Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. Lking

    ISP has indicated spam will cease

    I have no idea how much of the profit goes where. I would guess it depends on how much each person involved thinks their soul is worth. It is supported to be. ICANN should be controlling issuing of domain names and agencies,. But there is evidence that they are not actively taking aspects of their responsibilities seriously. If not money, what? Today's forum spam here included, male "enhancement" drugs, weight loss drugs, skin creams, muscle building diet pills, all for sale for money. I did not read carefully but I did not see anything with any "socially redeeming value" or other objective supported by pictures of women in bikinis or bed. JMHO
  3. Ricardo_63

    ISP has indicated spam will cease

    Based on you hypothesis about spam reason is clearly money and can concluded behind system structure is not regardless to a little corporate, without any respect and totally disloyal . Therefore it can concluded component of spammers began from IT managers (how about ISP? no carry out any responsibilities??). If spammer is based about money what is the relationship between normal services as hosting and others and spam extra money? As could be vertical structure, IT manager is the smaller portion of the spam business money share, as it could continues to the top of structure how much is the rate share? Why is not regulated?? who controls ? Are you sure is spam about money?
  4. Lking

    ISP has indicated spam will cease

    It is a mater of money. Some IT managers may not get paid if the money, maybe extra money, if action is taken agents the spammers. For those that don't see the difference, the spammer's money is just as spendable as any other.
  5. Yesterday
  6. Excellent DisplayName, thanks for posting. Not really my tip but I'll take acknowledgment
  7. Display Name

    Spamcop no longer works with Outlook/Exchange

    MIG, your tip works. Thanks again.
  8. Ricardo_63

    ISP has indicated spam will cease

    If Spamcop is and owes to: β€œspam complaints a day and is supported by hundreds of thousands of users, a knowledgeable volunteer community, and a professional staff” Why to be more condescending with ISP?? IT manager should be step forward monitoring system and not contributed to and for spam moreover when increase day by day.
  9. DN, here's the link where SC BIG team members give the real reasons for not posting spam full source data [ http://forum.spamcop.net/topic/27950-reporting-not-working-mainbody/ ], it's a good read
  10. Hi GnaarlyMarly, thanks, however, hmmm, I'm not so attached to OL to much around installing OL2010/2003, in fact, I'm close to giving OL the boot. I don't get spam with (Seamonkey/Gmail/Yahoo), generally I muck around with OL to burn as many spammers as possible, but, dog says I'd be better off spending time with her, she's never wrong
  11. , let us know how it goes & just a little fyi, the SC Forum "Big Team" encourage us to not post full spam data in the forum, they prefer the link that's generated when a spam is processed, even if the parsing spits out errors, still post the link with whatever the issue is that's causing us to report/request help. I think, from memory, filling up the forum with full spam source data hurts their eyes or maybe it's their scrolling finger gets tired
  12. Last week
  13. https://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z6499662004z6a4c2335c60773ff37fb0f7668385d6dz Parsing header: host 2001:12f0:601:a902:0:0:0:150 = turquesa.dcc.ufmg.br (cached)turquesa.dcc.ufmg.br is 2001:12f0:601:a902:0:0:0:150 0: Received: from smtp.dcc.ufmg.br (turquesa.dcc.ufmg.br. [2001:12f0:601:a902::150]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id a44si116985qvh.91.2018.11.11.09.04.47; Sun, 11 Nov 2018 09:04:49 -0800 (PST) Hostname verified: turquesa.dcc.ufmg.brGmail/Postini received mail from sending system 2001:12f0:601:a902:0:0:0:150 1: Received: from webmail.dcc.ufmg.br (xisto.dcc.ufmg.br [2001:12f0:601:a902::150]) by smtp.dcc.ufmg.br (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E90409F094; Sun, 11 Nov 2018 15:04:46 -0200 (-02) Hostname verified: xisto.dcc.ufmg.br Possible forgery. Supposed receiving system not associated with any of your mailhosts Will not trust this Received line. Tracking message source: 2001:12f0:601:a902:0:0:0:150: Display data:"whois 2001:12f0:601:a902:0:0:0:150@whois.lacnic.net" (Getting contact from whois.lacnic.net)Backup contact owner-c = rco217Using NS name gerencia.rede.ufmg.br to find domain and contact Display data: "whois rede.ufmg.br@whois.nic.br" (Getting contact from whois.nic.br) Backup contact owner-c = ura ura = r-admin@rede.ufmg.br urt = r-tecnic@rede.ufmg.br whois.nic.br rede.ufmg.br = r-admin@rede.ufmg.br, r-tecnic@rede.ufmg.br, mail-abuse@cert.brsic128 = cais@cais.rnp.brwhois.lacnic.net found abuse contacts for 2001:12f0:601:a902:0:0:0:150 = cais@cais.rnp.br Cannot find ip range in whois output No reporting addresses found for 2001:12f0:601:a902:0:0:0:150, using devnull for tracking. Yum, this spam is fresh! Message is 2 hours old2001:12f0:601:a902:0:0:0:150 not listed in cbl.abuseat.org2001:12f0:601:a902:0:0:0:150 not listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net2001:12f0:601:a902:0:0:0:150 not listed in accredit.habeas.com2001:12f0:601:a902:0:0:0:150 not listed in plus.bondedsender.org2001:12f0:601:a902:0:0:0:150 not listed in iadb.isipp.com Finding links in message body Parsing text partno links found Reports regarding this spam have already been sent: Re: 2001:12f0:601:a902:0:0:0:150 (Administrator of network where email originates) Reportid: 6876124444 To: nomaster@devnull.spamcop.net If reported today, reports would be sent to: Re: 2001:12f0:601:a902:0:0:0:150 (Administrator of network where email originates) nomaster@devnull.spamcop.net 2nd report using 3rd Rcvd line in header: https://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z6499662490z5bdb0567e14f44de3e07c2fbad0f6158z Parsing header: 0: Received: from smtp.dcc.ufmg.br (turquesa.dcc.ufmg.br. [150.164.0.133]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id a44si116985qvh.91.2018.11.11.09.04.47; Sun, 11 Nov 2018 09:04:49 -0800 (PST) Hostname verified: xisto.dcc.ufmg.brGmail/Postini received mail from sending system 150.164.0.133 1: Received: from webmail.dcc.ufmg.br (xisto.dcc.ufmg.br [150.164.0.133]) by smtp.dcc.ufmg.br (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E90409F094; Sun, 11 Nov 2018 15:04:46 -0200 (-02) Hostname verified: xisto.dcc.ufmg.br Possible forgery. Supposed receiving system not associated with any of your mailhosts Will not trust this Received line. Cached whois for 150.164.0.133 : search-apnic-not-arin@apnic.netI refuse to bother search-apnic-not-arin@apnic.net. Using search-apnic-not-arin#apnic.net@devnull.spamcop.net for statistical tracking. Using last resort contacts search-apnic-not-arin#apnic.net@devnull.spamcop.net
  14. nhraj700

    HabuL & Thunderbird v60.0.3

    I found when I upgraded Thunderbird from the v59 series to V60, Thunderbird disabled HabuL. I am puzzled how you even were able to use HabuL to send an inline attachment as I couldn't load it at all. Anyhow, like you, I bounced back to v59 immediately until I discovered a way to trick Thunderbird. Take the original habul-1.21.0-sm.xpi installation add-on file and copy it to one say habul-1.21.0-smThunderbird60.xpi. Open the newly copied package with 7-zip and look for a file named install.rdf. Edit it within the 7-zip program. Look for a installation statement <em:maxVersion>38.*</em:maxVersion> and change it to <em:maxVersion>69.*</em:maxVersion> 69 is an arbitrary number that will hopefully carry us along through the line of security updates. Don't know how long it will work for us though??? I think I just reinstalled the update right over the top of 59. But removing the add-on and reinstalling should work too. I also like to ensure Thunderbird is configured to send as Attachment as a default as I do other things spam related without habul.. Tools>Composition>General "tab">As Attachment. Hope this helps!
  15. Lking

    HabuL & Thunderbird v60.0.3

    Can you share? Being out of the line of security updates is not a good situation.
  16. nhraj700

    HabuL & Thunderbird v60.0.3

    I'm running HabuL 1.21.0 with Thunderbird 60.3.0 (32-bit) on Windows 10 64bit with no issues. I did have to use a kludge to trick Thunderbird from not disabling it however.
  17. I have two different e-mails one is Outlook the other one is Gmail. Every time i get a spam on my Outlook e-mail it in almost all cases reports directly to report_spam@hotmail.com. However sometimes i get the same spam on my Gmail e-mail (the spammer supposedly have both of my e-mail addresses.). But the Gmail one reports to the correct spam contacts wherever the Outlook always reports to the hotmail abuse address which it shouldn't do except the spammer send me spam from one using one of Microsofts services? Only in a few instances does Spamcop report to the right abuse contacts when using Outlook, i have no idea why it works in those cases but oh well. Why does it do this? If i recollect rightly this haven't always been the case and it always used to send to the correct instances or abuse contacts. Here's two Spamcop reports, first one from Outlook and the other one from the Gmail e-mail. https://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z6499645284z69efc272a2d2f2b47876f5ca99aa42ddz https://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z6499643222z25c6ac08119c343450665e089fa8cf61z Since Gmail doesn't work with Spamcop without breaking i had to convert the 6to4 address to an ipv4-address. It's a bad joke which Spamcop haven't correted for years now but i leave that for another time. It just shows that it is meaningless to report spam using Outlook since Spamcop can't handle them properly. At least Outlook is using a proper IPV6 address than a 6to4 private address like Gmail does but it doesn't help Spamcop parsing them properly to the right abuse contacts using Outlook either way. Something is broken.
  18. Display Name

    Spamcop no longer works with Outlook/Exchange

    Thank you, MIG. I'll give a shot with my next report to SpamCop.
  19. I currently use outlook 2010 at work. It also worked for me in outlook 2003 a few years back.
  20. Hi GnarlyMarly, using web Outlook Mail - no go, using Outlook 2016 app/windows - no go, using (MS) Mail and Calendar, no go. Process: create email, select spam mail (to drag & drop) - immediately closes the draft email - none of these allow "drag & drop", having said that I'm not sure I'm using the same " outlook windows application " you've referred to; which "outlook windows application" specifically are you referring to? Re "started using program called fetchmail over imap and a perl scri_pt to embed the email into an attachment", cor!
  21. The method I was speaking of for forward-as-attachment is for the outlook windows application. Webmail might not be able to do it because the windows application is using the windows explorer drag-and-drop. ActiveX was an "attempt" to enable this. According to microsoft.com there is no way to do this without a separate application. Which is why I started using program called fetchmail over imap and a perl scri_pt to embed the email into an attachment over a decade ago.
  22. Hi, Display Name, not sure if this will help, (someone here & maybe doco) suggested removing from the 1st [ Received: from DM5PR19MB1033.namprd19.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:3:ef::17) by DM5PR19MB1034.namprd19.prod.outlook.com with HTTPS via DM5PR04CA0055.NAMPRD04.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM; Thu, 8 Nov 2018 14:05:18 +0000] however, I notice the spam msg you're querying has 3 [Received: from etc] I removed the first 2 [Received: from etc] & submitted to spamcop - https://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z6499543863za669acef9883e3921fd95624a079faefz, if it was submitted within the timeframe it would have been directed to abuse@zohocorp.com
  23. Hello Gnarlymarley, well you said it loud enough for me to hear Re your method, are you speaking about https://outlook.live.com/mail/ or app based Outlook mail? I've just tried via web based mail, not possible. Will try app based & update... Cheers.
  24. Well they have finely done it! Thunderbird v60.0.3 is not compatible with to unsupported (But necessary) HabuL! When I tried to forward as an attachment to SpamCop that too failed. Attached emails seemed to be forwarded in line NOT as an attachment. Be warned. I was able to revert to 59.0b2 With 100+ spam a day...
  25. littlepeaks

    url not a routable address

    Thanks for all the replies. I will continue reporting these. I guess we can close this thread.
  26. I am not sure if google will fix this problem. Probably been going on for more than a year. See the following post, which goes back to as early as January.
  27. yeah, a spamtrap of mine seems to have gotten on the list with lots of random password. The interesting thing is that spamtrap address is just an alias account and has no password. Probably just a copycat setup from scammers who do not have the actual passwords. One can never be sure if they are the copycat or the real thing that is "masking" the password just so they do not give themselves away.
  1. Load more activity
×