[SpamCop-List] Re: munging not sufficient
bar_n0ne at hotmail.com
Sun Oct 2 15:24:55 EDT 2005
"Anton Haumer" <AHaumer_gmxnet at nopspam.invalid> wrote in message
news:433FB453.7E267817 at nopspam.invalid...
> Berny wrote:
> > > Sometimes I get spam in which the spammer
> > > fakes my own email-address as from-address.
> > >
> > > SC sends reports to the right addresses,
> > > but it leaves the faked from-address unmunged
> > > indictaing the source of the report ...
> > > although the other occurences are munged.
> > >
> > In my experience, welkl formed From: and Reply to: addies along with
> > etc. have always been munged, have you gone back and looked at the
> > report sent? (you can go to the past reports tab).
> Yes I did - unmunged.
> > In any case I really doubt it matters. The only thing I see spoammers
> > scraping from SC reports are new addresses and aliases (they already
> > yours), new MX names, spamfilter scores to tune their spam with, and
> > Recieved lines they may wish to use in faking mail routing.
> Yes I know
> but sometimes they try to verfiy the addresses ...
> Well, I prefer totally munged ;-)
Intereresting, I couldn;t properly confirm since I am set to unmunged in my
preferences, but I have a free account, so I get at least partially munged.
There was a discussion about munging the from address a few years back and
I'm sure it was munged at the time (after the discussion), but my spam's
"reply to" and "from"s are unmunged, It looks like yours (and everybody
elses) are also.
More information about the SpamCop-List