dynamic IPs in addition. I'm not sure that I see the point of worrying about whether the IP address is "dynamic" or not. Most dialups are very dynamic, the users of each phone line will change far more frequently than the 48hr listing. Anyone sharing a modem pool with spammers is going to have problems anyway, so an exponentially increasing listing period isn't going to make much difference. Most cable/ADSL users have DHCP tickets that almost never timeout. They are almost static, but not static enough to "safely" run a well known server on. Again, an exponentially increasing listing period is quite appropriate. > That's probably true as well. However, IPs allocated directly to spammers > tend to get listed quite quickly in blocking lists that are aimed at > listing blocks allocated to spammers (e.g. SBL), so again probably best > solved that way. The SBL only lists folks that have been "kicked off of three ISPs", SPEWs lists spammers and IP blocks owned by spam-friendly ISPs, many of the other DNSBLs have equally varying criteria for listing. Having the SCBL use an exponentially increasing listing period would not be a major change in its policy and I don't see other DSNBLs with a close enough match to the SCBL criteria to be a good substitute. > Being less lenient without being more accurate would result in the list > catching more spam, but it would also mean the list catching more legit > mail. Very true. > Seems to me it makes more sense to use different strategies rather > than attempting to extend Spamcop's existing method to catch everything - > Spamcop is very good at quickly catching new sources of spam. If an IP > has something about it which means the spam is likely to continue, it will > likely get picked up by another list before Spamcop's short-term listing > runs out. I disagree with this conclusion, however. -wayne From wayne at midwestcs.com Mon Jan 5 10:51:11 2004 From: wayne at midwestcs.com (wayne) Date: Mon Jan 5 11:55:19 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: "feature" request - redirect from vww.spamcop.net References: <3FF97FB5.85D3E72D@spamcop.net> Message-ID: In <3FF97FB5.85D3E72D@spamcop.net> Kenneth Brody writes: > Now that's just plain nasty on spamcop.COM's part. Agreed. The Vww.spamcop.COM redirect is a pretty clear sign that the .com is not another "anti-spammer", but a sleezy organization that is just trying to leverage SpamCop's good name and cause confusion. > Since NetSol was able to wildcard *.com and *.net to go to them, is it > possible to wildcard *.spamcop.net to redirect to www.spamcop.net as > well? Yes, it is very easy to add a wildcard, although I'm not so sure that it is a good idea. There are already other domains under spamcop.NET that do different things, such as mailsc.spamcop.net and members.spamcop.net. The Vww.spamcop.net domain is a special case. -wayne From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 12:09:44 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Jan 5 12:10:28 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DIA55.US Dutch registration info References: Message-ID: "Antoine J. Mechelynck" wrote in message news:bt5dvi$b5j$1@news.spamcop.net... > "Mike Easter" a crit dans le message de > news:bt5d92$a77$1@news.spamcop.net > [...] > > 'semaphones' [what's a semaphone?] > [...] > > I think it's called a "pager" in the US. They were put into service before cell > phones. A portable device, about the size of a cell phone, where you can receive > a numeric code (telling you, for instance, whom to call back). They could (can) > be called from the phone network and could not (cannot) transmit. > My Archwireless pager has a limited ability to transmit if it receives an _emailed_ pager message....there's a choice of about 15 common responses. I'd still classify it as a pager, it's certainly not anything like a Blackberry. From glnews030922 at highspot.net Mon Jan 5 11:16:14 2004 From: glnews030922 at highspot.net (Graeme Leith) Date: Mon Jan 5 12:15:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Another revolving IP address In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: hello wrote: > Seen this a couple of times; a spammer using a domain name for which the > corresponding IP address shifts constantly. This time it is a relatively > unambitious routine; oscillating between two hosts; 64.140.80.134 > (icgcom.com) and chinanet (219.149.10.91). > > www.crockolate.biz > > Most dynamic one I have ever seen rotated among 5 different hosts at 10-sec > intervals, and an hour later it would be 5 completely different hosts > (apparently infected servers) Visit the URL above and it only takes you to a test page. You need the full URL from the spam to visit the site proper. If you actually load up the page sent in the spam and click the order link, you'll find that the target is always hosted on Level3. Usually, but not always, in the teenie69.com domain. http://www.spamhaus.org/SBL/sbl.lasso?query=SBL9658 -- 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 michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com Mon Jan 5 17:16:37 2004 From: michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com (Michael Lefevre) Date: Mon Jan 5 12:20:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: And by the way Julian... I think block time frames should be escalating. References: Message-ID: wayne wrote: > In Michael Lefevre writes: > >> Many hijacked systems are on dynamic IPs anyway - I'm not sure longer >> listing would help with those. Best solution is probably to use a list of >> dynamic IPs in addition. > > I'm not sure that I see the point of worrying about whether the IP > address is "dynamic" or not. > > Most dialups are very dynamic, the users of each phone line will > change far more frequently than the 48hr listing. Anyone sharing a > modem pool with spammers is going to have problems anyway, so an > exponentially increasing listing period isn't going to make much > difference. To blocking spam it won't, no - it will increase the chances of people sharing modem pools with exploitable machines getting listed, and I don't think there are too many dialup ISPs out there which don't have some customers with open machines. > Most cable/ADSL users have DHCP tickets that almost never timeout. > They are almost static, but not static enough to "safely" run a well > known server on. Again, an exponentially increasing listing period > is quite appropriate. But not necessary - if the IPs are not static enough to "safely" run a well known server, then they shouldn't be sending email directly anyway, so it's easier just to block the whole lot. > The SBL only lists folks that have been "kicked off of three ISPs", No it doesn't, that's ROKSO. The SBL lists non-ROKSO spammers as well. > SPEWs lists spammers and IP blocks owned by spam-friendly ISPs, many > of the other DNSBLs have equally varying criteria for listing. > > Having the SCBL use an exponentially increasing listing period would > not be a major change in its policy and I don't see other DSNBLs with > a close enough match to the SCBL criteria to be a good substitute. They wouldn't be an exact substitute, no. But some ISP mail servers and confirmed opt-in mailing lists get listed from time to time. Penalising repeat listings would increase the changes of those servers being listed for longer. >> Being less lenient without being more accurate would result in the list >> catching more spam, but it would also mean the list catching more legit >> mail. > > Very true. > >> Seems to me it makes more sense to use different strategies rather >> than attempting to extend Spamcop's existing method to catch everything - >> Spamcop is very good at quickly catching new sources of spam. If an IP >> has something about it which means the spam is likely to continue, it will >> likely get picked up by another list before Spamcop's short-term listing >> runs out. > > I disagree with this conclusion, however. I'll accept that this change would catch more spam with SCBL, but you have to balance that against the false positives. Spamcop already has more false positives than most other lists - using the same methods but applying longer listings would increase the false positives as much as it increased the spam blocking, and some of the spam blocking is made redundant by other lists - I don't think that's an overall improvement. But that's just my opinion... -- Michael From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 12:22:18 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Mon Jan 5 12:25:19 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Former SpamCop User References: Message-ID: "Michael Lefevre" wrote in message news:btbstv$nm4$1@news.spamcop.net... > Miss Betsy wrote: > > "Canopus" wrote in message > > news:btbrv9$nbl$2@news.spamcop.net... > > >> This doesn't seem logical. Surely if a spammer could be bothered with > >> investigating who reported them then they would list-wash the person > >> responsible not send them more spam, that is unless they were > >> masochistic and liked getting kicked off IPs and possibly even get > >> prosecuted. > > > > For whatever reason, some spammers do send spam in response to a > > spam report (see thread "Wow, spammer has guts...") > > > > Perhaps it supports the theory that some spammers are not in it for > > the money, but like virus writers just to wreak havoc. > > I haven't seen any evidence to support that theory really. All the > ridiculous spam (blank messages, messages only random words, spam sent to > abuse desks and spamcop reporting addresses) I've seen can be explained by > clueless or careless spammers who aren't using their spamming software > correctly - sending to the wrong list of addresses, or failing to load the > body text of their spam into the software. > So what's your guess at why a spammer would spam a spam reporter's reporting address - usually in response to a spam report - sometimes with a "message" hidden in the sender or subject? Miss Betsy From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 12:35:17 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Jan 5 12:40:37 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports References: Message-ID: "Jeff" wrote in message news:bta3ik$leu$1@news.spamcop.net... > "Michael Lefevre" wrote in message > news:bt94ng$97f$1@news.spamcop.net... > > Except that under the new law, you have no right to take action, unless > > you're an ISP. Depending which state law you're referring to, the new law > > may actually mean you don't have a right of action when you did before. > > > > -- > > Michael > > You know, you've repeatedly tried to discourage me from taking action > against the spammers in all of your replies to me, and you've done nothing > to offer any positive advice. I'm sure the spammers appreciate that, but > don't like that at all. Michael is just speaking the truth, if you don't like it, tough. Ignore his advice and make all the cartooneys you want, you're the one who'll come off looking like a loon. > > By the way, your reply above is total BULLSHIT! I'm not even going to waste > my time explaining why. > > Again, he speaks wisely. You, as a private citizen, no longer have the right to sue spammers under the U-CAN-SPAM law. From michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com Mon Jan 5 17:43:14 2004 From: michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com (Michael Lefevre) Date: Mon Jan 5 12:45:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Former SpamCop User References: Message-ID: Miss Betsy wrote: > "Michael Lefevre" wrote in > message news:btbstv$nm4$1@news.spamcop.net... >> Miss Betsy wrote: [snip] > > So what's your guess at why a spammer would spam a spam reporter's > reporting address - usually in response to a spam report - sometimes > with a "message" hidden in the sender or subject? My guess is either they're not aiming to spam a spam reporter particularly, they're just aiming to spam a whole load of addresses, and they're stupid/careless enough to include the spamcop reporting addresses in there. Or alternatively they're running joe-jobs to get people to report innocent stuff (actually I guess that would fall into what you're talking about - spamming not to benefit themselves, but to attack someone else...) -- Michael From RobertTaylor at SpamCop.net Mon Jan 5 12:51:31 2004 From: RobertTaylor at SpamCop.net (Robert Taylor) Date: Mon Jan 5 12:56:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: In news:Xns94675D4D09EB8homesitehelp@216.154.195.61, Marjolein Katsma sent: > Cat (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net: > >> "Cat" is an obvious female name. > > There's nothing obviously female about "Cat". Took me a long time to > figure out what gender you are. [] If memory serves, "cat": Italian: "il gatto"; masculine noun. Spanish: "el gato"; masculine noun. French: "le chat"; masculine noun. There must be others (not German ("die Katze"). English, perversely, is not gender-specific about much of anything (should we infer some deep truth from this?). The above are just a few that come to mind. Dutch--I forget. Marjolean(?). Regards, Robert -- eMail: RobertTaylor@SpamCop.net Web-Address: http://users.rcn.com/robertt.nh.ultranet/Web-SitePg1.htm NOTARY SOJAC (Dizzy Gillespie, Prop.) From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Mon Jan 5 11:57:44 2004 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Mon Jan 5 13:00:31 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports References: Message-ID: In article , "indigo" writes: > Again, he speaks wisely. You, as a private citizen, no longer have the right > to sue spammers under the U-CAN-SPAM law. Before there was a CAN-SPAM law, nobody had a right to sue under it. The CAN-SPAM law has taken away the right to sue under certain stronger state spamfighting laws. I have seen nothing to indicate any dimunition of rights to sue on other bases, such as the tricky Trespass to Chattels route. From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 13:14:54 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Mon Jan 5 13:15:38 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports References: Message-ID: "Larry Kilgallen" wrote in message news:vFBQQBM+T$qP@eisner.encompasserve.org... > In article , "indigo" writes: > > > Again, he speaks wisely. You, as a private citizen, no longer have the right > > to sue spammers under the U-CAN-SPAM law. > > Before there was a CAN-SPAM law, nobody had a right to sue under it. > The CAN-SPAM law has taken away the right to sue under certain stronger > state spamfighting laws. > Your two sentences seem to be in opposition with themselves.......residents of certain states certainly *did* have the right to sue before the fed law superceded their states laws. From user at domain.invalid Mon Jan 5 20:19:10 2004 From: user at domain.invalid (user@domain.invalid) Date: Mon Jan 5 13:20:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] is it helpfull ? Message-ID: <3FF9AA9E.4070203@domain.invalid> Hi, is it helpfull to report via spamcop ? It really seems that spam mail is increasing therafter (subjective). Take for instance http://www.pharmacourt.biz, 211.158.7.147 spamcop reports to: De-referencing cqnet.com.cn@abuse.net abuse net cqnet.com.cn = postmaster@cqnet.com.cn, service@cqnet.com.cn Report routing for 211.158.7.147: postmaster@cqnet.com.cn, service@cqnet.com.cn However, those e-mail addresses don't exist and bounce back. Another thought in such a case of spamming which is by far the majority: over 98% of spam I receive are directly linked to some sort of sales scams via a website. Therefore it is useless to pursue thousands of "affiliates" which spam you, one has to takkle the beneficiary, the spam initiating website. I am not amused any more to read everytime "Yum, this spam is fresh" if I am dealing ALWAYS with the same old beneficiary. In the case of pharmacourt however the network were the spam website resides will never be reached by spamcop: inetnum: 211.158.0.0 - 211.158.31.255 netname: CQNET country: CN descr: Chongqing CNC BoardBand Networks Co.,Ltd. admin-c: IPAS1-AP admin-c: PF20-AP tech-c: PF20-AP status: ALLOCATED PORTABLE changed: pengxm@cqnet.com.cn 20030815 mnt-by: MAINT-CNNIC-AP source: APNIC role: CNNIC IPAS CONFEDERATION address: No.4, Zhongguancun No.4 South Street, Haidian District, Beijing country: CN phone: +86-10-62553604 fax-no: +86-10-62559892 e-mail: ipas@cnnic.net.cn admin-c: LW152-AP tech-c: LY220-AP nic-hdl: IPAS1-AP mnt-by: MAINT-CNNIC-AP changed: ipas@cnnic.net.cn 20020910 source: APNIC person: Peng Frank nic-hdl: PF20-AP e-mail: pengxm@cqnet.com.cn address: 21/f Dushi Plaza,No.39 Wusi Road Yuzhong Dist. Chongqing phone: +86-23-69089900-616 fax-no: +86-23-63782270 country: CN changed: pengxm@cqnet.com.cn 20021128 mnt-by: MAINT-CNNIC-AP source: APNIC From wb8tyw at qsl.network Mon Jan 5 12:25:10 2004 From: wb8tyw at qsl.network (John E. Malmberg) Date: Mon Jan 5 13:34:41 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Former SpamCop User References: Message-ID: In article , "Miss Betsy" writes: > > So what's your guess at why a spammer would spam a spam reporter's > reporting address - usually in response to a spam report - sometimes > with a "message" hidden in the sender or subject? To drive the point home that the spam report did not result in any action by the ISP hosting the spammer, and to try to convince the spam reporter that they are wasting their time reporting it. This was the behavior of a pump and dump spammer that was targeting me on several e-mail addresses. They put several obvious ones I.D. codes in the header and in the spam. One of my postmasters sent a LART to them, and got an immediate blast of spam back. That of course was the last spam that e-mail account got from that spammer until he activated a new I.P. block. Shortly after that Spamhaus.org seemed to have found all his fixed I.P. addresses. On spam from that same spammer to my broadband account, if I missed an ID code, I would receive with in 72 hours what spamcop.net identified as a virus from a AOL or Earthlink account. These were the only viruses that have ever been sent to that account, even through the major outbreaks. There was definitely a cause and effect. The spam came from "Investor Insights", and when it was coming from fixed I.P. addresses, Spamhaus.org identified the owner of the range to be Eddy Marin. Contrary to their intent, these little tantrums indicate that the spammers are bothered by spamcop.net reports. -John wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only From wb8tyw at qsl.network Mon Jan 5 12:33:00 2004 From: wb8tyw at qsl.network (John E. Malmberg) Date: Mon Jan 5 13:40:05 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Former SpamCop User References: Message-ID: In article , "Canopus" writes: > > "Mike Easter" wrote in message >> >> SpamCop spam reporting does virtually nothing to reduce your spamload, >> if spamload is characterized as incoming spam to be handled or filtered. >> *Insecure* spam handling to /feed/ spamcop can increase your spamload >> significantly by identifying you as a 'spamreader' - a juicy target. > > This doesn't seem logical. Surely if a spammer could be bothered with > investigating who reported them then they would list-wash the person > responsible not send them more spam, that is unless they were masochistic > and liked getting kicked off IPs and possibly even get prosecuted. What Mike is refering to is that if your e-mail client has any scripting enabled, or will automatically open links in e-mail to display pictures or other content, you are telling the spammer that his spew is getting through. It just takes one user on your ISP have their browser configured that way for the spammer to know that your ISP is letting the spew through to all their users. If your web browser is tied into your e-mail client, it can be giving your e-mail address out to every web site that you visit, including those that spam triggers your e-mail program to visit. It may also be giving out other personal information to assist a spammer. One spammer trick was to put javascript in the e-mail to make it look like the receiver clicked a banner link to a porn site. All you had to do is open the e-mail on a mail client with scripting enabled and the spammer got paid. And as I pointed out in another response, a spammer will try to make it look like your spam reports will not affect them, in order to intimidate you to give up. -John wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Mon Jan 5 12:40:59 2004 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Mon Jan 5 13:45:18 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports References: Message-ID: In article , "indigo" writes: > > "Larry Kilgallen" wrote in message > news:vFBQQBM+T$qP@eisner.encompasserve.org... >> In article , "indigo" > writes: >> >> > Again, he speaks wisely. You, as a private citizen, no longer have the > right >> > to sue spammers under the U-CAN-SPAM law. >> >> Before there was a CAN-SPAM law, nobody had a right to sue under it. >> The CAN-SPAM law has taken away the right to sue under certain stronger >> state spamfighting laws. >> > > Your two sentences seem to be in opposition with themselves.......residents > of certain states certainly *did* have the right to sue before the fed law > superceded their states laws. You need to read my first sentence more carefully, and reconsider the placement of your prepositional phrase "under the U-CAN-SPAM law". A bit more attention to grammar would be better than the effort coming up with politically charged names for objectionable legislation. From MikeE at ster.invalid Mon Jan 5 10:41:54 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Mon Jan 5 13:50:19 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Former SpamCop User References: Message-ID: Canopus wrote: > "Mike Easter" >> Nobody wrote: >>> I used to use SpamCop religiously about a year ago but quit because >>> it seemed that reporting the spam was making the problem much worse >>> (I suspect reporting the spam only confirmed it as a valid address). >> >> SpamCop spam reporting does virtually nothing to reduce your >> spamload, if spamload is characterized as incoming spam to be >> handled or filtered. *Insecure* spam handling to /feed/ spamcop can >> increase your spamload significantly by identifying you as a >> 'spamreader' - a juicy target. -- >> Mike Easter >> > > This doesn't seem logical. If we are talking about /my/ cite, /what/ doesn't seem logical? What I sed was -1- spamcop reporting does nothing to reduce your spam and -2- insecure spam handling can increase your spam. What isn't logical, that spamcop does nothing to reduce spam or insecure spam handling can increase spam? Or maybe my cite had nothing to do with what you are talking about. > Surely if a spammer could be bothered with > investigating who reported them then they would list-wash the person > responsible not send them more spam, In this sentence you aren't saying anything about what I sed, but it seems you are saying to the original poster that it doesn't seem logical that "reporting the spam was making the problem much worse (I suspect reporting the spam only confirmed it as a valid address)." In which case we don't disagree about anything I sed and I have no idea why you included my cite to make your point, since it seems to be addressed to the original poster, not me. Some how my cite is getting dragged into discussions in this thread which have nothing to do with what I sed, because it is sometimes being attached to your cite of my cite. -- Mike Easter From michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com Mon Jan 5 18:46:03 2004 From: michael.spamcop at michaellefevre.com (Michael Lefevre) Date: Mon Jan 5 13:50:33 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: is it helpfull ? References: <3FF9AA9E.4070203@domain.invalid> Message-ID: user@domain.invalid wrote: > Hi, > is it helpfull to report via spamcop ? [snip] > Take for instance http://www.pharmacourt.biz, 211.158.7.147 > > spamcop reports to: > De-referencing cqnet.com.cn@abuse.net [snip] > I am dealing ALWAYS with the same old beneficiary. > In the case of pharmacourt however the network were the spam website > resides will never be reached by spamcop: > > inetnum: 211.158.0.0 - 211.158.31.255 > netname: CQNET > country: CN > descr: Chongqing CNC BoardBand Networks Co.,Ltd. [snip] It's a fair point. This spammer is Alan Ralsky (read about him at http://www.spamhaus.org/rokso/evidence.lasso?rokso_id=ROK1290 ). Reporting his spam with Spamcop will get whatever "fresh" and insecure machine is being used to relay/proxy the spam to its destination. There's not a lot that can be done aside from that, unless some US authority wants to try and get him with the new law. He's got 20 or more different IP ranges from CQnet in China. Following their escalation procedures, the SBL listed first his blocks, then CQnet's corporate email relays, and finally the entire of CQnet. The whole of (or most of) CQnet is also on SPEWS, the SORBS list and others and has been for a couple of months. One would hope that the fact that CQnet users weren't able to send any email to much of the rest of the world would cause them to take action (it has with other Chinese providers over previous months), but apparently not yet this bunch. The only further technical step against them would be blocking all connectivity rather than just email, but nobody seems to do that any more. What your reporting is achieving is collecting stats about his spamming (which are useful in convincing people to take action), and reporting and blocking the insecure machines that are being abused. -- Michael From MikeE at ster.invalid Mon Jan 5 10:50:12 2004 From: MikeE at ster.invalid (Mike Easter) Date: Mon Jan 5 13:55:18 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: is it helpfull ? References: <3FF9AA9E.4070203@domain.invalid> Message-ID: user@domain.invalid wrote: > is it helpfull to report via spamcop ? > It really seems that spam mail is increasing therafter (subjective). A 'normal' spamcop report causes the source IP to get counted toward the SCbl, causes any relays to be submitted to open relay testing databases, notifies the provider of any spamvertised site of the issue. Some spamvertiser providers are unresponsive, are listed in spews and spamhaus, and aren't very interested in spamcop reports or any other kind. Some 'spamhandlers' who feed spamcop do so insecurely and thus are 'webbugged' and identified as an address which opens and reads spam and thus get more spam. Some spam reporters are also 'spam respondents' and open and read and respond to some spams. They are identified as /both/ spam openers and spam link clickers and get more spam on that basis as well. They are also spam profit makers and are contributory to the spam problem. -- Mike Easter From billk at no.spam Mon Jan 5 11:29:53 2004 From: billk at no.spam (Bill K.) Date: Mon Jan 5 14:30:17 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: SC tricked with too many invalid links In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > Bill K. wrote: > > http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z239581191z6250625e8e6bab702ae8201286aaaba6 > z > >>Only the http://www.easy5544.com/yt4/ listed seems legitimate. > > > Trackers only display the header parse, not the body. If you want to > discuss body parsing the entire spam item, including complete headers, > should be posted in spamcop.spam, *not* here, and discussed here, not > there. > Okay. Here it is. news: From billk at no.spam Mon Jan 5 11:30:35 2004 From: billk at no.spam (Bill K.) Date: Mon Jan 5 14:35:08 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: SC tricked with too many invalid links In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > Bill K. wrote: > > http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z239581191z6250625e8e6bab702ae8201286aaaba6 > z > >>Only the http://www.easy5544.com/yt4/ listed seems legitimate. > > > Trackers only display the header parse, not the body. If you want to > discuss body parsing the entire spam item, including complete headers, > should be posted in spamcop.spam, *not* here, and discussed here, not > there. > Okay. Here it is. news:btcdnb$ib4$1@news.spamcop.net From billk at no.spam Mon Jan 5 11:40:54 2004 From: billk at no.spam (Bill K.) Date: Mon Jan 5 14:45:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: SC tricked with too many invalid links In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Easter wrote: > Bill K. wrote: > > http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z239581191z6250625e8e6bab702ae8201286aaaba6 > z > >>Only the http://www.easy5544.com/yt4/ listed seems legitimate. > > > Trackers only display the header parse, not the body. If you want to > discuss body parsing the entire spam item, including complete headers, > should be posted in spamcop.spam, *not* here, and discussed here, not > there. > Okay. Here it is. news://news.spamcop.net:119/btcdnb$ib4$1@news.spamcop.net From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 14:37:26 2004 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Jan 5 14:50:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: "feature" request - redirect from vww.spamcop.net References: Message-ID: <3FF9BCF6.6921DDE1@spamcop.net> wayne wrote: [...] > > Since NetSol was able to wildcard *.com and *.net to go to them, is it > > possible to wildcard *.spamcop.net to redirect to www.spamcop.net as > > well? > > Yes, it is very easy to add a wildcard, although I'm not so sure that > it is a good idea. There are already other domains under spamcop.NET > that do different things, such as mailsc.spamcop.net and > members.spamcop.net. The Vww.spamcop.net domain is a special case. (And next week it'll be wVw, and then wwV, and then wVVw, and so on.) Well, wildcarding only kicks in (as I understand it) when the real lookup fails, so the others would still work as expected (if spelled correctly). Perhaps *.spamcop.net could redirect to a "you made a typo, here's a list of valid names, which one did you want" page? -- +---------+----------------------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth | kenbrody at spamcop.net | "The opinions expressed | | J. | http://www.hvcomputer.com | herein are not necessarily | | Brody | http://www.fptech.com | those of fP Technologies." | +---------+----------------------------------+-----------------------------+ From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 14:44:19 2004 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Jan 5 14:50:37 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports References: Message-ID: <3FF9BE93.FA5C53A2@spamcop.net> indigo wrote: > > "Larry Kilgallen" wrote in message > news:vFBQQBM+T$qP@eisner.encompasserve.org... > > In article , "indigo" > writes: > > > > > Again, he speaks wisely. You, as a private citizen, no longer have the > > > right to sue spammers under the U-CAN-SPAM law. > > > > Before there was a CAN-SPAM law, nobody had a right to sue under it. > > The CAN-SPAM law has taken away the right to sue under certain stronger > > state spamfighting laws. > > > > Your two sentences seem to be in opposition with themselves.......residents > of certain states certainly *did* have the right to sue before the fed law > superceded their states laws. He's playing with semantics. You stated that you "no longer have the right to sue spammers under the U-CAN-SPAM law". He's stating that you never did have the right to sue "under the U-CAN-SPAM law" in the first place. In other words, a "better" wording would have been: Under the U-CAN-SPAM law, you, as a private citizen, no longer have the right to sue spammers. -- +---------+----------------------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth | kenbrody at spamcop.net | "The opinions expressed | | J. | http://www.hvcomputer.com | herein are not necessarily | | Brody | http://www.fptech.com | those of fP Technologies." | +---------+----------------------------------+-----------------------------+ From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 14:50:06 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Mon Jan 5 14:50:48 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Former SpamCop User References: Message-ID: "John E. Malmberg" wrote in message news:i3G+uhbxrX7j@eisner.encompasserve.org... > Contrary to their intent, these little tantrums indicate that the spammers > are bothered by spamcop.net reports. > My experience was with manual larts mostly. does Eddie Marin actually sell a product? Or does he trade lists and scam other businesses into using his spammer service? Is there any legitimate product sold via spam any more? (and I don't count those companies that take forever to unsubscribe and sign you up for several lists without giving you a choice. IMHO, while blacklists are good to get their attention - if they ever do - it will take a broad consumer revolt before they shape up - it is a different category of spam that takes different approaches to solve). I really think for somebody engaged in business that deliberately sending viruses is a risky business - especially if they are on the edge of being legitimate. Miss Betsy From sph at sph.dk Mon Jan 5 20:49:01 2004 From: sph at sph.dk (sph) Date: Mon Jan 5 14:50:56 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Comcast revisited References: <3FF7BA57.FE1E9602@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Cat" wrote: > Anyway, I really need a Comcast bitch list so that my spam complaints > will hopefully get through to someone with half a brain cell. If anyone > here has a Comcast bitch list, please post it here. I just wondered. What do you mean by a bitch list?. Do you mean a list of "good" bitches who will take promt action against spammers, or do you mean a list of "bad" bitches?(which possibly could be someone like you spoke to at comcast). Not that Im capable of providnig any of those lists. From nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de Mon Jan 5 20:51:01 2004 From: nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de (Frank Ellermann) Date: Mon Jan 5 14:55:19 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Meta [was: Hotmail] References: Message-ID: <3FF9C025.30B@xyzzy.claranet.de> Miss Betsy wrote: [OE problem, off topic forced by unavailable mail address] |> Competent mail server operators will prevent the spam from going |> through. If the spammers threaten legal action, more mail |servers will |> go into the quietly drop mode and pretend that they have no idea |why it [...] Something with your OE quoting doesn't work at the moment. Please use your previous quoting style again. Bye, Frank From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 19:57:17 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net ([H]omer) Date: Mon Jan 5 15:00:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Russian Joe-Job References: Message-ID: On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 10:24:43 +0000, Redstone wrote: > "[H]omer" wrote in > news:pan.2004.01.04.17.32.54.593071@spamcop.net: >> I've just been Joe-Jobbed and received a mailer-daemon reject from >> mx6.mail.ru. The Spammer used my Spamcop address as the return address. >> The spam looks like it was a bulk-mailing to hundreds of russian >> addresses. > You can examine any bounces you receive to find the source. (Look for the > original message itself.. the bounce will usually keep the original > headers.) Yeah, I figured out that the source was a cable customer on arcor.de (abuse@arcor.net). Maybe an open proxy, who knows. Reported anyway. From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 15:17:41 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Mon Jan 5 15:20:30 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Meta [was: Hotmail] References: <3FF9C025.30B@xyzzy.claranet.de> Message-ID: "Frank Ellermann" wrote in message news:3FF9C025.30B@xyzzy.claranet.de... > Miss Betsy wrote: > > [OE problem, off topic forced by unavailable mail address] > > |> Competent mail server operators will prevent the spam from going > |> through. If the spammers threaten legal action, more mail > |servers will > |> go into the quietly drop mode and pretend that they have no idea > |why it > [...] > > Something with your OE quoting doesn't work at the moment. > Please use your previous quoting style again. Bye, Frank > I hope it has gone away. I think it has something to do with the way it handles HTML, but on this computer I can't change it. Miss Betsy From spamcop001 at bellsouth.net Mon Jan 5 14:28:05 2004 From: spamcop001 at bellsouth.net (Bo Briggs) Date: Mon Jan 5 15:32:46 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Comcast revisited In-Reply-To: References: <3FF7BA57.FE1E9602@spamcop.net> Message-ID: sph wrote: > "Cat" wrote: > > >>Anyway, I really need a Comcast bitch list so that my spam complaints >>will hopefully get through to someone with half a brain cell. If anyone >>here has a Comcast bitch list, please post it here. > > > I just wondered. What do you mean by a bitch list?. Do you mean a list of > "good" bitches who will take promt action against spammers, or do you mean a > list of "bad" bitches?(which possibly could be someone like you spoke to at > comcast). Not that I?m capable of providnig any of those lists. > > Aaah yes. Back to the Wizard of Oz. Remember? (paraphrasing from memory) Dorothy: "Bitches are ugly!" Glenda: "No, Only bad bitches are ugly!". Dorothy: "Are you a good bitch, or a bad bitch? Which?[1]" The Wicked Witch of the West's email is abuse@comcast.net just FYI. So I'm sorry to say, Cat, that you'll only be able to contact 'bad' bitches at Comcast. [1] I always thought that the line should have added 'which?'. Nice rhyme, fits in with the story. Just MHO. -- Bo Briggs From nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de Mon Jan 5 21:33:55 2004 From: nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de (Frank Ellermann) Date: Mon Jan 5 15:35:37 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: And by the way Julian... I think block time frames should be escalating. References: Message-ID: <3FF9CA33.3491@xyzzy.claranet.de> Michael Lefevre wrote: > R. P. McCormick wrote: >> I agree - and second this request. Add me. > Spam traps do result in longer listings. Multiple trap > recipients having a multiplying effect on the score might > be good though. IMHO the number of reports should also have an effect. With my catch-all address I often get the same spam more than once, to nobody@ and to various Message-IDs. That's roughly the same as EMP (multi-posts). I'm not sure what SC does with my "EMP"-reports. If they are simply counted as 2nd, 3rd, etc. report it would be okay. But if they are somehow disregarded as coming from the same user that would be stupid: My catch-all is essentially the same as a spamtrap. > Being less lenient without being more accurate would result > in the list catching more spam, but it would also mean the > list catching more legit mail. The accuracy should be defined by the users. If 100 users report 1000 spams from the same IP, then something is wrong with this IP. It should be listed until no more spam is reported for it. Of course SC needs _huge_ safety margins against malicious users, and the actual formula trying to estimate a spam / ham relation is okay for small numbers. But this formula doesn't work as expected for big numbers, or maybe I just don't understand it. > If an IP has something about it which means the spam is > likely to continue, it will likely get picked up by another > list before Spamcop's short-term listing runs out. Some formal procedure encouraging this likelihood would be nice. If SC doesn't want to create a list of persistent spammers, it could at least publish its results in a form to be used by 3rd parties. Bye, Frank From nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de Mon Jan 5 21:59:03 2004 From: nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de (Frank Ellermann) Date: Mon Jan 5 16:05:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Meta References: <3FF9C025.30B@xyzzy.claranet.de> Message-ID: <3FF9D017.7029@xyzzy.claranet.de> Miss Betsy wrote: > I think it has something to do with the way it handles HTML Not directly then, the quoted articles were plain text. It's probably somehow related to line lengths and "flowed" lines. John uses format=flowed in resp. > on this computer I can't change it Sigh, OE is always a pain :-( My stoneage Mozilla 3.0 is not really better, but at least it never ever tries to be "smart" making things worse than they are. With Mozilla 3.0 I'd have to adjust "flowed" quotes manually. With OE you could use a tool like Morver (?) to adjust "flowed" quotes automatically. Bye, Frank From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 10:27:41 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Anony Mouse) Date: Mon Jan 5 16:30:16 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Alan Ralsky at it again Message-ID: <3FF9D6CD.1090908@spamcop.net> Alan Ralsky did not take much of a break... Like all spammers he lied in the recent news interview. He is still spamming using the same methods... http://www.pharmacourt.biz From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 21:37:43 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Mon Jan 5 16:40:15 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Robert Taylor (RobertTaylor@SpamCop.net) wrote in news:btc873$9ip$1@news.spamcop.net: > If memory serves, > > "cat": > > Italian: "il gatto"; masculine noun. > > Spanish: "el gato"; masculine noun. > > French: "le chat"; masculine noun. > > There must be others (not German ("die Katze"). English, > perversely, is > not gender-specific about much of anything (should we infer some deep > truth from this?). The above are just a few that come to mind. > Dutch--I forget. Marjolean(?). Dutch: 'Kat'; not gender-specific (unless you refer to a specific animal of which you know the gender). When you want to specifally indicate a male cat, it's 'kater'; when that is used, 'kat' in that context (only) is the femnale. Can also be "poes", more usual for a female than a male cat, but strictly speaking also not gender-specific. Of course, 'kat' is also the first three letters of my last name - no semantic relationship though. But although I'm allergic to cats, I am "cat people" and cats know it. :=) -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 15:39:59 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Cat) Date: Mon Jan 5 16:40:50 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Comcast revisited References: <3FF7BA57.FE1E9602@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <3FF9D9AF.48369D8F@spamcop.net> sph wrote: > > "Cat" wrote: > > > Anyway, I really need a Comcast bitch list so that my spam complaints > > will hopefully get through to someone with half a brain cell. If anyone > > here has a Comcast bitch list, please post it here. > > I just wondered. What do you mean by a bitch list?. Do you mean a list of > "good" bitches who will take promt action against spammers, or do you mean a > list of "bad" bitches?(which possibly could be someone like you spoke to at > comcast). Not that I?m capable of providnig any of those lists. There used to be a web site, bitch-list.net, where the guy posted a bunch of employee addresses and other departmental addresses at spam friendly ISPs so that people could try to reach someone at the ISP willing to do something about it or let the ISP know that people were tired of being spammed by their users. Unfortunately, he gradually started removing ISPs from the list, claiming they were cleaning up their act when he knew just as well as everyone else that they were still just as spam friendly as ever. Eventually, bitch-list.net went down completely. I know there are a few people in this newsgroup who would have a bitch list for Comcast, but unfortunately, none of them have been kind enough to reply to my original post on this subject. From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 15:45:44 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Cat) Date: Mon Jan 5 16:50:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Comcast revisited References: <3FF7BA57.FE1E9602@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <3FF9DB08.AADC4F38@spamcop.net> Bo Briggs wrote: > > sph wrote: > > I just wondered. What do you mean by a bitch list?. Do you mean a list of > > "good" bitches who will take promt action against spammers, or do you mean a > > list of "bad" bitches?(which possibly could be someone like you spoke to at > > comcast). Not that I?m capable of providnig any of those lists. > > > > > The Wicked Witch of the West's email is abuse@comcast.net just FYI. So I'm > sorry to say, Cat, that you'll only be able to contact 'bad' bitches at Comcast. Yes, I know the abuse address at Comcast, which the abuse admins obviously ignore. My reason for posting this request was because I need as many other contact addresses for Comcast as possible so that hopefully, someone will take notice. In a group this large, I know there has to be someone around here who has such a list left over from the bitch-list.net days, but unfortunately, the only replies I've gotten in this thread have not been from any of those people. From masfjorden at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 22:46:13 2004 From: masfjorden at spamcop.net (masfjorden@spamcop.net) Date: Mon Jan 5 16:50:24 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). In-Reply-To: References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Marjolein Katsma skrev: > Robert Taylor (RobertTaylor@SpamCop.net) wrote in > news:btc873$9ip$1@news.spamcop.net: > > >>If memory serves, >> >>"cat": >> >>Italian: "il gatto"; masculine noun. >> >>Spanish: "el gato"; masculine noun. >> >>French: "le chat"; masculine noun. >> >> There must be others (not German ("die Katze"). English, >> perversely, is >>not gender-specific about much of anything (should we infer some deep >>truth from this?). The above are just a few that come to mind. >>Dutch--I forget. Marjolean(?). > > > Dutch: 'Kat'; not gender-specific (unless you refer to a specific animal > of which you know the gender). When you want to specifally indicate a > male cat, it's 'kater'; when that is used, 'kat' in that context (only) > is the femnale. Can also be "poes", more usual for a female than a male > cat, but strictly speaking also not gender-specific. > > Of course, 'kat' is also the first three letters of my last name - no > semantic relationship though. But although I'm allergic to cats, I am > "cat people" and cats know it. :=) > > Norwegian *katt* is masculine. We have words to specify if necessary, like *kjette*, f and *hankatt* m. Like dutch poes we have *pus*, also m helge From sph at sph.dk Mon Jan 5 22:54:11 2004 From: sph at sph.dk (sph) Date: Mon Jan 5 16:55:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Comcast revisited References: <3FF7BA57.FE1E9602@spamcop.net> <3FF9D9AF.48369D8F@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Cat" wrote: > There used to be a web site, bitch-list.net, where the guy posted a > bunch of employee addresses and other departmental addresses at spam > friendly ISPs so that people could try to reach someone at the ISP > willing to do something about it or let the ISP know that people were > tired of being spammed by their users. Unfortunately, he gradually > started removing ISPs from the list, claiming they were cleaning up > their act when he knew just as well as everyone else that they were > still just as spam friendly as ever. Eventually, bitch-list.net went > down completely. I know there are a few people in this newsgroup who > would have a bitch list for Comcast, but unfortunately, none of them > have been kind enough to reply to my original post on this subject. Thank you for the clarfication. I didnt know that such a site existed. It seems like a good idea. More than half of the spam I recieve originates from comcast. From tfm3 at nospam.teleproc.com Mon Jan 5 15:56:31 2004 From: tfm3 at nospam.teleproc.com (Thomas Mooney) Date: Mon Jan 5 17:00:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] OT: gender specificity of nouns - was - Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply... References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Robert Taylor wrote in message news:btc873$9ip$1@news.spamcop.net... > English, perversely, is > not gender-specific about much of anything (should we infer some deep > truth from this?). I'm curious about two things: 1) In what way is being non-gender-specific perverse? 2) Conversely, perhaps, how does gender-specificity of nouns improve a language? I was raised speaking the american dialect of english. I studied french and german while in school. (Well, to be honest, I didn't study all that much. ) We were never told how having masculinity and femininity (and, in the case of german, neutrality) associated with nouns was valuable. I could only see it as "one more thing to remember". Further, the lack of consistency, even among the europeans, leaves one feeling that the assignment of gender specificity is a bit capricious. Truly curious, -- TFM3 Note: Spam-resistant e-mail address From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 16:00:46 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Cat) Date: Mon Jan 5 17:05:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <3FF9DE8E.D16B7FB2@spamcop.net> Godwin Stewart wrote: > > On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 08:10:18 +0000, Marjolein Katsma wrote: > > >> "Cat" is an obvious female name. > > > > There's nothing obviously female about "Cat". Took me a long time to > > figure out what gender you are. It must just be a language barrier thing then. In English, most people are going to rightfully assume that someone calling herself "Cat" is female, whether or not it is considered a masculine noun in other languages. No self-respecting straight male would call himself just plain "Cat." The only example of that, as mentioned below, was Cat Stevens, but that was back in the 70s, and he changed his name since then. > Strange. I automatically assumed Cat was female, as in Catherine, Kaitlin, > Cathy, Kate... That's exactly why I wonder why a small few people in the newsgroup still think I'm a male since Cat is short for other female names. In my case, it's not short for my real name, but I use variations of nicknames with "cat" or "kat" as part of a longer username in other places on the internet since I like cats so much. > Of course, then there's Cat Stevens who comes along and muddies the > waters :) Yes, and even he had the good sense to finally change his name to something else much less feminine. From JohnJBurnessAT at ieeDOT.org Mon Jan 5 22:12:11 2004 From: JohnJBurnessAT at ieeDOT.org (John J. Burness) Date: Mon Jan 5 17:15:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). In-Reply-To: <3FF9DE8E.D16B7FB2@spamcop.net> References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> <3FF9DE8E.D16B7FB2@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Cat wrote: > Godwin Stewart wrote: > ------------------snip---------- >>Of course, then there's Cat Stevens who comes along and muddies the >>waters :) > > > Yes, and even he had the good sense to finally change his name to > something else much less feminine. But Cat Stevens changed his name for Religious reasons (as he equally would have done if he had been a Fred, Tom or a Larry), so that doesn't count!! Regards, John From newspamtrap at aol.com Mon Jan 5 22:16:14 2004 From: newspamtrap at aol.com (Trappaspam) Date: Mon Jan 5 17:20:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Alan Ralsky at it again References: <3FF9D6CD.1090908@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Anony Mouse" wrote in message news:3FF9D6CD.1090908@spamcop.net... > Alan Ralsky did not take much of a break... > > Like all spammers he lied in the recent news interview. > http://www.pharmacourt.biz > Seems to be down and not resolving at:- --- 01/05/04 22:05:45 GMT Standard Time --- IP lookup on http://www.pharmacourt.biz/ --- resolving host "www.pharmacourt.biz", please wait... --- resolve error: no data record found Temporary gliche - No doubt :-( > He is still spamming using the same methods... and a lot more ... http://tinyurl.com/2dg98 Regs Jon NS From a2yq-1ka8KILLCAPSB4SENDING at spamex.com Mon Jan 5 16:22:15 2004 From: a2yq-1ka8KILLCAPSB4SENDING at spamex.com (Todd Prouty) Date: Mon Jan 5 17:25:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Turning off images in IE Message-ID: Does anyone know of any easy way (small freeware app, perhaps?) to turn images in Internet Explorer (v. 6, Win2k) on and off? I'm locked into Outlook here at work, and would like to make sure images in HTML spam are blocked. After a lot of digging around in the registry, I haven't been able to find any way other than the Tools menu, which is inconvenient. It would be great if there was a system tray icon that could just be toggled on and off... -- Todd Prouty From sph at sph.dk Mon Jan 5 23:48:14 2004 From: sph at sph.dk (sph) Date: Mon Jan 5 17:50:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Turning off images in IE References: Message-ID: "Todd Prouty" skrev i en meddelelse news:btco2n$13g$1@news.spamcop.net... > Does anyone know of any easy way (small freeware app, perhaps?) to turn > images in Internet Explorer (v. 6, Win2k) on and off? I'm locked into > Outlook here at work, and would like to make sure images in HTML spam > are blocked. After a lot of digging around in the registry, I haven't > been able to find any way other than the Tools menu, which is > inconvenient. It would be great if there was a system tray icon that > could just be toggled on and off... > -- > Todd Prouty > Maybe you could find "spamhilator" useful. It automatically removes spam containing images saved on external servers. From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Mon Jan 5 23:56:40 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Mon Jan 5 18:00:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> <3FF9DE8E.D16B7FB2@spamcop.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:00:46 -0600, Cat wrote: >> Of course, then there's Cat Stevens who comes along and muddies the >> waters :) > > Yes, and even he had the good sense to finally change his name to > something else much less feminine. He took on an Arabic name after converting to Islam: Yusuf Islam. -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- Do molecular biologists wear designer genes? From spamtrap at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 16:02:31 2004 From: spamtrap at spamcop.net (Spam Trap) Date: Mon Jan 5 18:05:40 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Alan Ralsky at it again References: <3FF9D6CD.1090908@spamcop.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 22:16:14 -0000, "Trappaspam" wrote: >"Anony Mouse" wrote in message >news:3FF9D6CD.1090908@spamcop.net... >> Alan Ralsky did not take much of a break... >> >> Like all spammers he lied in the recent news interview. >> http://www.pharmacourt.biz >> > >Seems to be down and not resolving at:- >--- 01/05/04 22:05:45 GMT Standard Time > >--- IP lookup on http://www.pharmacourt.biz/ >--- resolving host "www.pharmacourt.biz", please wait... >--- resolve error: no data record found > >Temporary gliche - No doubt :-( > >> He is still spamming using the same methods... > >and a lot more ... http://tinyurl.com/2dg98 > >Regs >Jon NS > Check news:news.admin.net-abuse.* for "Ralsky" - you'll see plenty of examples. He lied to the NY Times, and did NOT take a break from spamming since 12/15, nor has he swiched to "CAN SPAM" compliant methods. http://groups.google.com/groups?q=Ralsky&lr=&scoring=d -- A user, not a reporting address... From a2yq-1ka8KILLCAPSB4SENDING at spamex.com Mon Jan 5 17:12:28 2004 From: a2yq-1ka8KILLCAPSB4SENDING at spamex.com (Todd Prouty) Date: Mon Jan 5 18:15:18 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Turning off images in IE In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: sph wrote: > "Todd Prouty" skrev i en meddelelse > news:btco2n$13g$1@news.spamcop.net... > >>Does anyone know of any easy way (small freeware app, perhaps?) to turn >>images in Internet Explorer (v. 6, Win2k) on and off? I'm locked into >>Outlook here at work, and would like to make sure images in HTML spam >>are blocked. After a lot of digging around in the registry, I haven't >>been able to find any way other than the Tools menu, which is >>inconvenient. It would be great if there was a system tray icon that >>could just be toggled on and off... > > > Maybe you could find "spamhilator" useful. It automatically removes spam > containing images saved on external servers. Well, I'd like to report the messages, not just remove them from the server. I typically just turn off images, run SpamSource, and copy the headers and body into the two-part reporting form. SpamSource opens the message (the only way to get the headers in Outlook), so turning off images is the only way to avoid having my spam tracked via remotely hosted images. -- Todd Prouty From ubetrap at hotmail.com Tue Jan 6 01:18:40 2004 From: ubetrap at hotmail.com (Dick Cardy) Date: Mon Jan 5 18:20:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Godwin Stewart" wrote in message news:pan.2004.01.05.10.32.59.329965@loopback.sgms-centre.com... > Of course, then there's Cat Stevens who comes along and muddies the > waters :) > Now I understand why he changed his name! Dick From ubetrap at hotmail.com Tue Jan 6 01:22:33 2004 From: ubetrap at hotmail.com (Dick Cardy) Date: Mon Jan 5 18:25:22 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: gender specificity of nouns - was - Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply... References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Thomas Mooney" wrote in message news:btcmhp$uka$1@news.spamcop.net... > 2) Conversely, perhaps, how does gender-specificity of nouns improve a > language? > Try Hebrew (Ivrit), not only nouns are gender specific Dick From Merlyn at Spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 18:24:47 2004 From: Merlyn at Spamcop.net (Merlyn) Date: Mon Jan 5 18:25:35 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Turning off images in IE References: Message-ID: "Todd Prouty" wrote in message news:btco2n$13g$1@news.spamcop.net... > Does anyone know of any easy way (small freeware app, perhaps?) to turn > images in Internet Explorer (v. 6, Win2k) on and off? I'm locked into > Outlook here at work, and would like to make sure images in HTML spam > are blocked. After a lot of digging around in the registry, I haven't > been able to find any way other than the Tools menu, which is > inconvenient. It would be great if there was a system tray icon that > could just be toggled on and off... > -- Tools/Internet Options/Advanced Under Multimedia unclick "Show pictures" -- Regards, Merlyn A Spamcop advocate All replies will be made specifically to the newsgroup From NoSpamHere at Tulaweb.net Mon Jan 5 18:26:05 2004 From: NoSpamHere at Tulaweb.net (Dave Sanderson) Date: Mon Jan 5 18:30:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: "Header incomplete, aborting. No source IP address found,cannot proceed. Not full header?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Philip Herlihy wrote: > But it's all there, clear as day. > > I use a macro of my own which has been unchanged for over a year. I > recently started using SpamPal (which is aware of SpamCop's own blacklist) > but I've checked and removed any effect that could have been having. Some > adjustment to SpamCop's parsing means it no longer works. Philip Does it parse if you manually paste the source into the web form? -- Dave Just a spamcop user From RobertTaylor at SpamCop.net Mon Jan 5 18:31:02 2004 From: RobertTaylor at SpamCop.net (Robert Taylor) Date: Mon Jan 5 18:35:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: In news:Xns9467E6311B909homesitehelp@216.154.195.61, Marjolein Katsma sent: > Robert Taylor (RobertTaylor@SpamCop.net) wrote in > news:btc873$9ip$1@news.spamcop.net: > >> If memory serves, >> >> "cat": >> >> Italian: "il gatto"; masculine noun. >> >> Spanish: "el gato"; masculine noun. >> >> French: "le chat"; masculine noun. >> >> There must be others (not German ("die Katze"). English, >> perversely, is >> not gender-specific about much of anything (should we infer some deep >> truth from this?). The above are just a few that come to mind. >> Dutch--I forget. Marjolean(?). > > Dutch: 'Kat'; not gender-specific (unless you refer to a specific animal > of which you know the gender). When you want to specifally indicate a > male cat, it's 'kater'; when that is used, 'kat' in that context (only) > is the femnale. Can also be "poes", more usual for a female than a male > cat, but strictly speaking also not gender-specific. > > Of course, 'kat' is also the first three letters of my last name - no > semantic relationship though. But although I'm allergic to cats, I am > "cat people" and cats know it. :=) In German, I believe the male cat (and, as in the Dutch, only the male) is also "Kater". I am not allergic to cats. Curiously (no pun) they have always seemed to like me inordinately; never could figure that out. Dogs too, oddly. Galvanic reactions? Who knows. ;) I've heard "poes", in NL. Also, in Germany (Berlinisch?) something similar I think, that sounds like "Miesche", or "Miesch" (never seen it written). Best, -- Robert eMail: RobertTaylor@SpamCop.net Web-Address: http://users.rcn.com/robertt.nh.ultranet/Web-SitePg1.htm 23 skidoo foo (Dizzy Gillespie, Prop.) From RobertTaylor at SpamCop.net Mon Jan 5 18:32:41 2004 From: RobertTaylor at SpamCop.net (Robert Taylor) Date: Mon Jan 5 18:35:21 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: gender specificity of nouns - was - Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply... References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: In news:btcmhp$uka$1@news.spamcop.net, Thomas Mooney sent: > Robert Taylor wrote in message > news:btc873$9ip$1@news.spamcop.net... > >> English, perversely, is not gender-specific about much of anything >> (should we infer some deep truth from this?). > 1) In what way is being non-gender-specific perverse? In a strictly figurative sense. Implication was that most Indo-European languages are gender-specific, but "we" had to be different. Largely tongue-in cheek; not seriously intended. :) > 2) Conversely, perhaps, how does gender-specificity of nouns improve a > language? I don't believe I indicated that it did, although there are certain conveniences. A bit too lengthy to go into, though, especially OT. > ... the lack of consistency, even among the europeans, leaves one > feeling that the assignment of gender specificity is a bit capricious. Apparently a series of accidents, or simply geo-historical residue. The Roman Legions spread a mass of Latin dialects all over the place for a very long time, which in due course became French, Spanish, Italian, and left strong traces in German, etc. (Gross over-simplification of course: a lot of stuff happened before, and in-between--beginning with Sanscrit.) All natural languages are shot through with capriciousness. If you're looking for logic, read Principia Mathematica (Russell/Whitehead), or study the development of context-free languages; you'll never find it in natural languages. Regards, Robert -- eMail: RobertTaylor@SpamCop.net Web-Address: http://users.rcn.com/robertt.nh.ultranet/Web-SitePg1.htm NOTARY SOJAC (Dizzy Gillespie, Prop.) From foof at REMOVEherlihy.eu.com Mon Jan 5 23:53:43 2004 From: foof at REMOVEherlihy.eu.com (Philip Herlihy) Date: Mon Jan 5 18:55:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: "Header incomplete, aborting. No source IP address found, cannot proceed. Not full header?" References: Message-ID: Yes it does - thanks, I hadn't thought of that simple check. I was careful to make sure everything went either into one text area or the other - nothing in the forwarded email was not pasted into the web interface, so it seems I can rule out SpamPal or my macro mangling the content. -- ###################### ## PH, London ## ###################### Dave Sanderson wrote: > Philip Herlihy wrote: > >> But it's all there, clear as day. >> >> I use a macro of my own which has been unchanged for over a year. I >> recently started using SpamPal (which is aware of SpamCop's own >> blacklist) but I've checked and removed any effect that could have >> been having. Some adjustment to SpamCop's parsing means it no >> longer works. > > Philip > > Does it parse if you manually paste the source into the web form? From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 00:04:08 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (nobody@spamcop.net) Date: Mon Jan 5 19:05:05 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Not Original Format error Message-ID: I got another message that SpamCop refuses to parse because it claims that the spam is not in the original format. The FAQ says: "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." I couldn't have introduced an error because I queued the spam for reporting directly from the Held Mail and the only thing to have handled the spam was SpamCop. How can I turn this broken "feature" off? SpamCop should at least realize that any spam submitted from the Held Mail is in the correct format. I can edit the spam, cancel the reports, "fix" the spam so SpamCop likes it and resubmit. But because I don't know what causes each error, it takes a long time for each message to be edited. http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z241024866z84d393ad0790b30a8021a01de240df3az Spam posted in spamcop.spam with the subject "Hey" From NoSpamHere at Tulaweb.net Mon Jan 5 19:05:49 2004 From: NoSpamHere at Tulaweb.net (Dave Sanderson) Date: Mon Jan 5 19:10:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Replacement for Mailwasher? In-Reply-To: <7687vvkiloqgse6c0ruup14pra881k6221@4ax.com> References: <3FF043C3.3AD42628@Tulaweb.net> <7687vvkiloqgse6c0ruup14pra881k6221@4ax.com> Message-ID: weAponX wrote: > If Spampal will show me the source code proir to me hitting > that "Send/Recieve" button, then I'll consider using it. No it will not do that. I still can't see why you care about that. If you view the source in MW, the source still has to be downloaded to your computer first. If you are determined to see the source before it gets to OE, then SpamPal is not for you. > So since ANYTHING can be abused, then maybe we should go on less > progroms AGAINST the abused PROGRAM and go on MORE Pogroms against the > perpetrators of said abuse. Peesh? I use many things that I don't like, and I didn't mean to say that you absolutely shouldn't use MW. The problem I have with them is that they deliberately encourage their users to send spam to innocent bystanders. I could go buy a bulk mail program that was designed for use by hard core spammers, and use it for legitimate purposes, but I would try to find a more reputable firm, to do business with, if I could. -- Dave Just a spamcop user From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 00:14:22 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Mon Jan 5 19:15:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> <3FF9DE8E.D16B7FB2@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Cat (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:3FF9DE8E.D16B7FB2@spamcop.net: >> >> "Cat" is an obvious female name. >> > >> > There's nothing obviously female about "Cat". Took me a long time >> > to figure out what gender you are. > > It must just be a language barrier thing then. In English, most people > are going to rightfully assume that someone calling herself "Cat" is > female, whether or not it is considered a masculine noun in other > languages. No self-respecting straight male would call himself just > plain "Cat." The only example of that, as mentioned below, was Cat > Stevens, but that was back in the 70s, and he changed his name since > then. If you think in the context of names, maybe (still not to me). But the context here is one where many people use handles instead of names; there is no way to tell whether "Cat" is an actual name or a handle. >> Strange. I automatically assumed Cat was female, as in Catherine, >> Kaitlin, Cathy, Kate... > > That's exactly why I wonder why a small few people in the newsgroup > still think I'm a male since Cat is short for other female names. Now that this is explained to me, it is obvious (with hindsight, and only if I'm thinking of "name" not "handle"). But you have to _know_ that "Cat" is short for a female name; if you don't... -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 00:21:44 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Mon Jan 5 19:25:22 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Alan Ralsky at it again References: <3FF9D6CD.1090908@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Spam Trap (spamtrap@spamcop.net) wrote in news:btcqea$3v8$1 @news.spamcop.net: > He lied to the NY Times, and did NOT take a break from > spamming since 12/15, nor has he swiched to "CAN SPAM" compliant > methods. Shouldn't someone point that out to the NYT? -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From NoSpamHere at Tulaweb.net Mon Jan 5 19:23:53 2004 From: NoSpamHere at Tulaweb.net (Dave Sanderson) Date: Mon Jan 5 19:25:43 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: "Header incomplete, aborting. No source IP address found,cannot proceed. Not full header?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Philip Herlihy wrote: > Yes it does - thanks, I hadn't thought of that simple check. > I was careful to make sure everything went either into one text area or the > other - nothing in the forwarded email was not pasted into the web > interface, so it seems I can rule out SpamPal or my macro mangling the > content. This also seems to rule out that your mail server changed the way it inserts headers. So how are you normally getting the spam to spamcop? Is your macro just for separating the spam or does it have something to do with forwarding it? I see that you are using OE for your news reader. Are you also using it for your mail client? The two part web form is for Outlook not Outlook Express. -- Dave Just a spamcop user From NoSpamHere at Tulaweb.net Mon Jan 5 19:28:24 2004 From: NoSpamHere at Tulaweb.net (Dave Sanderson) Date: Mon Jan 5 19:34:13 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: sending reports silently In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dave Sanderson wrote: > Al > I'm sure you'll get several different opinions on it, Well I guess not :-) -- Dave Just a spamcop user From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 18:34:47 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Cat) Date: Mon Jan 5 19:35:06 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> <3FF9DE8E.D16B7FB2@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <3FFA02A7.AD0C2608@spamcop.net> Marjolein Katsma wrote: > > Now that this is explained to me, it is obvious (with hindsight, and > only if I'm thinking of "name" not "handle"). But you have to _know_ > that "Cat" is short for a female name; if you don't... Yeah, but name or nickname, most people know that "Cat" has an obvious feminine touch. Outside of Cat Stevens, you just don't see men willing to go by such a feminine nickname. From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 19:09:16 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Mon Jan 5 20:10:05 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: No Spam & mail15 spammer References: <3FF87DCB.6070908@spamcop.net> <3FF90C4F.1040402@spamcop.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 20:03:43 +1300, Anony Mouse wrote: >I have been attacking them for over a year this time and the numbers in >my inbox have gone up and down over that period but in the end the >results speak for themselves, no spam today in any of the mail boxes I have. > >Sure they may start up again but I don't think it will be as bad as it >was in the past... > >Do nothing and the numbers build up... Attack and they intensify there >spamming to a point but when they find out you are whacking registrars >in order to get at them they start getting a bit hesitant about using >there intimidation tactics. I don't know if you are to be credited or not, or if the FTC has moved in on spammers (as indicated by a singular news story - *not* picked up by any of the usual channels), but today's spam in both my 80-100 spams a day each mail boxes are way, way down... (20, combined). It could be a glitch at my ISPs end (although my regular mail has come through with no problems), or it could be that you nailed the worst offenders (somehow). From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 19:34:49 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Nobody) Date: Mon Jan 5 20:40:32 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Please be civil (was: Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one).) References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Cat" wrote in message news:3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net... > "Cat" is an obvious female name. Try getting it right next time. > Automatically assuming that someone using the name Cat is a "he" is > about as ridiculous as if someone were to assume you're female despite > your name being Mike. Cat is the name of the male feline character on Red Dwarf. I have known more male "Cat"s than female. There is nothing inherently female in this name, particularly in Asia. We all come from different frames of reference, especially since so many of the posters here are using English as a second language. Moreover, the gender conventions in use in much of the world--which tend to grate on the ears of Westerners who have been spanked by the PC police for making gender assumptions--do not spark the same visceral reaction in female listeners outside the West. IMHO, we would be better served by assuming the best of intentions in the posters here, especially those who post somewhat frequently. I have seen a lot of these topics get wildly off track, largely because someone got offended by what might or might not have been an honest mistake. (Except for the obvious trolling. . .which should be met with a prompt YHBT, YHL, HAND.) Let us please try to ignore the incitements to flame, minor slights that have no bearing on the topic at hand, and gently handle the newbies. At least until I get my *plonk* working again. Patrick From kenbrody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 21:08:56 2004 From: kenbrody at spamcop.net (Kenneth Brody) Date: Mon Jan 5 21:10:13 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] That didn't take long -- "CAN-SPAM compliant" spam Message-ID: <3FFA18B8.43260DB@spamcop.net> Well, it's only January 5th, and I just received my first spam with: Subject: Business Opportunity - This message is CAN SPAM Compliant (There may have been earlier "compliant" messages within the body, but I wouldn't have seen those.) Apparently, it's for a "trillion-dollar-a-year industry". (Yes, the GIF actually says "trillion".) Of course, the "from" address claims to be from letsjam-dot-com (a website "where musicians meet") with a "real" name of "BRIT Consulting E Logistica". The actual source of the spam was a system in Australia. The spamvertised site is in Brazil. Certainly gives me the warm fuzzies that this is "CAN-SPAM compliant". I'll see how long it takes for spam to start arriving at the sneakemail address I used to "unsubscribe" from it. -- +---------+----------------------------------+-----------------------------+ | Kenneth | kenbrody at spamcop.net | "The opinions expressed | | J. | http://www.hvcomputer.com | herein are not necessarily | | Brody | http://www.fptech.com | those of fP Technologies." | +---------+----------------------------------+-----------------------------+ From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 13:25:00 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Petzl) Date: Mon Jan 5 21:31:12 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Hotmail References: Message-ID: On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:18:15 -0500, John Malmberg wrote: >Miss Betsy wrote: >> >> Well, it hasn't been in effect that long and I would venture to >> guess that Hotmail won't send error messages. > >So unless someone has a packet analyzer between Hotmail and the sending >mail server, they do not know who dropped the message. And with out >knowing who or why, no one can threaten cartooneys. > >> What they will do is >> to tell you to whitelist any correspondent whom you have difficulty >> in getting emails from. The only way you will know that you aren't >> getting emails is if your correspondent phones you and says, "Why >> didn't you answer my email?" > >SMTP does not guarantee notifications as you know. > >> The HM 'bot will never admit that he >> was blocked, but just tell you to use the whitelist for "optimum" >> performance. > >Call closed with "Unreproducable problem". Repeat as needed. > >No one harrassing your block list providers or your filter providers >with cartooneys. > >Competent mail server operators will prevent the spam from going >through. If the spammers threaten legal action, more mail servers will >go into the quietly drop mode and pretend that they have no idea why it >was not delivered, and will only investigate cases of users complaining >of missing e-mails. > >-John >wb8tyw@qsl.network >Personal Opinion Only I would say spammers would have a hotmail account to see if it is getting through I would like them to complain to Hotmail about their attacks on Hotmail users not getting through. Hotmail will not use a cartoony :-> Petzl -- "AVG 6.0 Free Edition" Anti-Virus Check your computer for "Spy Bots" (free) Block spamvertised websites (free) a good firewall for windows(free version available) From pwillener at ScPiAnMcCoOmP.com Tue Jan 6 11:26:01 2004 From: pwillener at ScPiAnMcCoOmP.com (Pat Willener) Date: Mon Jan 5 21:32:34 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: gender specificity of nouns - was - Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply... References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Thomas Mooney" wrote in message news:btcmhp$uka$1@news.spamcop.net... > Robert Taylor wrote in message > news:btc873$9ip$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > English, perversely, is not gender-specific about much of anything. > > ... > > I was raised speaking the american dialect of english. I studied french and > german while in school. (Well, to be honest, I didn't study all that much. > ) We were never told how having masculinity and femininity (and, in the > case of german, neutrality) associated with nouns was valuable. I could > only see it as "one more thing to remember". > > Further, the lack of consistency, even among the europeans, leaves one > feeling that the assignment of gender specificity is a bit capricious. Being a non-native English speaker, I believed until recently that nouns in the English language are not gender-specific. Then I heard some instances where really curious things (like a country, or a ship) is referred to as "she". From my native language I would have assumed that it would be "it". Obviously, English is more gender-specific than - for instance - Japanese. Interesting subject coming out of an original flame... From gmccx at notvalid.com Mon Jan 5 21:36:55 2004 From: gmccx at notvalid.com (gmccx) Date: Mon Jan 5 21:40:40 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] What is _this_ about? Message-ID: <3FFA1F47.FF92C1B9@notvalid.com> Posted in spamcop.spam, same subject. I didn't try to report this because after looking at it a bit I don't think I have much of an idea what to make of it. -- George http://people.delphiforums.com/gmcc From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 21:46:25 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (R. P. McCormick) Date: Mon Jan 5 21:50:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: And by the way Julian... I think block time frames should be escalating. References: Message-ID: > Many hijacked systems are on dynamic IPs anyway - I'm > not sure longer listing would help with those. Best solution > is probably to use a list of dynamic IPs in addition. I agree to the concept of blocking all dynamic IP's ... in fact - I'd rather advocate that no dynamic IP on any network should ever send SMTP traffic directly - only through the provider's SMTP servers. But that's a different issue. IMO, blocking a dynamic address longer doesn't hurt ... (especially since legit dynamic IP users again should be relaying through their provider's SMTP servers). And: many dynamic addresses do tend to stay around for quite some time. I've seen plenty of cable providers that are not forcing an IP address to change even though its dynamically provided. In these kinds of cases ... a longer BL listing may actually help (especially for those who don't have a certain provider's dynamic space listed). RE: direct allocations of IP space to spammers ... > That's probably true as well. However, IPs allocated directly > to spammers tend to get listed quite quickly in blocking lists > that are aimed at listing blocks allocated to spammers (e.g. SBL), > so again probably best solved that way. Well - that's "sometimes". I can point you at a network that's spamming, is black listed in SpamCop, continues to spam ... is directly allocated to the spammer ... and is not on the SBL or other lists. And its been around and in use since October 2003 at least ... Again - having a BL that has blocking based on accurate spam reports ... > Multiple trap recipients having a multiplying effect on the > score might be good though. Indeed! > Spamcop's list is already aggressive in what it lists - it's quite > possible for an IP to get listed (repeatedly) when it's not actually > spamming, and it's also quite possible for an IP to repeatedly have > "legit problems". But back when SpamCop used to tell us more info ... I saw too many that were listed, then delisted, then listed ... you know the scheme. What I'm thinking is that a scheme that sees that kind of problem may work better ... than a listing that times out - only to get listed a short period of time (again) later. > Being less lenient without being more accurate would result > in the list catching more spam, but it would also mean the list > catching more legit mail. I'm not sure I necessarily agree with this ... > If an IP has something about it which means the spam is likely > to continue, it will likely get picked up by another list before > Spamcop's short-term listing runs out. Sometimes. See my comment above. R P McCormick SpamCop user From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 21:51:02 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (R. P. McCormick) Date: Mon Jan 5 21:55:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] 2006HOSTING.COM 2005HOSTING.COM 560000X.COM Message-ID: OK - who's this? Resembles others ... 2006HOSTING.COM 2005HOSTING.COM 560000X.COM (registrar Gandi) John woo 2600 warden ave. 2r4 y6u markham Ontario Canada +1.9053423423 sendhost3004@hotmail.com ns1.2006hosting.com 202.102.245.51 ns2.2006hosting.com 202.102.245.123 created: 2004-01-01 21:18:03 changed: 2004-01-02 22:07:01 Canada Post (http://www.canadapost.ca) indicates that there is NO 2600 on Warden Ave in Markham. Lowest number on Warden Ave is 7020 in post code L3R 5W7. Numbers increase on Warden Ave to 11242 in post code L6C 1N4. The "2R4 Y6U" may have been an attempt at a post code. It is incorrect. All post codes in the Markham/Toronto area start with the letter L. Postal mail to that address can not be delivered. The email address IS NOT VALID: >> 220 mc10-f2.hotmail.com Microsoft ESMTP MAIL >> Service, Version: 5.0.2195.6713 ready at >> Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:58:28 -0800 >> helo >> 250 mc10-f2.hotmail.com Hello [XX.XX.XX.XX] >> mail from:<> >> 250 <>....Sender OK >> rcpt to: >> 550 Requested action not taken: mailbox unavailable The CNA (Canadian Number Administrator, http://www.cnac.ca) indicates that the 342 exchange in the 905 area code is allocated to Bell Canada for the Cold Springs rate centre. Did not find a listing for John Woo in Markham. It appears that all of the registration information for these domains is bogus. From Luis at niet.dk Mon Jan 5 21:15:13 2004 From: Luis at niet.dk (Luis) Date: Mon Jan 5 22:20:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. CAT in the house References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> <3FF9DE8E.D16B7FB2@spamcop.net> <3FFA02A7.AD0C2608@spamcop.net> Message-ID: While I'm still amazed about the volume of both ON and OFF topic replies to my original post, (Now it looks like I was holding a match to the edge of a dry corn field), I must say that Ellen not only caught the central issue (without complaining about my possible misposting), but also took the appropriate and logical action. Kudos to Ellen. Yes, I have both Cat-5, Cat-5e and Cat-6 in the house. Both male and female. And both genders are supposed to work together. Let us call THIS one carried "Ad absurdum". "Cat" wrote in message news:3FFA02A7.AD0C2608@spamcop.net... > Marjolein Katsma wrote: > > > > Now that this is explained to me, it is obvious (with hindsight, and > > only if I'm thinking of "name" not "handle"). But you have to _know_ > > that "Cat" is short for a female name; if you don't... > > Yeah, but name or nickname, most people know that "Cat" has an obvious > feminine touch. Outside of Cat Stevens, you just don't see men willing > to go by such a feminine nickname. From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 22:59:31 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (sol) Date: Mon Jan 5 23:00:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Netiquette query - was - Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). In-Reply-To: <3FF90980.8B2FB404@spamcop.net> References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF90980.8B2FB404@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Cat wrote: > Mike Vollmer wrote: > >>Another control freak on the prowl... > > > One more thing... > Maybe in all your top posting glory, you don't mind sifting through all > the spam posts to find a real discussion, but the rest of us who follow > the posting rules do mind. It is proper netiquette to bottom post on newsgroups, but to reply to e-mails in top post fashion? That seems to be Mozilla's default behavior. I sure hope that I have this correct. Does anyone care to hazard a guess as to Sol's gender? -- Sol slips beneath the waves and fades away amid majestic colors. From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Mon Jan 5 22:18:17 2004 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Mon Jan 5 23:20:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Netiquette query - was - Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF90980.8B2FB404@spamcop.net> Message-ID: In article , sol writes: > Cat wrote: >> Mike Vollmer wrote: >> >>>Another control freak on the prowl... >> >> >> One more thing... >> Maybe in all your top posting glory, you don't mind sifting through all >> the spam posts to find a real discussion, but the rest of us who follow >> the posting rules do mind. > > It is proper netiquette to bottom post on newsgroups, No, it is not proper to bottom-post on newsgroups. One should trim heavily and post interspersed after each comment to which one is responding. For very short posts, that might look like bottom posting, but the thought process is totally different. > but to reply to > e-mails in top post fashion? Email is a different mechanism, less likely to have people coming into the discussion in the middle. > That seems to be Mozilla's default > behavior. It is impossible for a program to do the part about "trim that which is unrelated to the comments you are about to make. From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 22:28:55 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Cat) Date: Mon Jan 5 23:30:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Netiquette query - was - Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spamreport with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF90980.8B2FB404@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <3FFA3987.C4655C52@spamcop.net> sol wrote: > > Cat wrote: > > One more thing... > > Maybe in all your top posting glory, you don't mind sifting through all > > the spam posts to find a real discussion, but the rest of us who follow > > the posting rules do mind. > > It is proper netiquette to bottom post on newsgroups, but to reply to > e-mails in top post fashion? E-mail is one thing because it's a one on one conversation. On the other hand, the method of proper netiquette for newsgroups where many people read and participate in the discussion is inline posting, not top posting or bottom posting. The preferred method around this newsgroup, which follows netiquette, is to snip any quoted text not relevant to your reply then add your own comments below each quoted point you are addressing. Inline posting keeps the conversation in order and easy to follow. Top posting forces people to read the reply at the top then to waste time scrolling down to figure out the context of the reply, which is totally backward. Bottom posting is really only good if you're snipping everything except one quoted point then replying to that point at the bottom. Otherwise, bottom posting forces people to waste time scrolling down through endless lines of irrelevant text to find the reply somewhere at the bottom then to have to figure out the context. Mike Vollmer caused quite a stir somewhere in another thread because people politely asked him to stop top posting, and he reacted with a childish temper tantrum, protesting the request to stop top posting. Hopefully this isn't going to turn into yet another top/bottom/inline posting debate since the thread is already way off topic, and the top/bottom/inline thing has already been hashed and rehashed several times recently in other threads. From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 23:35:06 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Brent) Date: Mon Jan 5 23:40:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Comcast revisited References: <3FF7BA57.FE1E9602@spamcop.net> <3FF9D9AF.48369D8F@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Cat scribed: > There used to be a web site, bitch-list.net, where the guy posted a > bunch of employee addresses and other departmental addresses at spam > friendly ISPs so that people could try to reach someone at the ISP > willing to do something about it or let the ISP know that people were > tired of being spammed by their users. Unfortunately, he gradually > started removing ISPs from the list, claiming they were cleaning up > their act when he knew just as well as everyone else that they were > still just as spam friendly as ever. Eventually, bitch-list.net went > down completely. I know there are a few people in this newsgroup who > would have a bitch list for Comcast, but unfortunately, none of them > have been kind enough to reply to my original post on this subject. You might wish to try this (effectiveness unknown): 1) Call the Comcast NOC at 856.317.7272 (i.e. the OrgAbusePhone per ARIN) 2) You'll receive a VRU. It won't prompt you for this option, but select option 1. 3) You're now in the "dial-by-name" directory. Here you can enter common or random letters of employee's last names until you receive a hit. 4) It will dial their extension. If no answer, you should hear their voice mail greeting which occasionally contains their e-mail address. Good luck. From reply at in.news.group Mon Jan 5 22:47:33 2004 From: reply at in.news.group (Mike Vollmer) Date: Mon Jan 5 23:45:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Series of articles on on-line pharmacies, spam, etc. Message-ID: These have been published in the St. Paul, MN, Pioneer Press over the last couple days. Access is free until an article is > 7 days old., so the links will only be good for 5-6 days. At Drugbuyers.com, pain suffers not sorry: http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/living/health/7633724.htm E-mail ads open doors to illicit prescriptions: http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/living/health/7637159.htm Internet sales fuel addiction: http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/living/health/7623319.htm Meanwhile, the spew continues from the "CAN" .... From nobody at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 22:09:10 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Jeff) Date: Tue Jan 6 00:10:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports References: Message-ID: "indigo" wrote in message news:btc78m$85q$1@news.spamcop.net... > Michael is just speaking the truth, if you don't like it, tough. Ignore his > advice and make all the cartooneys you want, you're the one who'll come off > looking like a loon. Thanks. I'll remember you said that. > > > > By the way, your reply above is total BULLSHIT! I'm not even going to > waste > > my time explaining why. > > > > > Again, he speaks wisely. You, as a private citizen, no longer have the right > to sue spammers under the U-CAN-SPAM law. Ya, ok. From skiwi+newsgroups at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 21:11:48 2004 From: skiwi+newsgroups at spamcop.net (Skiwi) Date: Tue Jan 6 00:15:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Series of articles on on-line pharmacies, spam, etc. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Vollmer wrote: > These have been published in the St. Paul, MN, Pioneer Press over the last > couple days. Access is free until an article is > 7 days old., so the links > will only be good for 5-6 days. > > At Drugbuyers.com, pain suffers not sorry: > > http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/living/health/7633724.htm [snip] Describing one instance of those who self medicated narcotics: "I am without a doubt hopelessly addicted to the narcotics," said Cindy, who also declined to give her last name. But she credits these drugs with enhancing, not degrading, her quality of life. If she must be an addict for the rest of her life, so be it. Maybe her pain is outrageous, but still very scary to me to hear this, especially from someone who should be better informed! And where have you heard that sort of justification before?!!! Remind me not to go to a hospital in Arizona! Geeeezzzz... From skiwi+newsgroups at spamcop.net Mon Jan 5 21:17:19 2004 From: skiwi+newsgroups at spamcop.net (Skiwi) Date: Tue Jan 6 00:20:10 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Series of articles on on-line pharmacies, spam, etc. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Mike Vollmer wrote: > These have been published in the St. Paul, MN, Pioneer Press over the last > couple days. Access is free until an article is > 7 days old., so the links > will only be good for 5-6 days. > > At Drugbuyers.com, pain suffers not sorry: > > http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/living/health/7633724.htm [snip] Describing one instance of those who self medicated narcotics: "I am without a doubt hopelessly addicted to the narcotics," said [Phoinix nurse] Cindy, who also declined to give her last name. But she credits these drugs with enhancing, not degrading, her quality of life. If she must be an addict for the rest of her life, so be it. Maybe her pain is outrageous, but still very scary to me to hear this, especially from someone who should be better informed! And where have you heard that sort of justification before?!!! Remind me not to go to a hospital in Arizona! Geeeezzzz... From slangist at verizon.net Tue Jan 6 00:55:09 2004 From: slangist at verizon.net (James McCarty Yeager) Date: Tue Jan 6 01:00:50 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OT: gender specificity of nouns - was - Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply... In-Reply-To: References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Thomas Mooney wrote: > Robert Taylor wrote in message > news:btc873$9ip$1@news.spamcop.net... > >>English, perversely, is >>not gender-specific about much of anything (should we infer some deep >>truth from this?). > > I'm curious about two things: > > 1) In what way is being non-gender-specific perverse? in this context, perverse=non-standard to most of the rest of the world's languages. > 2) Conversely, perhaps, how does gender-specificity of nouns improve a > language? languages over time seem to move from more grammatical specificity (or complexity if you will) toward less. like mountain ranges wearing down from erosion, after a while gender smooths out and becomes less visible, case smooths out and becomes less visible, and some tenses seem to drop away from lack of use. gender specificity is not added in later to a language; it's there at the beginning, and then wears away. > I was raised speaking the american dialect of english. I studied french and > german while in school. (Well, to be honest, I didn't study all that much. > ) We were never told how having masculinity and femininity (and, in the > case of german, neutrality) associated with nouns was valuable. I could > only see it as "one more thing to remember". it is an artefact of a previous consciousness. when the world was new and mankind looked at it and began to try to classify it in sounds, he/she attributed all kinds of human qualities to everything in creation. as gender is one of the most basic, it was universally attributed. but then, over time, languages shed their original fine level of grammatical detail, possibly supplementing its functionality with vocabulary spread. > Further, the lack of consistency, even among the europeans, leaves one > feeling that the assignment of gender specificity is a bit capricious. well, yes. language is an agreement to use sounds and symbols in a certain way. and all symbols are capricious, inherently. jmy -- Biography is a very definite region bounded on the north by history, on the south by fiction, on the east by obituary, and on the west by tedium. --Philip Guedalla From nobody at nowhere.com Mon Jan 5 22:02:17 2004 From: nobody at nowhere.com (GregR) Date: Tue Jan 6 01:07:23 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OK, I give up - what are they selling?... ;-) References: <3FF89836.2FF90F9A@nowhere.com> Message-ID: <3FFA4F69.C0EFB0E3@nowhere.com> Redstone wrote: > Don't you know it's all in French written backwards? :-) Ahhhh, that 'splains it. And if you play it backwards through a text-to-voice synthesizer, this really spooky voice says "Paul is dead". :-) -- GregR - Another Beemer Biker ...o&o> [This space for rent - inquire within] From nobody at nowhere.com Mon Jan 5 22:04:31 2004 From: nobody at nowhere.com (GregR) Date: Tue Jan 6 01:09:08 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OK, I give up - what are they selling?... ;-) References: <3FF89836.2FF90F9A@nowhere.com> Message-ID: <3FFA4FEF.6AAB0EEF@nowhere.com> hello wrote: > Whut is ut thet yu dunnot unerstan? I wud sey from lukking at it that ther > jes se$$in V1@Gaa. An the blue foxes bark at the moon yu cen gettit at a > dsscuun, which means appropriately albert shuns the water et is Cheep. Heh, for a while I considered running it through the Swedish Chef dialectizer to see if that would make it more readable. :-) -- GregR - Another Beemer Biker ...o&o> [This space for rent - inquire within] From nobody at nowhere.com Mon Jan 5 22:05:44 2004 From: nobody at nowhere.com (GregR) Date: Tue Jan 6 01:10:30 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OK, I give up - what are they selling?... ;-) References: <3FF89836.2FF90F9A@nowhere.com> Message-ID: <3FFA5038.B7C08F48@nowhere.com> Mike Gray wrote: > The question does remain as to how dumb you'd have to be to buy from these, > though. Dunno, how dumb are a box full of moonrocks? :-) -- GregR - Another Beemer Biker ...o&o> [This space for rent - inquire within] From tfm3 at nospam.teleproc.com Tue Jan 6 00:40:31 2004 From: tfm3 at nospam.teleproc.com (Thomas Mooney) Date: Tue Jan 6 01:46:20 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OT: gender specificity of nouns - was - Re: Wow. Spammer hasguts to reply... References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: James McCarty Yeager wrote in message news:btdiko$95f$1@news.spamcop.net... > Thomas Mooney wrote: > > > Robert Taylor wrote in message > > news:btc873$9ip$1@news.spamcop.net... > > > >>English, perversely, is > >>not gender-specific about much of anything (should we infer some deep > >>truth from this?). > > > > I'm curious about two things: > > > > 1) In what way is being non-gender-specific perverse? > > in this context, perverse=non-standard to most of the rest of the world's languages. I'll say this in my defense: before I posted my question I pulled out a dictionary and looked up "perverse" to affirm that it carried the negative meaning I inferred and that "non-standard" wasn't buried down in the fourth or fifth definition. I have subsequently consulted other dictionaries and while most definitions carry some significant negative overtones, I found a reference to "counter to what is expected". I really wasn't looking to pick a fight here, but rather to learn something. And I really don't suspect Robert Taylor was looking to pick a fight, except possibly in some playful way (e.g. the followup line about inferring some "deep truth"). I just don't see any value to imposing gender specificity. The germans at least allow for neutrality. The french insist on gender assignment. But, regardless, knowing the gender of a noun doesn't really help the writer/reader in communication 99.99999% of the time. Beyond writing with significant historical context (e.g. mythology), gender specificity seems to be merely a skill to be mastered with no compensation for mastery. The historical perspective you and others have provided is quite interesting. And I probably wouldn't have raised the issue except that the word "perverse" was provocative. And it seemed to defend an aspect of speech that could most kindly be viewed as vestigal, less kindly as a nuisance. And I couldn't/can't see how the loss of gender specificity was/is anything but an improvement in the language. Thanks to all who replied. It was educational. -- TFM3 Note: Spam-resistant e-mail address From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 06:49:21 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Robert Slade) Date: Tue Jan 6 01:50:50 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. CAT in the house In-Reply-To: References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> <3FF9DE8E.D16B7FB2@spamcop.net> <3FFA02A7.AD0C2608@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Luis wrote: > While I'm still amazed about the volume of both ON and OFF topic replies to > my original post, (Now it looks like I was holding a match to the edge of a > dry corn field), I must say that Ellen not only caught the central issue > (without complaining about my possible misposting), but also took the > appropriate and logical action. Kudos to Ellen. > > Yes, I have both Cat-5, Cat-5e and Cat-6 in the house. Both male and female. > And both genders are supposed to work together. Let us call THIS one carried > "Ad absurdum". > > > "Cat" wrote in message > news:3FFA02A7.AD0C2608@spamcop.net... > >>Marjolein Katsma wrote: >> >>>Now that this is explained to me, it is obvious (with hindsight, and >>>only if I'm thinking of "name" not "handle"). But you have to _know_ >>>that "Cat" is short for a female name; if you don't... >> >>Yeah, but name or nickname, most people know that "Cat" has an obvious >>feminine touch. Outside of Cat Stevens, you just don't see men willing >>to go by such a feminine nickname. > > > > You will note that Ellen said that action had already been taken. This was done before you posted. This was old news. If you had posted your spam in .spam you would have seen several copies of exactly the same spam in that group going back several days. This topic has also been discussed in .help again several days ago. Re the point regarding not posting spam in newsgroups other that .spam this is so that users who are using modems etc do not have to pay for downloading someone else's spam. Rob From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 07:32:05 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Tue Jan 6 02:36:39 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> <3FF9DE8E.D16B7FB2@spamcop.net> <3FFA02A7.AD0C2608@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Cat (nobody@spamcop.net) wrote in news:3FFA02A7.AD0C2608@spamcop.net: > Yeah, but name or nickname, most people know that "Cat" has an obvious > feminine touch. Only if those "most people" know other people named "Cat" or know it's an abbreviation of a female name. There really is nothing "obvious" there - only knowledge and experience. I might as well say that "most people" will know that "Marjolein" is a female name - but I won't because it just isn't true. It's true only for those people who have experience with other people named that way, or a a similar name, or who have some exposure to French. To everyone else, it's just a toss up. Or did you mean "most people in the US"? As a nickname, all bets are off. People can use a "male" nickname to hide their female identity and vice versa. I don't make any assumptions. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 07:40:30 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Tue Jan 6 02:48:35 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OT: gender specificity of nouns - was - Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply... References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: James McCarty Yeager (slangist@verizon.net) wrote in news:btdiko$95f$1@news.spamcop.net: >> 1) In what way is being non-gender-specific perverse? > > in this context, perverse=non-standard to most of the rest of the > world's languages. For the languages I've had exposure to, I would say about half (at most) have gender-specific nouns (and corresponding forms); but there are *so* many languages in the world, I certainly wouldn't be prepared to say that most languages in the world have gender-specific forms. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From spamtrap at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 00:42:58 2004 From: spamtrap at spamcop.net (Spam Trap) Date: Tue Jan 6 02:49:11 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Alan Ralsky at it again References: <3FF9D6CD.1090908@spamcop.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 00:21:44 +0000 (UTC), Marjolein Katsma wrote: >Spam Trap (spamtrap@spamcop.net) wrote in news:btcqea$3v8$1 >@news.spamcop.net: > >> He lied to the NY Times, and did NOT take a break from >> spamming since 12/15, nor has he swiched to "CAN SPAM" compliant >> methods. > >Shouldn't someone point that out to the NYT? I did send a note to the author. No reply. Perhaps others should make the point to them as well? -- A user, not a reporting address... From pwillener at ScPiAnMcCoOmP.com Tue Jan 6 16:51:49 2004 From: pwillener at ScPiAnMcCoOmP.com (Pat Willener) Date: Tue Jan 6 02:59:55 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: What is _this_ about? References: <3FFA1F47.FF92C1B9@notvalid.com> Message-ID: "gmccx" wrote in message news:3FFA1F47.FF92C1B9@notvalid.com... > > Posted in spamcop.spam, same subject. I didn't try to report this > because after looking at it a bit I don't think I have much of an idea > what to make of it. Looks like a bounce of a spam that possibly contained your email address in the From header. From user at domain.invalid Tue Jan 6 10:30:00 2004 From: user at domain.invalid (user@domain.invalid) Date: Tue Jan 6 03:32:20 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Alan Ralsky at it again References: <3FF9D6CD.1090908@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <3FFA7208.5030302@domain.invalid> were can I read this article ? URL please, NYT seems to want $$$$$ Spam Trap wrote: > On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 00:21:44 +0000 (UTC), Marjolein Katsma > wrote: > > >>Spam Trap (spamtrap@spamcop.net) wrote in news:btcqea$3v8$1 >>@news.spamcop.net: >> >> >>>He lied to the NY Times, and did NOT take a break from >>>spamming since 12/15, nor has he swiched to "CAN SPAM" compliant >>>methods. >> >>Shouldn't someone point that out to the NYT? > > > I did send a note to the author. No reply. > > Perhaps others should make the point to them as well? > > -- > A user, not a reporting address... From tfm3 at nospam.teleproc.com Tue Jan 6 03:27:02 2004 From: tfm3 at nospam.teleproc.com (Thomas Mooney) Date: Tue Jan 6 04:35:59 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Alan Ralsky at it again References: <3FF9D6CD.1090908@spamcop.net> <3FFA7208.5030302@domain.invalid> Message-ID: wrote in message news:3FFA7208.5030302@domain.invalid... > were can I read this article ? > URL please, NYT seems to want $$$$$ The following may require registration, but that's free. To the best of my knowledge, the NYT has never passed my e-mail address on to a third party or used it to send me spam. http://tinyurl.com/39xdn -- TFM3 Note: Spam-resistant e-mail address From user at domain.invalid Tue Jan 6 11:48:00 2004 From: user at domain.invalid (user@domain.invalid) Date: Tue Jan 6 04:56:57 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Alan Ralsky at it again References: <3FF9D6CD.1090908@spamcop.net> <3FFA7208.5030302@domain.invalid> Message-ID: <3FFA8450.3070104@domain.invalid> Thomas Mooney wrote: > wrote in message > news:3FFA7208.5030302@domain.invalid... > >>were can I read this article ? >>URL please, NYT seems to want $$$$$ > > > The following may require registration, but that's free. To the best of my > knowledge, the NYT has never passed my e-mail address on to a third party or > used it to send me spam. > > http://tinyurl.com/39xdn > > -- > TFM3 > > Note: Spam-resistant e-mail address > > thanks, it worked even without registration. From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Tue Jan 6 10:57:07 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Tue Jan 6 05:01:11 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 18:31:02 -0500, Robert Taylor wrote: > I've heard "poes", in NL. That's probably where we get "puss", as in "puss in boots" or "pussy-cat" from in English. -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- Which is worse: ignorance or apathy? Who knows? Who cares? From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Tue Jan 6 11:08:03 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Tue Jan 6 05:14:45 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: gender specificity of nouns - was - Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply... References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 18:32:41 -0500, Robert Taylor wrote: > In a strictly figurative sense. Implication was that most Indo-European > languages are gender-specific, but "we" had to be different. Largely > tongue-in cheek; not seriously intended. :) English *used* to have gender. It can be seen in the possessive case. Like in German, we add an "s" (or "'s" most of the time) to the end of a word to make it a possessive, for example "my cat's teeth are sharp". German does the same thing, but only to masculine and neutral nouns. For example, "my dog's teeth are sharp" would be "Die Z?hne meines Hunds sind scharf" (dog = Hund, masculine in German), but coming back to the cat's teeth, it would be "Die Z?hne meiner Katze sind scharf". "Katze" being feminine takes no "s". English used to be like this and there is still at least one example of it in today's language: "Lady day". Not "Lady's day" as it would be now, but "Lady day" in which the original Germanic construct is maintained. And that concludes today's wildly off-topic language lesson :) -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- Some marriages are made in heaven, but they all have to be maintained on earth... From agent01413 at my-deja.com Tue Jan 6 04:11:48 2004 From: agent01413 at my-deja.com (Socks the Whitehouse Cat) Date: Tue Jan 6 06:20:45 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Alan Ralsky at it again References: <3FF9D6CD.1090908@spamcop.net> <3FFA7208.5030302@domain.invalid> Message-ID: I can't believe that Thomas Mooney really had the following to say that was worth commenting on: > wrote in message > news:3FFA7208.5030302@domain.invalid... >> were can I read this article ? >> URL please, NYT seems to want $$$$$ > > The following may require registration, but that's free. To the best > of my knowledge, the NYT has never passed my e-mail address on to a > third party or used it to send me spam. > > http://tinyurl.com/39xdn for future reference, tinlc works as a uid and password, or so I am told -- tired of reading posts from morphing kooks? get a real news reader - http://xnews.newsguy.com help page rank Jamie Baillie http://www.jamiebaillie.com From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 11:45:23 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Tue Jan 6 06:50:22 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Alan Ralsky at it again References: <3FF9D6CD.1090908@spamcop.net> <3FFA7208.5030302@domain.invalid> Message-ID: (user@domain.invalid) wrote in news:3FFA7208.5030302@domain.invalid: > were can I read this article ? > URL please, NYT seems to want $$$$$ While registration is free, you may not want to give your data to the NYT. The workaround is this: if you have a keyword, or a title, use this to search Google News. Google has a deal with the NYT, and if you follow a link from Google News, you won't be asked for registration. (Might work with other 'registration-required' online newspapers as well.) -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com Tue Jan 6 11:54:40 2004 From: redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com (Redstone) Date: Tue Jan 6 06:59:59 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Russian Joe-Job References: Message-ID: "[H]omer" wrote in news:pan.2004.01.05.19.57.16.99566@spamcop.net: > > Yeah, I figured out that the source was a cable customer on > arcor.de (abuse@arcor.net). Maybe an open proxy, who knows. > Reported anyway. It usually is an open proxy nowadays. Hopefully the joe-job will wear off as the spammer uses some other unsuspecting victim's email address. From redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com Tue Jan 6 11:55:49 2004 From: redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com (Redstone) Date: Tue Jan 6 07:07:58 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OK, I give up - what are they selling?... ;-) References: <3FF89836.2FF90F9A@nowhere.com> <3FFA4F69.C0EFB0E3@nowhere.com> Message-ID: GregR wrote in news:3FFA4F69.C0EFB0E3@nowhere.com: > > Ahhhh, that 'splains it. > > And if you play it backwards through a text-to-voice synthesizer, > this really spooky voice says "Paul is dead". :-) > > -- I KNEW that Yoko had something to do with it. :-) From sache at grignon.inra.fr Tue Jan 6 13:16:03 2004 From: sache at grignon.inra.fr (Ivan Sache) Date: Tue Jan 6 07:18:37 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Lost lottery spammer Message-ID: <3FFAA703.95545EA4@grignon.inra.fr> Hi, Among several New Year's presents, I have received a great WINNING NOTIFICATION!! from Mrs. Megan van Lorch: > Diamond Email Lottery Promotions > 25A Prinz Franz Straat > 1543 Roermond,Rotterdam > Netherlands > GOVERNMENT ACCREDITED LICENSED LOTTERY PROMOTERS. As far as I remember, Roermond is located in Limburg province, near the German border, therefore fairly far from Rotterdam, even on the Dutch scale. I also seem to remember that Dutch postcodes end with two letters (a la 6700 EE Wageningen, although nobody in this very educated city was ever able to explain me the rationale of the code :-) Mrs. van Lorch needs some geography classes. I am not sure the infamous American Language Center or Ralskyan academies of that ilk give such classes. For the sake of curiosity, do 'government accredited licensed lotteries' exist in the Netherlands? Regards, and happy new year, hoping/dreaming 2004 will be the last spam year. -- Ivan Sache From newsgroups at jc-rules.com Tue Jan 6 06:20:33 2004 From: newsgroups at jc-rules.com (JC-Rules) Date: Tue Jan 6 07:25:45 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Turning off images in IE References: Message-ID: "Todd Prouty" wrote in message news:btco2n$13g$1@news.spamcop.net... > Does anyone know of any easy way (small freeware app, perhaps?) to turn > images in Internet Explorer (v. 6, Win2k) on and off? I'm locked into > Outlook here at work, and would like to make sure images in HTML spam > are blocked. After a lot of digging around in the registry, I haven't > been able to find any way other than the Tools menu, which is > inconvenient. It would be great if there was a system tray icon that > could just be toggled on and off... Todd, You may want to consider upgrading to Outlook 2003 which does this by default. -- Jerry Phelps - President JC Rules Computing, Inc. Metro 817-498-4890 NRA Lifetime Member TSRA Lifetime Member LEAA Lifetime Member http://www.JC-rules.com The best weapon is ANYTHING that makes your enemy change his or her mind. (Do NOT reply via email but to this Group ONLY. Emails to embedded email address are set to bounce back to sender.) From l.rmvmayne at uea.ac.uk Tue Jan 6 12:36:28 2004 From: l.rmvmayne at uea.ac.uk (Leon Mayne) Date: Tue Jan 6 07:47:23 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Cat wrote: > "Cat" is an obvious female name. You've never watched Red Dwarf then..... :-) From alanb+google4 at digistar.com Tue Jan 6 12:39:45 2004 From: alanb+google4 at digistar.com (Uncle StoatWarbler) Date: Tue Jan 6 07:48:06 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: child porn or joe job? References: Message-ID: On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 08:24:46 -0700, Spam Trap wrote: > b. each sent from different comcast.net open proxies, but with > envelope-from @ibi-tec.net > > c. ibi-tec.net is a German internet billing system. http://www.ibi-tec.net > notes the joe job in progress ibi-tec is responsible for a number of dialler scams and spamruns. > d. chat.deatoo.com and livecam.deatoo.com do appear to be sex-related > sites Check where they are - Ibi-tec. These have been arriving at $orkplace for _months_, using hijacked proxies and forged sender envelopes, with misleading subject lines, promoting *.my-free-website.com and *.deatoo.com I doubt this is a Joe Job, personally. From a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa Tue Jan 6 07:50:43 2004 From: a at all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa (John Malmberg) Date: Tue Jan 6 07:58:45 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Lost lottery spammer In-Reply-To: <3FFAA703.95545EA4@grignon.inra.fr> References: <3FFAA703.95545EA4@grignon.inra.fr> Message-ID: Ivan Sache wrote: > Hi, > >>Diamond Email Lottery Promotions >>25A Prinz Franz Straat >>1543 Roermond,Rotterdam >>Netherlands >>GOVERNMENT ACCREDITED LICENSED LOTTERY PROMOTERS. > > For the sake of curiosity, do 'government accredited licensed lotteries' > exist in the Netherlands? This looks like a variation of the Nigerian 419 scam. Otherwise known as an Advance Fee Scam. To collect your winnings you will need to pay a nominal fee that will allow them to raid your bank account. Or verify your identity to allow you to steal it. LART to the same places as Nigerian 419 scams for your country. Someone recently posted the addresses for the Netherlands. -John wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only From alanb+google4 at digistar.com Tue Jan 6 12:58:18 2004 From: alanb+google4 at digistar.com (Uncle StoatWarbler) Date: Tue Jan 6 08:00:58 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Why Not Allow More Automated Reporting by SC??? References: Message-ID: On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:04:59 -0600, JC-Rules wrote: > Larry, > > What "other" reporting mistakes are you referring to? The most common sems to be reporting lists you're on in the morning's clicking frenzy. Unfortunately that's hellishly easy because subjects may slip thought and the spamcop UI gets hypnotic after a couple of hundred reports. Being able to define known OK hosts on a per-reporter basis and have the system flag them to the reporter for extra-careful checking would solve a lot of it - basically an exception list. From alanb+google4 at digistar.com Tue Jan 6 13:06:27 2004 From: alanb+google4 at digistar.com (Uncle StoatWarbler) Date: Tue Jan 6 08:14:10 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Someone's Joe-Jobbing Blackstar... References: Message-ID: On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 17:35:40 +0000, Robert Slade wrote: > However, Blackstar could be using a doggy marking company. It sounds like > you have bought from them, in which case they can legally e-mail offers to > you under the new UK Antispam Law. Not via open proxies they can't. From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 08:08:00 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (R. P. McCormick) Date: Tue Jan 6 08:18:55 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Front end rDNS BL system recommendations? Message-ID: Someone asked me what would be a good system to front end a mail server that doesn't do good rDNS BL lookups and filtering. Ease of setup and configuration would be one of the important criteria. Thanks in advance for any insight. R P McCormick SpamCop user From alanb+google4 at digistar.com Tue Jan 6 13:15:14 2004 From: alanb+google4 at digistar.com (Uncle StoatWarbler) Date: Tue Jan 6 08:20:48 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: New BL at spamhaus.org References: Message-ID: On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 15:08:34 +0000, John McLusky wrote: > "The Spamhaus Exploits Block List (XBL) is a realtime database of IP > addresses of illegal 3rd party exploits, including open proxies (HTTP, > socks, AnalogX, wingate, etc), worms/viruses with built-in spam engines, > and other types of trojan-horse exploits." > > http://www.spamhaus.org/xbl/ > > Might be worth a look... The good part about it is this: sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org - 2 birds with one stone if you're doing DNSBL lookups. From alanb+google4 at digistar.com Tue Jan 6 13:21:37 2004 From: alanb+google4 at digistar.com (Uncle StoatWarbler) Date: Tue Jan 6 08:28:24 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: cubex.net.pk - Gone ??? References: Message-ID: On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 23:57:03 +0000, Trappaspam wrote: > http://cubex.net.pk - Too good to be true :-) - But - the whole block & > route seems to have been down for at least 24 hours :-) > Anyone know if cubex.com.pk are the same outfit ? (details below) cubex.net.pk may be gone, but cubexS.com.pk is still spam havening. From user at domain.invalid Tue Jan 6 15:24:12 2004 From: user at domain.invalid (user@domain.invalid) Date: Tue Jan 6 08:30:55 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Lost lottery spammer References: <3FFAA703.95545EA4@grignon.inra.fr> Message-ID: <3FFAB6FC.9090608@domain.invalid> yes, that's great, I was also a couple of times a "winner"............ just write to her and be overwhelmed at your luck and ask how you can claim your winning. To cut a long story short, you first have to pay a "admin" fee to receive ?????? .......... your guess ist as good as mine ............ obviously I never answered that second mail ............ Ivan Sache wrote: > Hi, > > Among several New Year's presents, I have received a great WINNING > NOTIFICATION!! from Mrs. Megan van Lorch: > > >>Diamond Email Lottery Promotions >>25A Prinz Franz Straat >>1543 Roermond,Rotterdam >>Netherlands >>GOVERNMENT ACCREDITED LICENSED LOTTERY PROMOTERS. > > > As far as I remember, Roermond is located in Limburg province, near the > German border, therefore fairly far from Rotterdam, even on the Dutch > scale. I also seem to remember that Dutch postcodes end with two letters > (a la 6700 EE Wageningen, although nobody in this very educated city was > ever able to explain me the rationale of the code :-) > Mrs. van Lorch needs some geography classes. I am not sure the infamous > American Language Center or Ralskyan academies of that ilk give such classes. > > For the sake of curiosity, do 'government accredited licensed lotteries' > exist in the Netherlands? > > > Regards, and happy new year, hoping/dreaming 2004 will be the last spam year. > From user at domain.invalid Tue Jan 6 15:39:16 2004 From: user at domain.invalid (user@domain.invalid) Date: Tue Jan 6 08:44:53 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Ralsky and CQNET, have you heard about this ? Message-ID: <3FFABA84.7070109@domain.invalid> that mail came after I sent them a fax about www.pharmacourt.biz, 211.158.7.147 ..........very "innocent" people ............?!?!?!?!? Datum: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 17:21:56 +0800 Von: "??????" An: "ff2010m" Betreff: re: spam Sir: Very sorry to hear that there is a spammer in our Network. We will deal with it as soon as possible. Keep contacting.Thanks a lot. ????????????????best wishes ----------------------------------------------------------- NOC: MengFei Hu Email: humf@cqnet.com.cn tel:+86-23-63783000-6857 fax:+86-23-63782270 Chongqing CNC Broadband Networks Co.,Ltd. 2004-01-06 ----------------------------------------------------------- From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 13:50:39 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Tue Jan 6 09:01:26 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Lost lottery spammer References: <3FFAA703.95545EA4@grignon.inra.fr> Message-ID: Ivan Sache (sache@grignon.inra.fr) wrote in news:3FFAA703.95545EA4@grignon.inra.fr: >> Diamond Email Lottery Promotions >> 25A Prinz Franz Straat >> 1543 Roermond,Rotterdam >> Netherlands >> GOVERNMENT ACCREDITED LICENSED LOTTERY PROMOTERS. > > As far as I remember, Roermond is located in Limburg province, near > the German border, therefore fairly far from Rotterdam, even on the > Dutch scale. I also seem to remember that Dutch postcodes end with two > letters (a la 6700 EE Wageningen, although nobody in this very > educated city was ever able to explain me the rationale of the code > :-) Mrs. van Lorch needs some geography classes. I am not sure the > infamous American Language Center or Ralskyan academies of that ilk > give such classes. > > For the sake of curiosity, do 'government accredited licensed > lotteries' exist in the Netherlands? Yup, three things immediately jumped to my eye: - house number before street name (should be after) - incomplete postal code (yes, it should be XXXX NN) - Roermond,Rotterdam - huh? Let's see... - Postal codes in Roermond start with 6 (maybe all with 60) - There is no street name in Roermond that starts with Prinz - There is only one street name that starts with Prins (Prins Bernhardstraat) - Postal codes in Rotterdam start with 3 (maybe all with 30) - Several Street names starting with Prins, none with Prinz; no prin[s|z] Franz I'd suggest to refer the scammer to this site: FRANK'S COMPULSIVE GUIDE TO POSTAL ADDRESSES: http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/postal.html#europe so (s)he can learn how to fake Dutch addresses a little more believably ;-) For addresses <-> postal codes, try this: Postcode.nl: http://www.postcode.nl/ See also my remark in the thread "DIA55.US Dutch registration info" (3 Jan) for how to use this site. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 13:52:39 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Tue Jan 6 09:03:48 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Lost lottery spammer References: <3FFAA703.95545EA4@grignon.inra.fr> Message-ID: Ivan Sache (sache@grignon.inra.fr) wrote in news:3FFAA703.95545EA4 @grignon.inra.fr: > For the sake of curiosity, do 'government accredited licensed lotteries' > exist in the Netherlands? Missed that one. Yes, not by that name, but only licensed lotteries can operate in the Netherlands. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 14:05:46 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Tue Jan 6 09:14:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Lost lottery spammer References: <3FFAA703.95545EA4@grignon.inra.fr> Message-ID: John Malmberg (a@all.addresses.on.cdrom.are.invalid.aaa) wrote in news:bteav4$vfd$1@news.spamcop.net: > This looks like a variation of the Nigerian 419 scam. Otherwise known > as an Advance Fee Scam. Yes, that's what the Lottery scams are. > To collect your winnings you will need to pay a nominal fee that will > allow them to raid your bank account. No. You just pay them an amount of "administration costs" and then never see your prize. [BTW, it seems that this _mechanism_ is actually legal in The Netherlands (which is why they so often quote a Dutch "address" and usually a Dutch phone number) - but it's a scam nonetheless.] > LART to the same places as Nigerian 419 scams for your country. NOT in the Netherlands; the 419 reporting address is for Nigerian scams only. > Someone recently posted the addresses for the Netherlands. I did. But it's NOT for lottery scams. They're going after the Nigerians. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 18:27:09 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Berny) Date: Tue Jan 6 09:33:34 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Ralsky and CQNET, have you heard about this ?-- please, C&C warning next time References: <3FFABA84.7070109@domain.invalid> Message-ID: wrote in message news:3FFABA84.7070109@domain.invalid... > that mail came after I sent them a fax about www.pharmacourt.biz, > 211.158.7.147 > > ..........very "innocent" people ............?!?!?!?!? > > > > Datum: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 17:21:56 +0800 > Von: "η" > An: "ff2010m" > Betreff: re: spam > > Sir: > Very sorry to hear that there is a spammer in our Network. We will > deal with it as soon as possible. > Keep contacting.Thanks a lot. > > > > best wishes > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > NOC: MengFei Hu > Email: humf@cqnet.com.cn > tel:+86-23-63783000-6857 > fax:+86-23-63782270 > Chongqing CNC Broadband Networks Co.,Ltd. > 2004-01-06 > ----------------------------------------------------------- > And I thought cqnet was simply Ralsky Inc. From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 15:53:39 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Hans Hansen) Date: Tue Jan 6 09:59:27 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: child and animal porn or joe job? http://www.ibi-tec.net + BT IGNITE ? References: Message-ID: There are some evaluations about child and animal porn-spams in Germany already! Please send your spam and evidence to: ========================= mail @at@ wettbewerbszentrale.de info @at@ BKA.de poststelle @at@ regtp.de cp @at@ interpol.int info@at@ europol.eu.int info@at@ computerbetrug.de info @at@ vzbv.de contact @at@ spammer-hammer.de ========================= We've heard that there is (may be) an illegal dialer used to cash money!? The company BT IGNITE is one of the providers of value added nos missusage before named in this case. see: http://www.spammer-hammer.de/pages/spammail/beisp/ibi-tec/ibi-tec_kopf.htm If it is child or animal porn this may be evaluated from german FBI named BKA if you are sending your complaint to them. From newspamtrap at aol.com Tue Jan 6 14:57:36 2004 From: newspamtrap at aol.com (Trappaspam) Date: Tue Jan 6 10:05:52 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: cubex.net.pk - Gone ??? References: Message-ID: "Uncle StoatWarbler" wrote in message news:pan.2004.01.06.12.21.37.950698@digistar.com... > On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 23:57:03 +0000, Trappaspam wrote: > > > http://cubex.net.pk - Too good to be true :-) - But - the whole block & > > route seems to have been down for at least 24 hours :-) > (details below) > > > cubex.net.pk may be gone, but cubexS.com.pk is still spam havening. Can you post a recent example in .spam , as even for cubexS am getting: --- 01/06/04 14:52:24 GMT Standard Time --- resolving host "cubexs.com.pk", please wait... --- resolve error: host not found & --- 01/06/04 14:56:30 GMT Standard Time --- pinging cubexs.com.pk, please wait... --- Ping error: host not found However, cubex.com.pk [66.78.3.211] is up - so back to my earlier question > Anyone know if cubex.com.pk are the same outfit ? Regs Jon NS From a2yq-1ka8KILLCAPSB4SENDING at spamex.com Tue Jan 6 09:50:11 2004 From: a2yq-1ka8KILLCAPSB4SENDING at spamex.com (Todd Prouty) Date: Tue Jan 6 10:55:43 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Turning off images in IE In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Merlyn wrote: > "Todd Prouty" wrote in message > news:btco2n$13g$1@news.spamcop.net... > >>Does anyone know of any easy way (small freeware app, perhaps?) to turn >>images in Internet Explorer (v. 6, Win2k) on and off? I'm locked into >>Outlook here at work, and would like to make sure images in HTML spam >>are blocked. After a lot of digging around in the registry, I haven't >>been able to find any way other than the Tools menu, which is >>inconvenient. It would be great if there was a system tray icon that >>could just be toggled on and off... >>-- > > > Tools/Internet Options/Advanced Under Multimedia unclick "Show pictures" Um, see my message above... "I haven't been able to find any way other than the Tools menu, which is inconvenient." This is exactly the process I'm trying avoid. -- Todd Prouty From a2yq-1ka8KILLCAPSB4SENDING at spamex.com Tue Jan 6 09:53:05 2004 From: a2yq-1ka8KILLCAPSB4SENDING at spamex.com (Todd Prouty) Date: Tue Jan 6 10:55:54 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Turning off images in IE In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: JC-Rules wrote: > "Todd Prouty" wrote in message > news:btco2n$13g$1@news.spamcop.net... > >>Does anyone know of any easy way (small freeware app, perhaps?) to turn >>images in Internet Explorer (v. 6, Win2k) on and off? I'm locked into >>Outlook here at work, and would like to make sure images in HTML spam >>are blocked. After a lot of digging around in the registry, I haven't >>been able to find any way other than the Tools menu, which is >>inconvenient. It would be great if there was a system tray icon that >>could just be toggled on and off... > > > Todd, > > You may want to consider upgrading to Outlook 2003 which does this by > default. Thanks, I didn't realize Outlook 2003 had that feature. Maybe that upgrade is already in our IS department's plans. Does turning images on involve several steps, as with IE/Outlook 2000? -- Todd Prouty From sph at sph.dk Tue Jan 6 16:53:19 2004 From: sph at sph.dk (sph) Date: Tue Jan 6 10:56:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Turning off images in IE References: Message-ID: "Todd Prouty" wrote:< > Well, I'd like to report the messages, not just remove them from the > server. I typically just turn off images, run SpamSource, and copy the > headers and body into the two-part reporting form. SpamSource opens the > message (the only way to get the headers in Outlook), so turning off > images is the only way to avoid having my spam tracked via remotely > hosted images. > The blocked message is in spamhilators trash can. I use "show message" (which is in text-format only) within spamhilator and paste the message including headers to SPAMCOPs web reporting page. I dont know if it will work the same way with outlook as with outlook express. From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 16:36:55 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Wiggy) Date: Tue Jan 6 11:40:25 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Turning off images in IE References: Message-ID: "Todd Prouty" wrote in message news:btco2n$13g$1@news.spamcop.net... > Does anyone know of any easy way (small freeware app, perhaps?) to turn > images in Internet Explorer (v. 6, Win2k) on and off? I'm locked into > Outlook here at work, and would like to make sure images in HTML spam > are blocked. After a lot of digging around in the registry, I haven't > been able to find any way other than the Tools menu, which is > inconvenient. It would be great if there was a system tray icon that > could just be toggled on and off... > -- > Todd Prouty If it helps the regkey for turning images off and on is: HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Main\Display Inline Images A couple of simple .reg files could be used to toggle between showing images and not. HTH Wiggy From mikegray at avoidpsamdsl.pipex.com Tue Jan 6 16:41:22 2004 From: mikegray at avoidpsamdsl.pipex.com (Mike Gray) Date: Tue Jan 6 11:45:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: That didn't take long -- "CAN-SPAM compliant" spam References: <3FFA18B8.43260DB@spamcop.net> Message-ID: > Well, it's only January 5th, and I just received my first spam with: I'm on my third, my first being on January 1st, and that was AM UK time, so would have been perhaps before midnight US time... by and large, my spam is exactly the same as it was pre can-spam, although quantity seems slightly decreased, but I credit that to it being post-holiday. Mike From noemail at nowhere.com Tue Jan 6 11:50:18 2004 From: noemail at nowhere.com (Robert) Date: Tue Jan 6 11:45:20 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Comcast revisited References: <3FF7BA57.FE1E9602@spamcop.net> Message-ID: I'm suprised no one posted this already... http://www.dslreports.com/ has a wealth of information on ISP's, including cable intenet providers. You can get all the customer-contributed dirt on Comcast, and post your own. I've read quite a bit on them, they're even worse than is generally known. Robert "Cat" wrote in message news:3FF7BA57.FE1E9602@spamcop.net... > After all the recent discussion about Comcast in the newsgroup and my > less than productive conversation with a particularly rude and snotty > abuse admin on the phone yesterday who tried to write off Comcast's spam > problems as a virus on the spam victims' computers, I really wish we > could do something about Comcast. I also mentioned some spam fighting > concerns to the woman on the phone, and she said she refused to address > any of that. I wish I had written her name down, because now I can't > remember it. She claims that they do close spammers down but that it > takes them anywhere from a week to a month to investigate. I told her I > wasn't gullible enough to believe that since a reputible ISP would shut > down a spammer immediately and that I was tired of her excuses. > > Anyway, I really need a Comcast bitch list so that my spam complaints > will hopefully get through to someone with half a brain cell. If anyone > here has a Comcast bitch list, please post it here. From qf3ngqs402 at sneakemail.com Tue Jan 6 10:43:02 2004 From: qf3ngqs402 at sneakemail.com (Eric The Viking) Date: Tue Jan 6 11:45:37 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Alan Ralsky at it again In-Reply-To: <3FF9D6CD.1090908@spamcop.net> References: <3FF9D6CD.1090908@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Anony Mouse wrote: > Alan Ralsky did not take much of a break... > Like all spammers he lied in the recent news interview. > He is still spamming using the same methods... > http://www.pharmacourt.biz Not that I don't think Ralsky is scum, but how do you know this is him and not some other spammer? The style of the web page or the fact that it's hosted in China, or some other detail? From Merlyn at Spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 11:56:02 2004 From: Merlyn at Spamcop.net (Merlyn) Date: Tue Jan 6 12:01:19 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Alan Ralsky at it again References: <3FF9D6CD.1090908@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Eric The Viking" wrote in message news:bteokq$vc$1@news.spamcop.net... > Anony Mouse wrote: > > Alan Ralsky did not take much of a break... > > Like all spammers he lied in the recent news interview. > > He is still spamming using the same methods... > > http://www.pharmacourt.biz > > Not that I don't think Ralsky is scum, but how do you know this is him > and not some other spammer? The style of the web page or the fact that > it's hosted in China, or some other detail? It is an Alan Ralsky IP and "yes" he is spamming scum who steals services from others so he can dump his unwanted crap in everyone's inbox. What he does using his SMTP AUTH "break-ins" is illegal. Query : www.pharmacourt.biz Offical Name = pharmacourt.biz Aliases = www.pharmacourt.biz Addresses = 211.158.7.147 Ref: SBL10264 See: http://www.spamhaus.org/sbl/sbl.lasso?query=SBL10264 211.158.0.0/18 is listed on the Spamhaus Block List (SBL) 19-Dec-2003 12:47 GMT | SR Alan Ralsky 211.158.0.0/18 is listed on the Register Of Known Spam Operations (ROKSO) database as being assigned to, under the control of, or providing service to a known professional spam operation run by Alan Ralsky. These also belong to him: SBL7496 [211.158.88.0/21] SBL8282 [211.158.32.0/20] SBL8680 [211.158.48.0/22] SBL9326 [211.158.64.0/21] -- Regards, Merlyn A Spamcop advocate All replies will be made specifically to the newsgroup From a2yq-1ka8KILLCAPSB4SENDING at spamex.com Tue Jan 6 11:09:15 2004 From: a2yq-1ka8KILLCAPSB4SENDING at spamex.com (Todd Prouty) Date: Tue Jan 6 12:10:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Turning off images in IE In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Wiggy wrote: > "Todd Prouty" wrote in message > news:btco2n$13g$1@news.spamcop.net... > >>Does anyone know of any easy way (small freeware app, perhaps?) to turn >>images in Internet Explorer (v. 6, Win2k) on and off? I'm locked into >>Outlook here at work, and would like to make sure images in HTML spam >>are blocked. After a lot of digging around in the registry, I haven't >>been able to find any way other than the Tools menu, which is >>inconvenient. It would be great if there was a system tray icon that >>could just be toggled on and off... > > > If it helps the regkey for turning images off and on is: > > HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Main\Display Inline Images > > A couple of simple .reg files could be used to toggle between showing images > and not. > > HTH Thanks, that's exactly what I was looking for. For some reason I didn't come across that particular branch during my search. For anyone interested: I just exported two versions of the branch mentioned above, naming one file "IE Images OFF.reg" and the other, "IE Images ON.reg". The only difference in each file is the value of "Display Inline Images" (yes/no). Now double-clicking one of the files on my desktop and hitting twice toggles the display of images in IE. Handy, if not perfect. Sure beats using the Tools menu, though. Thanks again. Oh, btw, the setting change won't take effect in any currently open instances of IE (or windows that use IE inline, such as Outlook HTML messages), just new ones. -- Todd Prouty From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 17:28:08 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Tue Jan 6 12:30:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: That didn't take long -- "CAN-SPAM compliant" spam References: <3FFA18B8.43260DB@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Mike Gray (mikegray@avoidpsamdsl.pipex.com) wrote in news:bteoek$s8$1@news.spamcop.net: > by and large, my spam is > exactly the same as it was pre can-spam, although quantity seems > slightly decreased, but I credit that to it being post-holiday. I saw a short post-holiday peak, but now things are back to "normal" again. And no influence of CAN-SPAM that I can detect. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From SikaM-newminuitLoseThis at sneakemail.com Tue Jan 6 18:35:24 2004 From: SikaM-newminuitLoseThis at sneakemail.com (SikaSpam) Date: Tue Jan 6 12:40:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: is it helpfull ? References: <3FF9AA9E.4070203@domain.invalid> Message-ID: On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 20:19:10 +0200, user@domain.invalid wrote: > is it helpfull to report via spamcop ? > It really seems that spam mail is increasing therafter (subjective). Since this question is asked about one a week, one could also ask if posting the question is useful or helpful ;) From SikaM-newminuitLoseThis at sneakemail.com Tue Jan 6 18:39:51 2004 From: SikaM-newminuitLoseThis at sneakemail.com (SikaSpam) Date: Tue Jan 6 12:40:21 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <19yyjjfagv9aw$.1dpdcommkw60$.dlg@40tude.net> On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 10:57:07 +0100, Godwin Stewart wrote: > That's probably where we get "puss", as in "puss in boots" or "pussy-cat" > from in English. In the vernacular of a certain community in L.A. and in the Southern USA, "cat" is a literal translation of "pussy" in a context that geeky newsgroups would not normally evoke. From user at domain.invalid Tue Jan 6 19:40:11 2004 From: user at domain.invalid (user@domain.invalid) Date: Tue Jan 6 12:45:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: is it helpfull ? References: <3FF9AA9E.4070203@domain.invalid> Message-ID: <3FFAF2FB.20309@domain.invalid> SikaSpam wrote: > On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 20:19:10 +0200, user@domain.invalid wrote: > > >>is it helpfull to report via spamcop ? >>It really seems that spam mail is increasing therafter (subjective). > > > Since this question is asked about one a week, one could also ask if > posting the question is useful or helpful ;) your comment is not much of any help to anyone if you just pick on those two lines. what is your response to the full message I posted ? From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 17:50:25 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Tue Jan 6 12:55:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> <19yyjjfagv9aw$.1dpdcommkw60$.dlg@40tude.net> Message-ID: SikaSpam (SikaM-newminuitLoseThis@sneakemail.com) wrote in news:19yyjjfagv9aw$.1dpdcommkw60$.dlg@40tude.net: > In the vernacular of a certain community in L.A. and in the Southern > USA, "cat" is a literal translation of "pussy" in a context that geeky > newsgroups would not normally evoke. FYI and amusement, the same would apply to Dutch "poe" and its diminutive "poesje". And etymologically, of course, "poes' and "pussy" derive from the same root. -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 17:58:14 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Tue Jan 6 13:00:23 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Why Not Allow More Automated Reporting by SC??? References: Message-ID: Uncle StoatWarbler (alanb+google4@digistar.com) wrote in news:pan.2004.01.06.11.58.18.270218@digistar.com: >> What "other" reporting mistakes are you referring to? > > The most common sems to be reporting lists you're on in the morning's > clicking frenzy. Heh, if I'm "frenzied" at any time, it's more likely to be late at night, when I'm tired and less likely to notice mistakes. (Like now, and it's not even late yet - but I _am_ tired.) -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 18:01:43 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Marjolein Katsma) Date: Tue Jan 6 13:05:19 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: is it helpfull ? References: <3FF9AA9E.4070203@domain.invalid> Message-ID: SikaSpam (SikaM-newminuitLoseThis@sneakemail.com) wrote in news:ysw4qqf45tjn.utykaxjmzx7v.dlg@40tude.net: >> is it helpfull to report via spamcop ? >> It really seems that spam mail is increasing therafter (subjective). > > Since this question is asked about one a week, one could also ask if > posting the question is useful or helpful ;) Which statement is, of course, entirely unhelpful. New poeple are coming in here al the time. It's slightly unrealistic to expect all of them to have read three months' worth of archive listings. Right? ;=) -- Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 18:45:32 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Wiggy) Date: Tue Jan 6 13:50:55 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Turning off images in IE References: Message-ID: ----- Original Message ----- > For anyone interested: I just exported two versions of the branch > mentioned above, naming one file and the other, "IE > Images ON.reg". The only difference in each file is the value of > "Display Inline Images" (yes/no). Now double-clicking one of the files > on my desktop and hitting twice toggles the display of images in > IE. Handy, if not perfect. Sure beats using the Tools menu, though. You could write simply batch file along the lines of: :echo off if exist c:\temp\nopics goto turnon regedit /s "IE Images OFF.reg" echo iepics >c:\temp\nopics goto end :turnon regedit /s "IE Images ON.reg" del c:\temp\nopics :end You will need to change the paths of reg files and probably the temp directory. It should toggle the reg key each time you run it. Wiggy From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 13:52:22 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (indigo) Date: Tue Jan 6 13:55:44 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: new comments I now use with Spamcop reports References: Message-ID: "Larry Kilgallen" wrote in message news:yGsyzky1bXtP@eisner.encompasserve.org... > > You need to read my first sentence more carefully, and reconsider the > placement of your prepositional phrase "under the U-CAN-SPAM law". A > bit more attention to grammar would be better than the effort coming > up with politically charged names for objectionable legislation. Jesus, Larry. Why are you being so damn pedantic? I don't think anyone would have any problem understanding what I was saying, whether the word "under" was used properly or not. From redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com Tue Jan 6 19:14:00 2004 From: redford_stone at INVERSE_OF_COLDmail.com (Redstone) Date: Tue Jan 6 14:15:28 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Ralsky and CQNET, have you heard about this ?-- please, C&C warning next time References: <3FFABA84.7070109@domain.invalid> Message-ID: "Berny" wrote in news:btegju$n92$1@news.spamcop.net: >> > And I thought cqnet was simply Ralsky Inc. > > It is. That response came from one of Ralsky's paid flunkies. From sbacct at allofmy.info Tue Jan 6 14:29:24 2004 From: sbacct at allofmy.info (Joseph Usser) Date: Tue Jan 6 14:30:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Front end rDNS BL system recommendations? References: Message-ID: "R. P. McCormick" wrote in message news:btebvc$2go$1@news.spamcop.net... > Someone asked me what would be a good system > to front end a mail server that doesn't do good rDNS > BL lookups and filtering. Ease of setup and configuration > would be one of the important criteria. postfix. Lots of people (sucessfully) doing it. Lots of information on doing so. I've personally setup systems for 3 different ISPs with postfix. Works great. If you want to get fancy, postfix with amavis (for virus filtering). Amavis can also use spamassassin (which can use Vernon's DCC, Pyzor, and Razor). Amavisd-new is the way to go there. You'll also see folks saying Qmail, and probably Vernon saying Sendmail. There's lots of choices, Postfix is mine. Easy to setup and maintain, great security track record, great on resource usage. -- ******************************************** Wayne Smith, CNE/MCSE/CCNP/CCDP/CSS1/Linux+ Advanced Computer Connections http://www.accnorwalk.com From newspamtrap at aol.com Tue Jan 6 20:04:06 2004 From: newspamtrap at aol.com (Trappaspam) Date: Tue Jan 6 15:05:22 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Thought I`d seen it all Message-ID: Full spam in .spam - New disclaimer :-) Order your DVD's from: D.F. ERRER PHD 150 King Street, Box 384 Peterborough, ON K9J 6Z3 CANADA You may also order it by simply doubling your payment and enclose a note that says SEND ME BOTH DISNEY DVD's...we'll do the rest! Oh, the return email address HAS TO BE BOGUS....we want orders and not complaints. Forgive us for this small, but necessary, tactic, ok? Regs Jon NS From martis.N0sPaM at ntlworld.com Tue Jan 6 20:43:03 2004 From: martis.N0sPaM at ntlworld.com (Martin S) Date: Tue Jan 6 15:46:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] DNS lookup problem Message-ID: Just noticed on one of my reports that when spamcop parses a url which resolves to multiple IP's it only does an abuse lookup on one, presumably the first result. Name: sale-soft.biz Addresses: 24.169.203.110, 24.195.5.128, 217.44.134.240, 24.130.179.39 24.163.80.159 Aliases: www.sale-soft.biz Also it said abuse@rr.com didn't want abuse reports on this even though 3 of the IP's are theirs, next time I brought the page up before filing the report it said abuse@bt.net didn't want reports. So I decided to manually send the reports to the 3 ISP's whose IP the name resolves with the nslookup. My question is can't spamcop be made lookup all the IP's and cc all abuses responsible? Martin From nospam at please.com Tue Jan 6 15:45:26 2004 From: nospam at please.com (No Spam) Date: Tue Jan 6 15:50:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: 2006HOSTING.COM 2005HOSTING.COM 560000X.COM References: Message-ID: "R. P. McCormick" wrote in message news:btd7qi$n9p$1@news.spamcop.net... > OK - who's this? Resembles others ... > > 2006HOSTING.COM > 2005HOSTING.COM > 560000X.COM > > (registrar Gandi) > John woo > 2600 warden ave. > 2r4 y6u > markham Ontario Canada > > +1.9053423423 > sendhost3004@hotmail.com > > ns1.2006hosting.com 202.102.245.51 > ns2.2006hosting.com 202.102.245.123 > > created: 2004-01-01 21:18:03 > changed: 2004-01-02 22:07:01 > > Canada Post (http://www.canadapost.ca) indicates > that there is NO 2600 on Warden Ave in Markham. > > Lowest number on Warden Ave is 7020 in post code L3R 5W7. > Numbers increase on Warden Ave to 11242 in post code L6C 1N4. > > The "2R4 Y6U" may have been an attempt at a post code. > It is incorrect. All post codes in the Markham/Toronto > area start with the letter L. > > Postal mail to that address can not be delivered. > > The email address IS NOT VALID: > > >> 220 mc10-f2.hotmail.com Microsoft ESMTP MAIL > >> Service, Version: 5.0.2195.6713 ready at > >> Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:58:28 -0800 > >> helo > >> 250 mc10-f2.hotmail.com Hello [XX.XX.XX.XX] > >> mail from:<> > >> 250 <>....Sender OK > >> rcpt to: > >> 550 Requested action not taken: mailbox unavailable > > The CNA (Canadian Number Administrator, http://www.cnac.ca) > indicates that the 342 exchange in the 905 area code > is allocated to Bell Canada for the Cold Springs rate centre. > Did not find a listing for John Woo in Markham. > > It appears that all of the registration information for these domains is bogus. > > See the thread: " digitalcable4free.com mypilldoctor.com ehostzzz.com = Super Zonda" Sounds like the same clown From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 16:19:34 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Joyce) Date: Tue Jan 6 16:20:36 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Timeouts? Message-ID: <3FFB2666.7834E505@spamcop.net> I use Netscape 4.8 and today I can't seem to submit the reports. It just sits there when I click on the submit spam now button and eventually I get a message saying: Request Timeout The server timed out while waiting for the browser's request I tried submitting using IE and had no problem, but that's not really an option for me because Netscape is my default browser and I get way over 100 spams a day to report and it would take me forever and a day to copy and paste each into IE. From nospam at please.com Tue Jan 6 16:21:01 2004 From: nospam at please.com (No Spam) Date: Tue Jan 6 16:25:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] 400 Bad Request Server: QTSS-Akamai Message-ID: No matter what I put after http://spamcop.net, I get the following: RTSP/1.0 400 Bad Request Server: QTSS-Akamai/4.1 (Build/412.16; Platform/Linux) Cseq: Connection: Close This has been the case for more than 36 hours now. Anyone able to help solve this? From nospam at please.com Tue Jan 6 16:40:12 2004 From: nospam at please.com (No Spam) Date: Tue Jan 6 16:45:32 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: digitalcable4free.com mypilldoctor.com ehostzzz.com = Super Zonda References: <3FBA9806.3070307@any-of-your.biz> Message-ID: TOP POSTING CORRECTED > Incorrect. It is my understanding that many of these related domains > have been cut off. If you find one that resolves - please post it. Here's some more to add... They keep on coming!!! 2006HOSTING.COM 2005HOSTING.COM 560000X.COM From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 13:41:21 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (nobody@spamcop.net) Date: Tue Jan 6 16:45:42 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Thought I`d seen it all In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Trappaspam wrote: > Full spam in .spam - New disclaimer :-) > > Order your DVD's from: > D.F. ERRER PHD > 150 King Street, Box 384 > Peterborough, ON K9J 6Z3 > CANADA > > You may also order it by simply doubling your > payment and enclose a note that says SEND > ME BOTH DISNEY DVD's...we'll do the rest! > > Oh, the return email address HAS TO BE > BOGUS....we want orders and not complaints. > Forgive us for this small, but necessary, tactic, ok? > > > Regs > Jon NS > > "we want orders and not complaints." ROTFLMFAO A PhD, no less? The address checks out as a valid street address according to UPS and FedEx online. Anybody in the area to check if this is a private mailbox drop? Sure looks like the local authorities could grab somebody emptying the box and charge them with mail fraud. At least the postal inspectors are willing to catch and prosecute for that, even if we can't get action against spammers most of the time. From Merlyn at Spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 16:49:19 2004 From: Merlyn at Spamcop.net (Merlyn) Date: Tue Jan 6 16:50:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: 400 Bad Request Server: QTSS-Akamai References: Message-ID: "No Spam" wrote in message news:btf8rt$lev$1@news.spamcop.net... > No matter what I put after http://spamcop.net, I get the following: > > RTSP/1.0 400 Bad Request Server: QTSS-Akamai/4.1 (Build/412.16; > Platform/Linux) Cseq: Connection: Close > > This has been the case for more than 36 hours now. Anyone able to help > solve this? > What are you trying to put after it? What do you get when you go to http://www.spamcop.net/ What do you get when you go to http://www.spamcop.net/help.shtml What do you get when you go to http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml What url are you trying to get to? -- Regards, Merlyn A Spamcop advocate All replies will be made specifically to the newsgroup From NXBSGVWQHCKY at spammotel.com Tue Jan 6 22:37:48 2004 From: NXBSGVWQHCKY at spammotel.com (Mathew Hendry) Date: Tue Jan 6 17:40:25 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DNS lookup problem References: Message-ID: On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 20:43:03 -0000, "Martin S" wrote: >Just noticed on one of my reports that when spamcop parses a url which >resolves to multiple IP's it only does an abuse lookup on one, presumably >the first result. > >Name: sale-soft.biz >Addresses: 24.169.203.110, 24.195.5.128, 217.44.134.240, 24.130.179.39 > 24.163.80.159 >Aliases: www.sale-soft.biz > >Also it said abuse@rr.com didn't want abuse reports on this even though 3 of >the IP's are theirs, next time I brought the page up before filing the >report it said abuse@bt.net didn't want reports. > >So I decided to manually send the reports to the 3 ISP's whose IP the name >resolves with the nslookup. > >My question is can't spamcop be made lookup all the IP's and cc all abuses >responsible? Try that nslookup again and you'll get a completely different set of addresses. SpamCop will only report them if it knows that they're running a proxy, trojan etc. -- Mat. From martis.N0sPaM at ntlworld.com Tue Jan 6 22:58:03 2004 From: martis.N0sPaM at ntlworld.com (Martin S) Date: Tue Jan 6 18:00:44 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DNS lookup problem References: Message-ID: "Mathew Hendry" wrote in message news:esbmvvckf3pvh8h9o95ijulkecbauk4vsb@4ax.com... > On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 20:43:03 -0000, "Martin S" > wrote: > > > Try that nslookup again and you'll get a completely different set of > addresses. SpamCop will only report them if it knows that they're running a > proxy, trojan etc. > > -- Mat. > Can abuse reports not be made against the site hosting the domain, I see from a dig the TTL is only 2 mins. One name server hosted by Saburovo.com Is it me or are arin lookups getting less detailed, some seem to be very lacking in info on IP blocks. Martin From mikegray at avoidpsamdsl.pipex.com Tue Jan 6 23:41:43 2004 From: mikegray at avoidpsamdsl.pipex.com (Mike Gray) Date: Tue Jan 6 18:45:19 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Thought I`d seen it all References: Message-ID: > A PhD, no less? The address checks out as a valid > street address according to UPS and FedEx online. > Anybody in the area to check if this is a private > mailbox drop? Sure looks like the local authorities > could grab somebody emptying the box and charge them > with mail fraud. At least the postal inspectors are > willing to catch and prosecute for that, even if we > can't get action against spammers most of the time. Any danger of this being a joe-job on someone? After what happened to Ralsky, you can imagine that people spamming their own address might attract a little more mail than they bargained for. Mike From agent01413 at my-deja.com Tue Jan 6 16:51:08 2004 From: agent01413 at my-deja.com (Socks the Whitehouse Cat) Date: Tue Jan 6 18:55:28 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: How to get your post read: top posting/bottom posting/inline References: <01c3cbd2$25968ce0$LocalHost@default> <01c3cd68$b05291c0$LocalHost@default> <5O$4aNe2YfEW@eisner.encompasserve.org> Message-ID: I can't believe that Technomage really had the following to say that was worth commenting on: > > I just wish folks would shut up, think and realize that there are many > styles and all are equally valid. > it's hard to see what you're responding to if what you are responding to isnt associated with the response. -- tired of reading posts from morphing kooks? get a real news reader - http://xnews.newsguy.com help page rank Jamie Baillie http://www.jamiebaillie.com From sfjoe at BLOCKspamcop.net Tue Jan 6 15:53:07 2004 From: sfjoe at BLOCKspamcop.net (Joe) Date: Tue Jan 6 18:55:38 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: How to get your post read: top posting/bottom posting/inline In-Reply-To: References: <01c3cbd2$25968ce0$LocalHost@default> <01c3cd68$b05291c0$LocalHost@default> <5O$4aNe2YfEW@eisner.encompasserve.org> Message-ID: Technomage wrote: > I just wish folks would shut up, think and realize that there are many > styles and all are equally valid. > > Technomage There are many styles but not all styles are equally valid. You can spell the word 'dog' with a 'k'. It's an interestng style but not at all valid. There has to be a mutually agreed-upon style of communication or else nobody could understand one another. Granted, your top-posts can eventually be deciphered. Why do you think we owe you the time and effort it takes to unravel a mixed-up post? As far as quoting goes: see how nicely this works? From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 17:29:03 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Jeff) Date: Tue Jan 6 19:30:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Thought I`d seen it all References: Message-ID: Cool, I'll mail them a month's worth of junk mail out of my mailbox. "Trappaspam" wrote in message news:btf4bm$gh6$1@news.spamcop.net... > Full spam in .spam - New disclaimer :-) > > Order your DVD's from: > D.F. ERRER PHD > 150 King Street, Box 384 > Peterborough, ON K9J 6Z3 > CANADA > > You may also order it by simply doubling your > payment and enclose a note that says SEND > ME BOTH DISNEY DVD's...we'll do the rest! > > Oh, the return email address HAS TO BE > BOGUS....we want orders and not complaints. > Forgive us for this small, but necessary, tactic, ok? > > > Regs > Jon NS > > From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 16:34:23 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (nobody@spamcop.net) Date: Tue Jan 6 19:35:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: How to get your post read: top posting/bottom posting/inline In-Reply-To: References: <01c3cbd2$25968ce0$LocalHost@default> <01c3cd68$b05291c0$LocalHost@default> <5O$4aNe2YfEW@eisner.encompasserve.org> Message-ID: Joe wrote: > Technomage wrote: > >> I just wish folks would shut up, think and realize that there are many >> styles and all are equally valid. >> >> Technomage > > > There are many styles but not all styles are equally valid. You can > spell the word 'dog' with a 'k'. It's an interestng style but not at all > valid. K-9 ?? big :-D From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 20:08:26 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Miss Betsy) Date: Tue Jan 6 20:10:18 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Netiquette query - was - Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF90980.8B2FB404@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Sol is male Miss Betsy From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Jan 7 14:14:28 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Anony Mouse) Date: Tue Jan 6 20:15:20 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: No Spam & mail15 spammer References: <3FF87DCB.6070908@spamcop.net> <3FF90C4F.1040402@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <3FFB5D74.30406@spamcop.net> Tom wrote: > On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 20:03:43 +1300, Anony Mouse > wrote: > > >>I have been attacking them for over a year this time and the numbers in >>my inbox have gone up and down over that period but in the end the >>results speak for themselves, no spam today in any of the mail boxes I have. >> >>Sure they may start up again but I don't think it will be as bad as it >>was in the past... >> >>Do nothing and the numbers build up... Attack and they intensify there >>spamming to a point but when they find out you are whacking registrars >>in order to get at them they start getting a bit hesitant about using >>there intimidation tactics. > > > I don't know if you are to be credited or not, or if the FTC has moved > in on spammers (as indicated by a singular news story - *not* picked > up by any of the usual channels), but today's spam in both my 80-100 > spams a day each mail boxes are way, way down... (20, combined). It > could be a glitch at my ISPs end (although my regular mail has come > through with no problems), or it could be that you nailed the worst > offenders (somehow). Greetings Tom... It is very hard to take credit for nailing any spammer and thats not really my goal... The goal being to stop the bastards spamming me. About all I can take credit for directly is Shane Atkinson, the VP-RX spam organiser here in NZ that I harassed until he made a mistake. I also had some involvement in the formal warning issued to Network Solutions in March (I think it was) for not closing domains with willfully false whois info. Joker got an informal warning about the same time, also as a result of extensive evidence I built up. ICANN had lots of evidence against Netsol but were not acting. I threatened to send a few emails to some key people in the US senate which forced ICANN to act I think. The list of domains registered with Netsol that I had was very large and covered a 5 month period. I do have contacts that I have manipulated for a year now... Namely Vinton Cerf and Dan Halloran of ICANN. I did this by first spanking them... They don't like me obviously as I am rather ruthless and always looking for an opportunity to pin Vinton Cerf down... As you may know he owns MCI Global (I am pretty sure he was one of the founding principles of that company... Senior Vice President) Whenever I can show the other ICANN board members that he indirectly supports spamming then I do... This usually has the desired effect and he takes action. Now days I just need to report to him and he acts if it is within his control. The spammer that was living on VSNL got thrown off within days of reporting to Vinton as MCI was VSNL's upstream. The spammer has subsequently moved to Dishnet and I am pretty sure it is either Ralsky or Garavaglia. I have also laid formal complaints with the Argentine embassy over Garavaglia's activities and then caused a diplomatic incident to push home my point. Maybe this action has had some effect as I have not had any spam that I can trace to Garavaglia for some time now... MCI is a very powerfull company and you will find that they have there fingers in most of the major pies on the Internet.... UU Net is one... There are others. I also go after registrars with a gusto that most can not withstand... I like setting them up... I.E. I lay simple complaints and track them... I only complain once and then if they do not take action I really start on there case building up evidence over several months and then nailing them with it. I often do not tell them the full extent of the evidence I have. In my opinion it is up to them to find out that info however when I lay formal complaints with ICANN I let them have all the evidence and it is pretty overwhelming once it gets to that stage. Like the list in the thread mail15 spammer. DirectI only got some of the domains reported to them. Namely the ones I got spammed with but the full list went to ICANN in support of the complaint that DirectI was not acting properly on willfully false whois complaints. This is my pet hate as I wrote to Vinton Cerf way back in 1999 (When ICANN was being formed) telling him that if ICANN did not enforce policy then it would lead to what we have today... Anyway I think you will find your reduction in spam is a combination of many things. The FTC, DEA and FDA have had some impact and meds spam should be reduced. Eye Five Inc, the makers of VP-RX products, will also be getting nervous as they are starting to realise that more and more people are discovering that there affiliate program is just a front. Eye Five pays the spammers directly and the two worst offenders in this little scam are Ralsky and Garavaglia. Ralsky has been very quite for the last few weeks however he has started up again all be it with a slightly different modus operandi. I think it will get easier from now on to deal to the recidivist offenders. Specially if they keep flaunting the Can Spam act. I have caught Ralsky out at it already... From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 17:17:40 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (nobody@spamcop.net) Date: Tue Jan 6 20:20:07 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Netiquette query - was - Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). In-Reply-To: References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF90980.8B2FB404@spamcop.net> Message-ID: Wow, how the thread does wander! sol wrote: > > Does anyone care to hazard a guess as to Sol's gender? I know one of each, so I can't tell from personal experience. Probably male is more common, but this might be a trick question, asked by one of the few female examples! From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 20:21:27 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (R. P. McCormick) Date: Tue Jan 6 20:25:26 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DNS lookup problem References: Message-ID: [snip] > My question is can't spamcop be made lookup all the IP's > and cc all abuses responsible? NO There are typically two things that some spammers are doing: - a query for an IP for a given host name returns multiple IP's - the spammer uses extremely short (like 10 minutes, sometimes less) TTL times and has a script that updates the A records frequently So ... in the first case, ya, sure ... someone could improve SpamCop's code such that it takes ALL of the addresses returned for a host name lookup ... it may take a bit of work, 'cuz instead of just processing ONE IP (and coming up with all the net admin contacts) ... it would have to recursively process all the IP's. But in the second case - NO ... SpamCop can't do anything about it. If the authoritative DNS responses are changing ... you really can't expect SpamCop to look at the TTL's ... and then go back TTL minutes later and relookup the addresses - check to see if they're still the same ... and then process those addresses. IMO - the bigger issue here is the authoritative DNS servers. I'd love to see SpamCop also have the functionality to LART network admins for those networks that are harbouring the spammer's authoritative name servers. Many spammers are even using the same small subset of name servers - and by getting THOSE things shut down, cuts off the spammer's sites quick and fast. And in case you're not aware ... most of these cases where the spammer has a domain with multiple IP's for a given host name ... and is rotating the IP addresses ... those IP's are usually hijacked infected broadband users that are acting as HTTP proxies for the spammer ... only someone with a proxypot could really tell you where the spammer's real site is hosted! HTH R P McCormick SpamCop user From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Jan 7 14:29:05 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Anony Mouse) Date: Tue Jan 6 20:30:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Alan Ralsky at it again References: <3FF9D6CD.1090908@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <3FFB60E1.9040001@spamcop.net> Eric The Viking wrote: > Anony Mouse wrote: > >> Alan Ralsky did not take much of a break... >> Like all spammers he lied in the recent news interview. >> He is still spamming using the same methods... >> http://www.pharmacourt.biz > > > Not that I don't think Ralsky is scum, but how do you know this is him > and not some other spammer? The style of the web page or the fact that > it's hosted in China, or some other detail? Marlyn has answered this question for you very adequitly... Thanks Merlyn. I know all the spammers that spam me at present... Alan Ralsky, Juan Garavaglia and Carl Henderson. Some that have fallen recently include Robert Soloway, this ones amusing, Bonnie Dukarossa and Hussein Gandhi (VSNL spammer. The one that threw a tantrum in nanea and spammed the news group with anti Sematic/Islamic garbage when I had him thrown off VSNL). Robert Soloway was a bit of homour... I traced one of his spams and sent an email to him... It was neive and did not give away the fact that I was a spam hunter... We sent emails back and forth with him denying things and then saying I should not get any more spam from the source which he said was not him. I kept up a front until I got sick of his bullshit and then I told him who he was. I.E instead of the false name he was using I told him his real name. The replies stopped and he passed my email address on to his mates to give me a hard time... It took about a month to nail all them down and stop them. I think my repustation is starting to preceed me :) From wildwilly at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 17:40:27 2004 From: wildwilly at spamcop.net (Wild Willy Parsons) Date: Tue Jan 6 20:40:28 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] A new Spamcop message board (updated!) Message-ID: <20040106174027.mkrzegwgc0o0048s@webmail.spamcop.net> Hello, Sorry for the intrusion, but I am a moron. I cannot navigate through the newsgroup help board very easily because they are laid out pretty bad, in my opinion. So I created a simple, easy to navigate help message board which is much simpler to navigate. I am a paid member of Spamcop and I do love the service. My board is not meant to replace the official newsgroup. I just invite you to stop by and check it out. It is brand new and I am in no way a master of Spamcop, which is why I created this board. If you are a master or a novice, like me, please come over and help get this board rolling. If you are a Spamcop guru and like to help others, please apply for a moderator position. No need to register to participate, but registering is easy. My only motivation for doing this is because I am frustrated with the current layout as questions and replies seem to be all over the place. Thanx for reading and I apologize if this email is annoyed you in any way. I will not send out another. Sincerely Spam King Message Board is located here: http://spamcop.proboards25.com/ From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 20:54:21 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (sol) Date: Tue Jan 6 20:55:31 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Netiquette query - was - Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spamreport with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). In-Reply-To: <3FFA3987.C4655C52@spamcop.net> References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF90980.8B2FB404@spamcop.net> <3FFA3987.C4655C52@spamcop.net> Message-ID: On the other > hand, the method of proper netiquette for newsgroups where many people > read and participate in the discussion is inline posting, not top > posting or bottom posting. The preferred method around this newsgroup, > which follows netiquette, is to snip any quoted text not relevant to > your reply then add your own comments below each quoted point you are > addressing. Thanks - I agree that inline is much more reader friendly. A moment of extra effort is involved in preparing the post, but it saves plenty of time for the many readers. -- Sol slips beneath the waves and fades away amid majestic colors. From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 21:07:44 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (R. P. McCormick) Date: Tue Jan 6 21:10:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: No Spam & mail15 spammer References: <3FF87DCB.6070908@spamcop.net> <3FF90C4F.1040402@spamcop.net> <3FFB5D74.30406@spamcop.net> Message-ID: You know Anony Mouse ... sometimes your arrogance is a bit much. I appreciate your anti-spam passion ... but the way you present yourself doesn't globally help the efforts of the wider community. > I do have contacts that I have manipulated for a year now... > Namely Vinton Cerf and Dan Halloran of ICANN. > > I did this by first spanking them... This is what I mean by a bit much ... You manipulate Mssrs. Cerf and Halloran? And spank them, too? I think you've been reading too much spam. Well - I'll get to the real point of my reply post ... > ... I am rather ruthless and always looking for an opportunity > to pin Vinton Cerf down... As you may know he owns MCI > Global (I am pretty sure he was one of the founding principles > of that company... Senior Vice President) Before making statements like that ... why don't you do some research. Based on your spam fighting efforts - I'd figure you could easily find info on Mr. Cerf such that you could accurately quote or identify who he is, his roles, responsibilities, etc. Start with this, since the focus was initially ICANN: http://www.icann.org/biog/cerf.htm And why not venture to his professional presence at MCI: http://global.mci.com/us/enterprise/insight/cerfs_up/ In my professional career I've had the opportunity to meet and talk with Mr. Cerf on a couple of different occasions, and been present a quite a few of his presentations. I have nothing but the utmost respect for the gentleman. He is currently a Senior VP at MCI and has been with the various incarnations of recent MCI companies now for about the last 10 years. He also worked for the previous MCI company from 1982 to 1986. I don't know of nor have I read anything that would indicate he was a founding principal of any of the MCI's ... but if you really wanted to know - you could check out the US Securities and Exchange Commission web site ... they should have all the filings there (form 10K as well as others) that would tell you about this publicly traded company ... Beyond MCI, Mr. Cerf's more important accomplishments were with the DARPA and many of the organisations (such as BBN, the predecessor of BBNPlanet, a Cambridge MA US based organisation) who also had a lot to do with the origin of TCP/IP and the Internet that we use today. I'll let you (and others) peruse the aforementioned links to glean more info and background on this distinguished person. > MCI is a very powerful company and you will find that they > have there fingers in most of the major pies on the Internet.... > UU Net is one... There are others. You are accurate in the point that MCI is a large company ... Today's MCI is not the same as MCI from some decades ago. The MCI name today is what is being used for all of the MCI / WorldCom / Brooks Fibre / UUnet / etc. companies At one point UUnet may have had the largest public Internet infrastructure - but I do not think that's the case any more. Frankly - I've stopped bothering to keep track or even care. From: http://global.mci.com/uunet/ which is the URL you'll now get if you go to the old UUnet site: >> Our new name is MCI and our brand for domestic and >> international Wholesale Services is UUNET - a name >> known in the industry for unsurpassed innovation and value. >> But we have changed more than our name. We are marking >> an exciting new era in communication by delivering more >> powerful products and services for your business and for >> your customers' businesses. >> >> UUNET will continue its market leadership by delivering the >> highest quality services and driving the convergence of voice >> and data on one of the world's largest IP backbone network. >> We will serve you with the utmost integrity while providing >> simplicity, innovation, and value for your business. >> We want to see you succeed. Let's just hope that the "you" in that last sentence ... doesn't pertain to their spamming customers! > This is my pet hate as I wrote to Vinton Cerf way back in 1999 > (When ICANN was being formed) telling him that if ICANN > did not enforce policy then it would lead to what we have today... If you did your research ... you'd find accurate info at: http://www.icann.org/general/background.htm ICANN was created out of a memorandum of understanding that was executed on 25 Nov 1988 between the US DoC (Department of Commerce) and the entity we know today as ICANN. Of course, work on moving away from the single (monopoly) overseer of the Internet (Network Solutions) started long before that ... starting back in the spring of 1998. As you can also attest from a quick check, ICANN's domain was first registered on: 14-Sep-1998. It is clear from this, and other postings, that you have not much regard for Cerf and others. For whatever reason, that's you're prerogative. But if you are going to make statements about or against these folks on your sh|t list - maybe you could at least give them (and their organisations) the courtesy of reporting accurate info. And if you really didn't have the privilege of bottom whacking these guys - don't report that you did ... even if its a saying - please respect the fact that not everyone participating in this and other anti-spam forums is a native English speaker. R P McCormick SpamCop user From Merlyn at Spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 21:11:54 2004 From: Merlyn at Spamcop.net (Merlyn) Date: Tue Jan 6 21:15:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: A new Spamcop message board (updated!) References: Message-ID: "Wild Willy Parsons" wrote in message news:mailman.169.1073439630.14687.spamcop-list@news.spamcop.net... > Hello, > > Sorry for the intrusion, but I am a moron. > > I cannot navigate through the newsgroup help board very easily because they are > laid out pretty bad, in my opinion. So I created a simple, easy to navigate > help message board which is much simpler to navigate. I am a paid member of > Spamcop and I do love the service. My board is not meant to replace the > official newsgroup. > > I just invite you to stop by and check it out. It is brand new and I am in no > way a master of Spamcop, which is why I created this board. If you are a master > or a novice, like me, please come over and help get this board rolling. If you > are a Spamcop guru and like to help others, please apply for a moderator > position. No need to register to participate, but registering is easy. > > My only motivation for doing this is because I am frustrated with the current > layout as questions and replies seem to be all over the place. > > Thanx for reading and I apologize if this email is annoyed you in any way. I > will not send out another. > Sorry but I will stick to NNTP. If you used a news reader everything would not be all over the pace. It would be nice and orderly :0) -- Regards, Merlyn A Spamcop advocate All replies will be made specifically to the newsgroup From josephk+sc at nwlink.com Tue Jan 6 18:17:35 2004 From: josephk+sc at nwlink.com (Joseph_K) Date: Tue Jan 6 21:20:19 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] minor HTML parsing problem Message-ID: Looks like the parser gets a little confused when dealing with tags and relative URLs. It did find the BASE URL and do the proper lookups, it was the later relative URLs that were wrong (treated as absolute URLs) when viewing the verbose/technical output. See the report for the complete details http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z242132485z5b9a5787ca59f2f6ba4dbef6b0919c40z The following is the relevant HTML. mailer ---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+ Joseph Kiernan Seattle, WA From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 21:35:13 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (R. P. McCormick) Date: Tue Jan 6 21:40:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: A new Spamcop message board (updated!) References: Message-ID: > Sorry for the intrusion, but I am a moron. Pretty strange lead-in for a posting! ... >> I cannot navigate through the newsgroup help board >> very easily because they are laid out pretty bad, >> in my opinion. Not sure what your problem is - it may be that you are neither familiar with or know how to use a news reader? Even Outlook Express (what I'm actually now using) does a FINE job of keeping messages together in threads in each news group. >> So I created a simple, easy to navigate >> help message board which is much simpler >> to navigate. I am a paid member of spamcop >> and I do love the service. My board is not >> meant to replace the official newsgroup. >> >> I just invite you to stop by and check it out. >> It is brand new and I am in no way a master of >> Spamcop, which is why I created this board. >> If you are a master or a novice, like me, >> please come over and help get this board rolling. >> If you are a Spamcop guru and like to help others, >> please apply for a moderator position. >> No need to register to participate, but registering is easy. >> >> My only motivation for doing this is because >> I am frustrated with the current layout as >> questions and replies seem to be all over the place. [snip] >> Message Board is located here: http://spamcop.proboards25.com/ Well ... I'm not sure you are going to be very successful. Here's some thoughts on that. First off - the current SpamCop newsgroups are the current (and only) place that I know of where the actual people who make SpamCop work (not only the spam reporting tool but the email system, etc.) participate. Postings made here are read by everyone, including Julian. Unless you can convenience the folks behind SpamCop to visit your web based forums ... you won't have one of the most important aspects of these forums. I was and still am a bit weary about your third party board. So much so I have not visited your site first hand - but only through a proxy. My concern is what is the real colour of your hat! In doing some due diligence on this, I found the following links on the URL that you posted: >> http://spamcop.proboards25.com/ >> http://www.wildwilly.com/images/jpg/spamcoptitle.jpg >> http://banners.4d5.net/ads/ads.cgi >> http://www.mahoganyrush.com/images/remote/smily_01.gif >> http://proboards8.com/boardimages/open.gif as well as ... >> /* >> Cell Highlight & Link >> Copyright 2003 Craig Suffolk, ProBoards.com >> All Rights Reserved >> */ Do I did visit the proboards.com site ... I've never heard of them - don't know who they are. Although the proboards site purports FREE boards ... in fact - it isn't. Looks like you have to put up with banners and advertising ... unless you PAY! To wit - also from the code on the URL you provided: >> > value="spamcop.proboards25.com"> >> >> >> http://www.vacations.net >> http://www.hotels.net >> http://www.1800fastdsl.com >> http://www.sunfinder-vacations.com >> http://www.eternalwebdesign.com Sorry - the SpamCop groups are advert free. Nothing. Nada. Nill. Personally I refuse to ever consider using Yahoo! groups because of the crap the embed into their system. Yea - its advertising supported. Great. I have not bothered to look up any of the aforementioned domains ... I'll assume they're all above board. With the current SpamCop newsgroups ... there is some level of being anonymous. But looks like you need to register with this message forum that you setup? I'm not too keen on doing that, especially in a spam fighting group, unless I know who has access to and control of the information that has to be submitted. >> Thanx for reading and I apologize if this email >> is annoyed you in any way. (Did you really post by sending an email?!) No - not annoyed. I just kind of feel bad ... that if you went to any significant effort and you don't get much response. I don't remember any previous thread on doing this; I try to read all threads but as of late I've had days when I have to blow through them ... You may want to poll the active people here to see what they think ... and maybe as well also contact SpamCop (try deputies) to see what their feeling is on it. I'll be the first to agree that the SpamCop web site and the stuff presented on it could be done much better layout and graphically. Especially given more and more users are not going to be the admin and techie types but general users ... But I really think the newsgroups ... for the purpose they have today - are working just fine. Maybe all you really need to do is just get some better experience using a news reader?! R P McCormick SpamCop user From newspamtrap at aol.com Wed Jan 7 03:05:54 2004 From: newspamtrap at aol.com (Trappaspam) Date: Tue Jan 6 22:10:04 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] [Media] Robomail to help pr0n spammers "adjust" Message-ID: From:- Spammers try to adjust to new U.S. regulations - Saul Hansell NYT Wednesday, January 7, 2004 "Robomail, can help high volume e-mailers comply with the new U.S. antispam law by inserting their postal address in the mail and by keeping track of recipients who ask to be removed from the sender's mailing list." & Ralsky Says (again) "A lot of mailers have backed out since they think some kind of bust is going to happen," said Alan Ralsky, a major bulk e-mailer who is one of the organizers of the meeting. Ralsky, who is based in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, has said he will comply with the new law." http://www.iht.com/articles/123982.html Regs Jon NS From newspamtrap at aol.com Wed Jan 7 03:13:09 2004 From: newspamtrap at aol.com (Trappaspam) Date: Tue Jan 6 22:15:18 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Alan Ralsky at it again References: <3FF9D6CD.1090908@spamcop.net> <3FFB60E1.9040001@spamcop.net> Message-ID: "Anony Mouse" wrote in message news:3FFB60E1.9040001@spamcop.net... > Eric The Viking wrote: > > Anony Mouse wrote: > > > >> Alan Ralsky did not take much of a break... > >> Like all spammers he lied in the recent news interview. > >> He is still spamming using the same methods... > >> http://www.pharmacourt.biz > > Ralsky Comments (lies) - Again at Vegas Internext - trade show ! "A lot of mailers have backed out since they think some kind of bust is going to happen," said Alan Ralsky, a major bulk e-mailer who is one of the organizers of the meeting. Ralsky, who is based in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, has said he will comply with the new law. See topic: [Media] Robomail to help pr0n spammers "adjust" Regs Jon NS From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 20:39:37 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Jeff) Date: Tue Jan 6 22:40:20 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: A new Spamcop message board (updated!) References: Message-ID: You can't navigate through a message board, but you can create a message board? hmmmmm... From reply at in.news.group Tue Jan 6 22:09:22 2004 From: reply at in.news.group (Mike Vollmer) Date: Tue Jan 6 23:05:07 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: A new Spamcop message board (updated!) References: Message-ID: I don't have enough time to keep up with this one, I personally don't need a new one. Sorry! I use Outlook and have no trouble reading the news groups; have used WinVN in the past but prefer Outlook these days. From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 21:06:18 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Jeff) Date: Tue Jan 6 23:10:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] booby trap the spammers Message-ID: Hey, I just found a website that illegally sells prescription drugs. It has a place for me to type my email address. The FDA has an email address for reporting the illegal sale of prescription drugs. If I type that email address in the box, do you think they'll start spamming the FDA with drug sales ads? Can I get in trouble for that? Jeff From RobertTaylor at SpamCop.net Tue Jan 6 23:08:22 2004 From: RobertTaylor at SpamCop.net (Robert Taylor) Date: Tue Jan 6 23:10:20 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> <19yyjjfagv9aw$.1dpdcommkw60$.dlg@40tude.net> Message-ID: In news:Xns9468BFA716B1Fhomesitehelp@216.154.195.61, Marjolein Katsma sent: > SikaSpam (SikaM-newminuitLoseThis@sneakemail.com) wrote in > news:19yyjjfagv9aw$.1dpdcommkw60$.dlg@40tude.net: > >> In the vernacular of a certain community in L.A. and in the Southern >> USA, "cat" is a literal translation of "pussy" in a context that geeky >> newsgroups would not normally evoke. > > > > FYI and amusement, the same would apply to Dutch "poe" and its diminutive > "poesje". > > And etymologically, of course, "poes' and "pussy" derive from the same > root. (If that's a pun, then your English is even better than I thought.) Final footnote: For decades, (as most Americans probably still know) among American jazz musicians, the word "cat" referred to any adult male, but primarily to other jazz musicians (male). Thus: in the '30s and '40s, "hip cat"; in the '50s and thereabouts, "cool cat"; both terms denoting a person who was temperamentally, ethically, or musically (or all three) deserving of great respect. During the '50s, a single woman was called a "chick". Interesting juxtaposition. Regards, Robert -- eMail: RobertTaylor@SpamCop.net Web-Address: http://users.rcn.com/robertt.nh.ultranet/Web-SitePg1.htm NOTARY SOJAC (Dizzy Gillespie, Prop.) From dschlieder at yahoo.com Tue Jan 6 20:36:11 2004 From: dschlieder at yahoo.com (Dave) Date: Tue Jan 6 23:40:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Vetomail? Message-ID: What the f***'s up with Vetomail? Some of the spam I have gotten has a remove link http://rtyfgh.biz/gone.php that turns out to be an add for Vetomail! And this page is full of vulgarities! Of course spamcop would see this unless it followed the remove link... So is vetomail spamming to get people to purchase their anti-spam software? Or is someone setting them up? From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Tue Jan 6 22:43:34 2004 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Tue Jan 6 23:45:20 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: How to get your post read: top posting/bottom posting/inline References: <01c3cbd2$25968ce0$LocalHost@default> <01c3cd68$b05291c0$LocalHost@default> <5O$4aNe2YfEW@eisner.encompasserve.org> In article , "Technomage" writes: > Besides, I'd rather see some info top posted. The problem is not what you want to see, but what the people who might answer your question want to see, and whether they will be so offended by your contrarian attitude as to killfile your posts. From apking at cox.net Tue Jan 6 22:06:25 2004 From: apking at cox.net (Lead - Zeppelin) Date: Wed Jan 7 00:10:15 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Auto forward References: Message-ID: Nobody going to answer this? "Lead - Zeppelin" wrote in message news:bt6pqn$crb$1@news.spamcop.net... > It seems to me in the past month all the spam I report comes back to me and > I have to cut/paste it and pass it on. It used to come back from Spamcop and > gave me the option to send the report. What happend? > > From user at domain.invalid Wed Jan 7 07:20:19 2004 From: user at domain.invalid (user@domain.invalid) Date: Wed Jan 7 00:26:22 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Alan Ralsky at it again References: <3FF9D6CD.1090908@spamcop.net> <3FFB60E1.9040001@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <3FFB9713.1040706@domain.invalid> hi anony mouse, it seems from your postings that you are the greatest. then why not stopp ralsky at once ??? show us - don't just brag ...................... pharmacourt is still active, do something .............. if you can! Anony Mouse wrote: > Eric The Viking wrote: > >> Anony Mouse wrote: >> >>> Alan Ralsky did not take much of a break... >>> Like all spammers he lied in the recent news interview. >>> He is still spamming using the same methods... >>> http://www.pharmacourt.biz >> >> >> >> Not that I don't think Ralsky is scum, but how do you know this is him >> and not some other spammer? The style of the web page or the fact >> that it's hosted in China, or some other detail? > > > Marlyn has answered this question for you very adequitly... Thanks Merlyn. > > I know all the spammers that spam me at present... > > Alan Ralsky, Juan Garavaglia and Carl Henderson. > > Some that have fallen recently include Robert Soloway, this ones > amusing, Bonnie Dukarossa and Hussein Gandhi (VSNL spammer. The one that > threw a tantrum in nanea and spammed the news group with anti > Sematic/Islamic garbage when I had him thrown off VSNL). > > Robert Soloway was a bit of homour... I traced one of his spams and sent > an email to him... It was neive and did not give away the fact that I > was a spam hunter... We sent emails back and forth with him denying > things and then saying I should not get any more spam from the source > which he said was not him. I kept up a front until I got sick of his > bullshit and then I told him who he was. I.E instead of the false name > he was using I told him his real name. The replies stopped and he passed > my email address on to his mates to give me a hard time... It took about > a month to nail all them down and stop them. > > I think my repustation is starting to preceed me :) > > From hydrastark at netscape.net Tue Jan 6 23:20:37 2004 From: hydrastark at netscape.net (Jimi Thompson) Date: Wed Jan 7 00:27:22 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Auto forward In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3FFB9725.103@netscape.net> I'm wondering if this is related to my post..... LZ, are you getting rejected with an error message that says that SpamCop cannot find your spam in the email? Jimi Lead - Zeppelin wrote: > Nobody going to answer this? > > "Lead - Zeppelin" wrote in message > news:bt6pqn$crb$1@news.spamcop.net... > >>It seems to me in the past month all the spam I report comes back to me > > and > >>I have to cut/paste it and pass it on. It used to come back from Spamcop > > and > >>gave me the option to send the report. What happend? >> >> > > > From Kilgallen at SpamCop.net Tue Jan 6 23:22:20 2004 From: Kilgallen at SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Date: Wed Jan 7 00:27:49 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Auto forward References: Message-ID: In article , "Lead - Zeppelin" writes: > Nobody going to answer this? > > "Lead - Zeppelin" wrote in message > news:bt6pqn$crb$1@news.spamcop.net... >> It seems to me in the past month all the spam I report comes back to me > and >> I have to cut/paste it and pass it on. It used to come back from Spamcop > and >> gave me the option to send the report. What happend? Perhaps not; for me at least, your description was quite unclear. You might try quoting exact words that SpamCop uses to describe what it is sending back to you. From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 23:26:17 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Wed Jan 7 00:30:06 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: MASSIVE number of rejected Spams References: Message-ID: On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 23:04:20 -0600, Jimi Thompson wrote: >Personally, I'm not having a problem seeing the spam. I've tried >sending this stuff as HTML, at text, and as HTML and Text. I'm just not >getting anywhere and it's really annyoing. I don't see any indication that you are pasting _raw_ text, or that you are forwarding the spam as "unquoted." I'm not sure what you're using at your end for reading the spam, but if it is Outlook, then there are special requirements. Raw text looks like this (only some of the stuff is shown here): Return-Path: Received: from compuserve.com ([211.249.156.221]) by mail.x.x (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id i06IRkvn002880 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2004 12:27:47 -0600 Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 18:27:28 +0000 From: Mihailsvva Subject: x, Viamgra! To: x References: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3AB0J5HDD6H9LK78@tensor.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit -----------end of sample headers-------- By the way, this looks like it was sent through/by a compromised (probably infected) computer... Also, I've munged my own ISP's information... From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 23:31:29 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Cat) Date: Wed Jan 7 00:36:49 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: MASSIVE number of rejected Spams References: Message-ID: <3FFB99B1.F632C72D@spamcop.net> Jimi Thompson wrote: > I've pasted in one of the more recent items below. I've read the FAQ > and can't seem to find any good reason for this happening. I'm using > Netscape or Thunderbird as my mail client, so processing the headers > shouldn't be such an issue. Google had numerous postings of people > asking about this problem, but I see no replies. > > If anyone has any ideas, I'd appreciate it. > > Thanks, > > Jimi Please follow the "no spam posting" rule at http://spamcop.net/forum.shtml and do not post spam here. If you need to post a copy of spam, please post it only in spamcop.spam then refer to it here. The people who read and post here get enough spam of their own without having to see yours in a place where they are promised a spam free environment. -Cat SpamCop user, not an admin From someone at microsoft.com Wed Jan 7 00:35:19 2004 From: someone at microsoft.com (hello) Date: Wed Jan 7 00:41:03 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: anti-Spamcop trick - Part II: � References: Message-ID: "Michael Lefevre" wrote in message news:bt79hi$v80$1@news.spamcop.net... > hello wrote: > > > > "Michael Lefevre" wrote in message > > news:bt2451$bj4$1@news.spamcop.net... > >> Anyway, thanks for the report. I'm passing this along to Julian so he can > >> take a look. > > > > I see this has been incorporated now into the parsing by Spamcop. Thanks a > > lot. > > Yeah - Julian emailed me back to say that, but you've beaten me to posting > the info... :) Not working today.... the following URL could not be deobsfucated: http://nlm3023hiwinwmgtec.ttdown4d4.com�tdqrdebtd4pf3amd8p331eah3.62q7xuo.com -Marc From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 23:37:42 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Wed Jan 7 00:42:53 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: No Spam & mail15 spammer References: <3FF87DCB.6070908@spamcop.net> <3FF90C4F.1040402@spamcop.net> <3FFB5D74.30406@spamcop.net> Message-ID: <1o6nvvs11lao3nlg63njgdepotdnvt6djd@4ax.com> On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 14:14:28 +1300, Anony Mouse wrote: >Greetings Tom... > >It is very hard to take credit for nailing any spammer and thats not >really my goal... The goal being to stop the bastards spamming me. I understand... Despite my report yesterday, it was likely a glitch. Traffic back to normal today (pout!) From mrichter at cpl.net Tue Jan 6 21:48:13 2004 From: mrichter at cpl.net (Mike Richter) Date: Wed Jan 7 00:51:32 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Vetomail? References: Message-ID: <3FFB9D9D.8020303@cpl.net> Dave wrote: > What the f***'s up with Vetomail? > > Some of the spam I have gotten has a remove link http://rtyfgh.biz/gone.php > that turns out to be an add for Vetomail! > > And this page is full of vulgarities! > > Of course spamcop would see this unless it followed the remove link... > > So is vetomail spamming to get people to purchase their anti-spam software? > Or is someone setting them up? > > Spam for anti-spam software is common. I don't know Vetomail, but see no reason they should be an exception. (I do wonder whether such a product has a loophole to let its own spam through.) Spam is vulgar if not obscene. It's nice to know that this one makes it clear at its WWW site. It could be a joe job, of course. Mike -- mrichter@cpl.net http://www.mrichter.com/ From reply at in.news.group Wed Jan 7 00:03:57 2004 From: reply at in.news.group (Mike Vollmer) Date: Wed Jan 7 01:01:50 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Fax Spam & FCC Complaint Address Message-ID: Yesterday I read an article (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2004/01/05/nat ional1410EST0589.DTL) that the FCC had fined fax.com $5.5 million for sending unsoliticed faxes (489 faxes @ $11,000 each).. Today I receive two spams advertising mass fax services, 50,000 minimim per order! So the minimum fine must be around $550,000,000 per customer? Hope they can pay! I unplugged our home fax machine several years ago after whole roll of paper was consumed by such bozos. The FCC's email address for complaints is: fccinfo@fcc.gov From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Jan 7 00:02:20 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tom) Date: Wed Jan 7 01:05:09 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spam report with Spam. (And I better do not report this one). References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> <19yyjjfagv9aw$.1dpdcommkw60$.dlg@40tude.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 23:08:22 -0500, "Robert Taylor" wrote: >Final footnote: For decades, (as most Americans probably still know) among >American jazz musicians, the word "cat" referred to any adult male, but >primarily to other jazz musicians (male). Thus: in the '30s and '40s, "hip >cat"; in the '50s and thereabouts, "cool cat"; both terms denoting a >person who was temperamentally, ethically, or musically (or all three) >deserving of great respect. During the '50s, a single woman was called a >"chick". Interesting juxtaposition. Boy, has this wandered off topic. Anyway. "cat" also referred to an aficionado of jazz (of either sex). "Cool Cat" was part of the beatnik generation in the late 50's and early 60's and was probably personified best by Ed "Cookie" Burns (at least on television). I haven't bothered going back through this long thread, but "Cat" is also a nickname for Catherine (and its variant spellings)... and most likely used as a nickname by Cat in this forum. From nobody at nowhere.com Tue Jan 6 22:02:46 2004 From: nobody at nowhere.com (GregR) Date: Wed Jan 7 01:05:48 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: OK, I give up - what are they selling?... ;-) References: <3FF89836.2FF90F9A@nowhere.com> <3FFA4F69.C0EFB0E3@nowhere.com> Message-ID: <3FFBA106.E9DD98BE@nowhere.com> Redstone wrote: > I KNEW that Yoko had something to do with it. :-) Oh, she killed Paul? :-) -- GregR - Another Beemer Biker ...o&o> [This space for rent - inquire within] From antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be Wed Jan 7 07:02:53 2004 From: antoine.mechelynck at skynet.be (Antoine J. Mechelynck) Date: Wed Jan 7 01:06:12 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: DIA55.US Dutch registration info References: Message-ID: "Marjolein Katsma" a ?crit dans le message de news:Xns9466BDBBCFD67homesitehelp@216.154.195.61 > Merlyn (Merlyn@Spamcop.net) wrote in > news:bt9g9h$ntb$1@news.spamcop.net: > > > Almost all web servers can be configured by site to make the default > > page anything you want. Actually I prefer default.htm or > > default.html > > Except when it's a bit of hosting space that comes free with an access > contract. ;-) > > The default actually _is_ index.html here (possibly with alternatives; > I've never tested). That doesn't mean I have to use it in every > directory. > > > -- > Marjolein Katsma - Amsterdam, NL - http://hshelp.com/ > Spammers steal resources: they're my enemy. > Cyveillance steals resources and they lie: they're my enemy. > The enemy of my enemy can be my enemy, too. > http://www.xs4all.nl/~iamback/evidence/cyveillance/cookies.html My hosting space at http://users.skynet.be/antoine.mechelynck/ comes free with the contract. I don't choose the name of the dafult page: the software looks for index.html, INDEX.HTML, index.htm or INDEX.HTM, in some specified order which I never remember. In my "main" directories (pages accessible from each other and from the main entry page through links) I put default pages. But I don't have one in my other/ directory, used for pages, pictures, etc. to which I post links on NGs or MLs. If you ask for a directory (not a file) and none of these 4 names are in it, you will be directed to a page at www.skynet.be telling you: "Oops... The page you asked was not found" and giving you several options. The number 404 does not appear on that page. I've seen other sites using default.html, default.php, default.asp as the default, and at least one site which shows you an ls-like directory listing of files so you can choose which one to view or download. Best regards, Tony. From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Jan 7 06:17:48 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Tuatara) Date: Wed Jan 7 01:20:56 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Turning off images in IE References: Message-ID: <3ffba305.51194500@news.spamcop.net> On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:22:15 -0600, Todd Prouty wrote: >Does anyone know of any easy way (small freeware app, perhaps?) to turn >images in Internet Explorer (v. 6, Win2k) on and off? >Todd Prouty > What works perfectly for me is a tool called Toggle Images.exe. When I toggle off images, it impacts IE, various versions of Outlook (but not Outlook Express), and some online Help systems. You may be able to obtain it from Microsoft. Although I obtained it free from Microsoft for IE 5.x, it works perfectly well with 6.x on both Win XP and Win 2000. Toggle Images.exe is included with a set of utilties, but I do not recall whether it was called IE Accessories or XP Power Tools or some such. These were all free from Microsoft. From nobody at spamcop.net Wed Jan 7 00:23:36 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Cat) Date: Wed Jan 7 01:27:06 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Names and stuff (was Re: Wow. Spammer has guts to reply to Spamreport with Spam.) References: <3FF8E409.98C2193A@spamcop.net> <3FF908FB.3FF6BFCA@spamcop.net> <19yyjjfagv9aw$.1dpdcommkw60$.dlg@40tude.net> Message-ID: <3FFBA5E8.D3DAB21B@spamcop.net> (follow-ups to .social) Tom wrote: > Boy, has this wandered off topic. Hehe, I'm surprised no one else moved it to .social before now, which is what I'm doing. > Anyway. "cat" also referred to an > aficionado of jazz (of either sex). "Cool Cat" was part of the beatnik > generation in the late 50's and early 60's and was probably > personified best by Ed "Cookie" Burns (at least on television). > > I haven't bothered going back through this long thread, but "Cat" is > also a nickname for Catherine (and its variant spellings)... and most > likely used as a nickname by Cat in this forum. Yes, that's exactly why I find it hard to believe that some people want to label me with the male gender on this board. "Cat" isn't short for my real name, but I have seen it most often used as a nickname for people with names like Catherine or other Cat/Kat type names. Used here, "Cat" is just a shorter variation of nicknames I use on other parts of the internet. I've also noticed on this particular newsgroup (examples like "dear sir", etc.), that some people are under the false impression that women don't concern themselves with spam fighting, which leads to some people mistakenly assuming all of the newsgroup participants are male. From ben.de+SCnews at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 23:14:22 2004 From: ben.de+SCnews at spamcop.net (Ben) Date: Wed Jan 7 02:17:38 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: Fake Rolexes! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3FFBB1CE.5090503@spamcop.net> Mike Gray wrote: > Hmm.. I do wonder if Rolex or the other manufacturers mentioned here might > be interested in this one.... call me crazy, but I think they might just be. > [Original Spam in spamcop.spam] I would say, ?yes;? most manufactures are usually very interested in counterfeit versions of their products. They are often also interested in grey-market sales of their products too; especially the "high end" ones. Every compnay I worked for has... I will put in an inquiry to some of the companies listed and pondered the question to them. If I get time I'll post the replies provided I remember. Here is one vendor has to say about this, (From Longines? web page and paraphrased for brevity.) Some of the other vendors said just about the same thing. And as always - It is Caveat Emptor with these people. [Truncated & Paraphrased] ...*no* Longines distributor or official retailer offers for sale any Longines product on the Internet. Longines disclaims any relationship to, or responsibility for, any timepiece or other item bearing the Longines name, brand, logotype or symbol that may be offered for sale or purchased via the Internet. Purchasing such an item from an unauthorized party is therefore at the buyer's sole risk, particularly in the case of counterfeit or substandard products... [They go on to say you should only buy their product from authorized dealers only.] From nobody at spamcop.net Tue Jan 6 23:28:19 2004 From: nobody at spamcop.net (Don Wannit) Date: Wed Jan 7 02:31:55 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] My first bizarre CAN SPAM sample Message-ID: This was a fun one. I just got my first CAN-SPAM enabled (?) spam. Posted in spamcop.spam with the same Subject. The spammer is claiming that the spam email has 2 purposes, and the primary purpose is some silly "benefit" from a non-profit organization. That is supposed to get them past any CAN-SPAM restrictions, I guess, since it's supposedly a non-profit org. (Tomorrow maybe I'll see if they are a legit non-profit -- nah, MacWorld will be a much better use of my time.) The "secondary purpose" of the email is to get people to sign up to receive email messages. We're supposed to believe that the messages are Crazy and Unfair US State Laws. But since that's only the secondary purpose, and the primary purpose is a no-cost free "benefit" from a non-profit org, it's not spam. It is exempt from any and all provisions of the CAN SPAM law. Yeah, right. And I can "click here" to email advertise my web site to 1,850,000 OPT-IN email addresses for free. Uh, huh. Sounds like an opportunity I can't afford to miss! It's a not-so-fresh twist on the chain letter scams that claimed they were not chain letters. "Send $5 to the first 5 names on the list and in receive a valuable 10th generation photocopy of something worthless. This is not a chain letter." But it did give me one giggle: I didn't know it was illegal in Massachusetts to put tomatoes in clam chowder. BTW, it got past the various DNSBL's we use, and past our global SpamAssassin rules, and past my personal SpamAssassin rules, to get to my POP mailbox. But Eudora 6.0.2 on Mac OS X caught it and shunted it to my Junk folder. Let's hear it for multiple layers of protection! -- Don Wannit A paid SpamCop user since 1999 From SikaM-newminuitLoseThis at sneakemail.com Wed Jan 7 09:09:31 2004 From: SikaM-newminuitLoseThis at sneakemail.com (SikaSpam) Date: Wed Jan 7 03:11:51 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: is it helpfull ? References: <3FF9AA9E.4070203@domain.invalid> <3FFAF2FB.20309@domain.invalid> Message-ID: <1kgffgoumz15q$.1ielgrvo0wspq.dlg@40tude.net> On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 19:40:11 +0200, user@domain.invalid wrote: > what is your response to the full message I posted ? Yes it is helpful to to report via spamcop? It feeds the SCBL which I and many others use to block spam before it gets delivered. From SikaM-newminuitLoseThis at sneakemail.com Wed Jan 7 09:12:44 2004 From: SikaM-newminuitLoseThis at sneakemail.com (SikaSpam) Date: Wed Jan 7 03:15:37 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: is it helpfull ? References: <3FF9AA9E.4070203@domain.invalid> Message-ID: On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 18:01:43 +0000 (UTC), Marjolein Katsma wrote: > It's slightly unrealistic to > expect all of them to have read three months' worth of archive listings. Call me an optimist :) Oh-oh, thread drift! From rmu93aw02 at sneakemail.com Wed Jan 7 02:50:07 2004 From: rmu93aw02 at sneakemail.com (Spambo) Date: Wed Jan 7 03:55:51 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: MASSIVE number of rejected Spams In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Jimi Thompson wrote: > 90% or better of the spam that I send to SpamCop gets rejected with > > "SpamCop encountered errors" > > Personally, I'm not having a problem seeing the spam. I've tried > sending this stuff as HTML, at text, and as HTML and Text. I'm just not > getting anywhere and it's really annyoing. I don't have any problems seeing the spam either, although I should since the rules for this newsgroup plainly state not to post full spam in this newsgroup. Use spamcop.spam for that purpose. I suspect that the " -------- Original Message -------- " (as shown at the end of this reply) which is added by your email program is the cause of the problem. The parser is expecting to find only the raw spam source, not the raw source with additional comments added. > I've pasted in one of the more recent items below. I've read the FAQ > and can't seem to find any good reason for this happening. I'm using > Netscape or Thunderbird as my mail client, so processing the headers > shouldn't be such an issue. Google had numerous postings of people > asking about this problem, but I see no replies. If you are using Netscape you must have missed the part of the FAQ that says to send the spam "as attachment" - "as attachment" doesn't add the extra comment like forwarding "inline" will. > If anyone has any ideas, I'd appreciate it. > > Thanks, > > Jimi > > SpamCop encountered errors while saving spam for processing: > SpamCop could not find your spam message in this email: The headers below are from the email you forwarded to SpamCop and later posted in this newsgroup. > [snip] > From: Jimi Thompson If the email address I munged was actually your email address then you have revealed it to the world. Some don't think that's anything to worry about, others don't like having their addresses published in newsgroups. Anywayz, this is just a minor comment, the next one is the "lulu". > User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) > Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) > X-Accept-Language: en-us, en > MIME-Version: 1.0 > To: Spam Cop ^^^^^^^^ In your post you revealed your personal and once private submission address. Anyone who reads your post can now submit spams using your account. They can't process the spams but they could set you up to submit false spam reports if you don't make sure that what you're reporting was actually submitted by you. > [snip] >
> -------- Original Message -------- >
> [snip remainder] Try submitting the spam "as attachment" and in plain text, not HTML and things might improve. From user at domain.invalid Wed Jan 7 12:13:57 2004 From: user at domain.invalid (user@domain.invalid) Date: Wed Jan 7 05:22:02 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: is it helpfull ? References: <3FF9AA9E.4070203@domain.invalid> <3FFAF2FB.20309@domain.invalid> <1kgffgoumz15q$.1ielgrvo0wspq.dlg@40tude.net> Message-ID: <3FFBDBE5.80108@domain.invalid> SikaSpam wrote: > On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 19:40:11 +0200, user@domain.invalid wrote: > > >>what is your response to the full message I posted ? > > > Yes it is helpful to to report via spamcop? It feeds the SCBL which I and > many others use to block spam before it gets delivered. that is just one side of the coin, and in my opinion a very unimportant one as it does nothing to stop or even reduce spamming. my query was actually if the reporting can achive the closing down of a "beneficiary" website and perhaps it's unrepentant ISP, rather to report thousands of ever changing spam mail origins from kitchen table mailservers all around the world. seeing the ever increasing spamming I have reason to doubt that. From SikaM-newminuitLoseThis at sneakemail.com Wed Jan 7 11:47:27 2004 From: SikaM-newminuitLoseThis at sneakemail.com (SikaSpam) Date: Wed Jan 7 05:50:32 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: is it helpfull ? References: <3FF9AA9E.4070203@domain.invalid> <3FFAF2FB.20309@domain.invalid> <1kgffgoumz15q$.1ielgrvo0wspq.dlg@40tude.net> <3FFBDBE5.80108@domain.invalid> Message-ID: <1g48tu9dv6av0$.9gn1xg8ewa3s$.dlg@40tude.net> On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 12:13:57 +0200, user@domain.invalid wrote: > that is just one side of the coin, and in my opinion a very unimportant > one as it does nothing to stop or even reduce spamming. I disagree is a very selfish way because [I find] the spamcop list to be one of the most useful. I know it won't stop spam or spammers but I fear nothing short of a sudden transe of all idiots who would ever buy anything from the spammers enlightens them. I've always though the biggest problem is the smaller spammers that think there is big money to be made. The ones that buy the lists and the software; I doubt that many make any money themselves. > my query was actually if the reporting can achive the closing down of a > "beneficiary" website and perhaps it's unrepentant ISP, rather to report > thousands of ever changing spam mail origins from kitchen table > mailservers all around the world. I see that too especially on the drug stuff. I'm not sure why these operations can't be shut down by law enforcement at least int the US and Canada. Maybe it's because of entrapment laws that prevent the feds from ordering to use their own order as evidence. > seeing the ever increasing spamming I have reason to doubt that. I'm afraid you are right there :( From NoSpam at NoSpam.com Wed Jan 7 06:46:04 2004 From: NoSpam at NoSpam.com (Richard M. Rivera) Date: Wed Jan 7 06:54:54 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: joker: 530000x.net freeadultranch.com 2004hosting.org cdevfr.biz References: Message-ID: These dirbags are now with Gandi.net "R. P. McCormick" wrote in message news:bt9mig$32v$1@news.spamcop.net... > Maybe Joker has gotten 'enuf complains and 'enuf months > have gone by that they've done somethiing, albiet not much. > Here's what Joker's whois has to say ... > and what b.gtld-servers.net also has to say > > 530000x.net > - whois nameserver now invalid-address.joker.com > - gtld returns invalid-address.joker.com > - this domain will not resolve - cached entries may still exist > > freeadultranch.com > - whois nameservers ns1.lmihosting.com and ns2.lmihosting.com > - gtld returns authoritative nameserver addresses: > 200.206.187.138 DSL cnx in Brazil (no response) > 200.206.191.19 DSL cnx in Brazil (no response) > 61.251.190.246 Asian IP (no response) > 61.252.159.18 Asian IP (no response) > 61.104.86.122 Asian IP - this one works but with bogus responses > > 2004hosting.org > - whois nameserver now invalid-address.joker.com > - gtld returns NO authoritative nameservers > > cdevfr.biz > - lots of perfectnameservers.xxx (like ns2.perfectnameservers.com) > - gtld redirects to x.GTLD.biz name servers > - A.GTLD.biz nameserver response with perfectnameservers > 61.251.19.203 Asian IP - allows ZONE transfer for cdevfr.biz !!! > 221.232.160.95 - timeout, not accessible > > So ... as you can see ... two of those domains are (right now) not > resolving (and yes, thanks to Joker). But the others are up and > running as usual. I suspect that the freeadultranch.com may actually > be attempting to run DNS on hijacked systems based on the addresses > that are indicated for authoritative name servers. > > R P McCormick > SpamCop user > > From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Wed Jan 7 13:11:34 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Wed Jan 7 07:18:51 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: A new Spamcop message board (updated!) References: Message-ID: On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 21:35:13 -0500, R. P. McCormick wrote: > (Did you really post by sending an email?!) It looks like it judging by the headers. Therefore, it also looks like the mail2news gateway no longer tags the subject: header. -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- The three "R"s of Microsoft support: Retry, Reboot, Reinstall. From gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com Wed Jan 7 13:13:05 2004 From: gstewart at loopback.sgms-centre.com (Godwin Stewart) Date: Wed Jan 7 07:21:47 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] Re: A new Spamcop message board (updated!) References: Message-ID: On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 17:40:27 -0800, Wild Willy Parsons wrote: > Sorry for the intrusion, but I am a moron. > > I cannot navigate through the newsgroup help board What "newsgroup help board"? These are newsgroups. All you need is a newsreader and you're set. Anything available on the web is just provided for archival purposes. -- G. Stewart -- s/loopback\.// to reply -- Remember: TINLC --------------------------------------------------------------- Doctors can be frustrating. You wait six weeks for an appointment and he says, "I wish you'd come to me sooner." From darren at younghome.com Wed Jan 7 06:20:32 2004 From: darren at younghome.com (Darren Young) Date: Wed Jan 7 07:22:40 2004 Subject: [SpamCop-List] What's the purpose? Message-ID: They're not asking for my bank account number, my phone number, anything. Are they just trying to build up their list of emails to sell perhaps? But come on now people, what happened to basic spelling and grammar?