rconner Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 See tracking link. I'm not following what's going on here. I've seen this for quite some time now, but only now am I getting around to asking about it. The parser found the IP address of the spamvertized website. The parser then found an abuse contact e-mail address (presumably via WHOIS) for this IP address; the e-addy happened to be at Yahoo even though the IP block owner does not appear to have any other business relation to Yahoo. The parser passed this e-mail address through abuse.net and got Yahoo's contact address, which it redirected to its "private" reporting address for Yahoo. SpamCop wants to send my report on the website to the Yahoo SC address. I understand why one might want to consult abuse.net for the reporting addresses IF the reporting address is within a domain that bears some responsibility for the spam (i.e., it would be better to funnel all abuse reports to a published abuse contact). In this case, however, Yahoo appears to have had nothing whatsoever to do with the spamvertized website -- it's just that the admin of that website's address chose to publish a freemail Yahoo address in his WHOIS info. The very most that Yahoo might do (as far as I know) in response to this report would be to shut down the reporting address, which probably would not matter to anyone. Why, then, would SC report this spammed website to Yahoo? -- rick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farelf Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 Thanks Rick - seems like the case reported in http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=11618 (and you say there is no shortage of other examples). Seems something has come off the rails, looks like Don has intervened in that other one - which is the same routing as "yours". See the routing details as they now appear in your report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rconner Posted December 5, 2010 Author Share Posted December 5, 2010 Thanks. Better to devnull, I suppose, than to annoy Yahoo (which apparently has more than enough on its hands dealing with the abuse that actually does transpire on its premises). -- rick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpamCopAdmin Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 It turns out that ttnnet[at]yahoo.com bounces our mail, so I set the reports to go to office.john.smith[at]gmail.com. Probably a waste of time, but at least office.john.smith[at]gmail.com isn't bouncing (so far). - Don D'Minion - SpamCop Admin - - service[at]admin.spamcop.net - . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpamCopAdmin Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 Better to devnull, I suppose, than to annoy YahooYes. One thing SpamCop definitely doesn't want to do is send reports to the wrong place. Big taboo with us. Plus, it's the act of sending the reports that feeds our stats and blocking list, so devnull is as good as any other address for our purposes. - Don D'Minion - SpamCop Admin - - service[at]admin.spamcop.net - . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farelf Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 And, on top of that, the web site has been kicked off that hosting. Comprehensively resolved and marking as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.