[SpamCop-List] Re: why does SpamCop appear to be the origin of so much spam

[Mike Easter]

Annie wrote:
> Ok here is what I am doing, hope you can help me decipher the correct
> way to personally complain to the spammers host.

Your manual reports can go how 'you' like - not how SC 'chooses'.

> I am parsing the header information on spamcop, and sending  a
> personal email from my spammed address to the origin of the email and
> CCing the complaint to uce at ftc,gov federal Can-Spam abuse address.

When you are parsing an actual spam, you get to see more information
than if you just give the parser a target to give you a notify addy.
The verbose parse will show you some 'why' about why an addy doesn't get
used - either based on bounces or that the entity doesn't want SC
reports.  Then you can mail the same addy that SC chose to not.  In the
case of kornet, the reg'd abuse addies are:

whois -h whois.abuse.net kornet.net ...
abuse at kornet.net   postmaster at kornet.net   spamrelay at certcc.or.kr (for
kornet.net)

Then, you will gather your own experience with the kornet addies re
bounces and such.

> Can you tell me a better way to get the real culpret's ISP address to
> send the personal complaint?  Do they also refuse individuals
> complaints?  I wonder if the ftc.gov address will give them a little
> incentive to "accept" complaints from the consumer?
>
> I am also using my SpamCop subscription to report the spam.

That's a good combination.  It also allows you to notify upstreams and
such for spews and spamhaus listed non-responsives with your manual
notify.

-- 
Mike Easter
kibitzer, not SC admin