I have been on SpamCop's "list" for 2 weeks now. I do NOT send junk emails, I do NOT use an auto-responder, and I have tried to get help from SpamCop but I am still listed. My business uses email extensively to communicate with clients. I am not able to respond to them because of being on a STUPID LIST with SpamCop!!! At some point, there has to be liability on SpamCop's part for blocking my ability to use email!!! Does anyone know how to begin a formal complaint or lawsuit against SpamCop for what they are doing to my business? What they hve done is no different than if they had come to my home and ripped all my phones out of the wall!!

If you had provided the IP address you believe is listed with spamcop, we could have provided you a lot more information about why you are listed (samples of spam coming from your IP address, notes if spam is still coming from it, notes if spamtraps (addresses never signed up for anything) have been hit, etc.) Without that information I can simply ask that you look through the FAQ here, specifically the topic: Why am I blocked?

The fact you have been on the list for 2 weeks leads me to believe that some machine behind the IP address continues to send spam onto the internet. SpamCop listings expire after the spam reports stop coming in.

Unless your ISP has a goofy setup (blocking outgoing messages that are blocked by spamcop) then only a percentage of your messages will not be getting through, those people who have decided they do not want any messages from servers that send spam. They are using the spamcop list to determine who they do not want to receive email from. It is their choice to not receive your emails, as it should be.

Also, since this post has nothing to do with how to use the spamcop forum software, it will be moved to the SpamCop Blocklist Help forum.

Thanks Steve for all your concern. I sent my IP address to you so hopefully an actual human being can help get my business back in order!

I assure you I have NOT been blocked by my clients so that is just a pompus statement on your part. I have been running my business for 19 years and never had a problem with emails until SpamCop showed up. I am currently forced to send my emails to my VP of Operations who in turn runs them through G-mail to get thm to the clients.

I would expect to hear from you very soon regarding what is causing the issue with your program and my emails.

It's very sad that I have to resort to a forum to try and get a resolution in this matter! Maybe my next business should be SpamCop Cops! We could police the policies and procedures of SpamCop and block the inappropriate blocks! Oh, What fun this is!!!

No, you haven't. SpamCop doesn't list email addresses, people, companies or domains.

The SpamCop list contains only mail server IP addresses.

If you want to send me a copy of the rejection notice you get when you send mail to your clients who use our service, maybe I can help. I need the IP address of the server.

When the spam stops flowing from that IP, it will automatically go off our list 24 hours later.

You can email me directly at service[at]admin.spamcop.net

- Don D'Minion - SpamCop Admin -
.

IP received off-line... I do not reply to support issues off-line so am posting here with clean information to respect your wishes. It will require a lot more work on your end and limit the conversation, but that is your choice. Yes, I do think you should post your IP address in this forum... it is a public IP anyway and publiched in DNS. The IP of my work system is: 12.30.28.8. I use spamcop's mail servers and those IP's can be readily found as well. My home IP address is 68.116.173.51 , but I also know that is protected from most (never say all) outside attacks by my firewall.

With all due respect, SpamCop has no possible way to block your messages. Your mail server would be sending the message directly to their mail server. It is that mail server configured to reject the message using spamcop's list. Your recipient or their mail administrator, has made that decision.

Go to: http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?action=blcheck and enter the first IP you provided and you will see:
If there are no reports of ongoing objectionable email from this system it will be delisted automatically in approximately 21 hours.

Causes of listing
System has sent mail to SpamCop spam traps in the past week (spam traps are secret, no reports or evidence are provided by SpamCop)
It appears this listing is caused by misdirected bounces. We have a FAQ which covers this topic: Why auto-responses are bad (Misdirected bounces). Please read this FAQ and heed the advice contained in it.
Additional potential problems
(these factors do not directly result in spamcop listing)

System administrator has already delisted this system once
Because of the above problems, express-delisting is not available

Listing History
System has been listed for 5.7 days.

The other IP you cite has reports, but is not currently listed. Neither of these has any manual reports showing, so likely the same issue. It is likely spamcop's spamtrap addresses have gotten forged as the sender of some spam and your system is using that forged information to hit the spamtrap. Follow the links on the above listed page to find out how to fix this (if you run your own email server).

You do not appear to be sending plain spam onto the internet, which is a good thing. You are however, passing some that your server does receive onto innocent third parties whose only sim was to have their address forged as the sender. Fix the misdirected bounces and your problem will be fixed after the waiting time. Had the problems been fixed before the express delisting were tried, the listing would have expired quickly.

I am simply a user of SpamCop's services... I do not get paid for my work here except to help people. Right now, with the evidence presented above, it appears your system is causing innocent third parties to receive unwanted and unneeded messages. Have you ever received a whole bunch of bounces for messages you dd not send? Those were directed to you because of a server setup as yours is. You are correct, I don't care about your business one way or another. I am trying to help you clean up your part of the internet, but without specific data (the IP address) it is very difficult to do so.

Actually, the statement is simply fact. SpamCop is NOT blocking your messages. Any blocking would be happening at the receiving end, which is surely happening at the servers designated to receive email for your clients. The "pompous" claim is insulting and inappropriate. You showed up with a HUGE chip on your shoulder, posted in the WRONG forum, didn't bother to read the FAQ and you're throwing around insults. You're being a jerk.


This indicates that the problem on your server is relatively recent. Whomever is responsible for that server is the one who you should be frustrated with, because it's mostly likely developed some sort of security problem. Most people who want help here will provide the IP address of their server so that we can offer assistance. I see that you plan on sending it to Steven, but now that Don (the SC Admin) has responded, send him an email message using the method you use to contact your clients and he will be able to help you.

DT

I do have a huge chip on my shoulder because I have spent a lot of time trying to resolve this issue. I have spoken with my IP provider and they responded that this was fixed. I am doing twice the amount of work to get things accomplished.

The failure notices show SpamCop as the reason for the rejected emails so that is why I came to you. I have read te FAQS several times and did not see where any of those would have applied to my emails (if you note in my first post I mentioned I do not use an auto-responder which was one of the reasons your FAQS say I would be listed).

I looked everywhere to find a way to speak to a human being from SpamCop but that did not seem possible. I posted (yes, to the WRONG forum!) in an attempt to get resolution to this issue.

Between all of your little attacks to my posts I have been able to weed out some potentially useful information. I don't want to be going through this, I do not make any money by posting these messages (as am sure all of you do) and I jut want to be rid of SpamCop forever!

By the way, if you ever want to train your staff on customer service and de-escalation of the "problem" customer, give me a call as this is what my company does.

Thanks for calling me a jerk, just what I wanted to hear. I hope a lot of potential clients read this post. I know I am keeping a copy. It is pompus for you to make a statement that my clients have rejected my emails; you infer that my customers do not want to hear from me and that is just not true.

I am currently on the phone with my IP provider who is stating that someone has taken my email and used it to send spam. Even though it is not coming from my IP address they have made it "appear" it is. They said your system is not sophisticated enough to tell that the spam is not coming from my IP address; therefore you just treat ME like the criminal instead of the victim. This means I am victimized twice; once by the spam sender and then again by you.

Can you please give me the city and state your company operates from so I may contact the BBB.

Thanks

No offense, but your "IP provider" clearly doesn't have a clue. The SpamCop parser looks at the originating IP address to determine the source of a message, it has not interest in the ususually forged FROM address. You provider seems to be using the terms "email address" and "IP address" interchangably. These two things are not even close to the same thing. Email addresses can be easily forged, and usually are, which is why SpamCop ignores them completely. On the other hand, it is generally not technically feasible to forge IP addresses in the context of sending emails, and on the rare occassion it is attempted, it is generally a trivial matter to detect the forgery.

As stated above, your most likely problem is with misdirected bounces. This is a mail server configuration issue. Essentially, a spammer sends a message to your mail server with a forged from address. Instead of rejecting the message outright, which would simply send an error code back to the connected sending server, your server is accepting the message, and then generating a bounce to the phoney from address later. This means that a completely uninvolved 3rd party is getting all these bounce messages. This can potentially be hundreds or even thousands of misdirected bounces, depending on how many messages the spammer sent with their address forged on it, and how many poorly configured mail servers it hits. This is a problem with your mail server and needs fixed.

As far as the actual blocking of your email, this can only be accomplished at the receiving end, as your mail never passes through any assets owned by SpamCop. Some of your customers probably use the SpamCop list to reject potential spam email, as do many mail administrators because of the effectiveness of the list in quickly adding problem servers and removing listings when problems stop. Your SpamCop listing will automatically expire when the problem is fixes, but we (TINW) can't fix it from here, you are going to have to get your mail server admin to fix the configuration issues on your end.

It seems to me that if you have been in business for 19 years and are that reliant on email, which BTW is not, has not been, and probably will never be a guaranteed method of delivery, it would behoove you to become a little more familiar with just how the email system operates.

BZZZZZZZZZZZT....Wrong! Thanks for playing.

Did you bother to send an email to the SpamCop Admin, as requested? Really, I don't know why we're bothering to give you the time of day, given your absolutely over-the-top rants, and yet here we are, trying to help you in spite of yourself. Get a grip.

DT

Your ISP doesn't know what they're talking about.

The "From" address on spam is almost universally either fake or forged. SpamCop has ignored the email addresses in spam for the last ten years.

Our focus is entirely on the source IP (origin point) of the spam.

You may have missed the part about these forums being *user support* forums. They are owned and operated by SpamCop users. The SpamCop staff has no control here whatsoever.

I am the SpamCop Administrator. I have given you my email address and asked for a copy of the rejection notice you get when you try to send mail to certain clients. I need the IP address of your mail server.

You get no sympathy if you don't write to me so I can help you.

- Don D'Minion - SpamCop Admin -
service[at]admin.spamcop.net
http://www.spamcop.net/

Many ISPs and server admins have been known to put out bogus rejection reasons in their NDRs, including using SpamCop as an excuse, but let's assume that those were actually accurate.


Good, but the server from which your emails originate might be guilty of "backscatter," which are non-delivery report messages sent "after the fact." I'm guessing that you're not a server administrator or directly in control of the server. Are you using the SMTP services of your local broadband provider? There are too many things you haven't shared with us, so that makes it next to impossible to help you.


I'd say that the feeling is mutual.


You're very welcome.


My crap detector is sounding a loud alarm. That's not what anyone is saying. We're saying that there's apparently a bunch of unwanted junk spewing out of the IP address used to relay your outbound messages, and that there's obviously a problem that needs to be fixed. It has nothing to do with messages you're trying to send out.

DT

I agree I need to become more familiar with email. I might also want to take some classes on how to construct buildings just in case someone comes along and blows up my office instead of just my email. I have taken email for granted in the fact that it has always been a reliable method of communication and is especially convenient since some of my clients are in diferent time zones. I will pass your comments about my IP provider along to them.

I guess I'll always be confused when I get this message:

Hi. This is the qmail-send program at mail.simplenet.com.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.

<#####.#####@###.com>:
Connected to 64.217.170.11 but sender was rejected.
Remote host said: 550 5.7.1 Rejected: 209.132.4.31 listed at bl.spamcop.net

<#######.######@.com>:
Connected to 64.217.170.11 but sender was rejected.
Remote host said: 550 5.7.1 Rejected: 209.132.4.31 listed at bl.spamcop.net

and yet SpamCop keeps telling me they have nothing to do with it.

Again, can someone give me the city and state where SpamCop is incorporated?

I think the problem here is a matter of terminology.

You may be correct, your clients did not decide 'Lets block all of seanman's email.' What they, or their email server adm, did decide was to use the SpamCop Black List (SCBL) to filter incoming email and to reject all email that comes from IP addresses on the SCBL. As an unintended result of these decisions when your IP addresses appeared on the SCBL your email started to be rejected.

Your email server adm made decisions about how to handle rejection messages. These decisions have had the unintended result of misdirecting bounces to SpamCop spam traps and getting you IP on the SCBL.



I agree this sequence of postings would make an interesting case study in a conflict resolution seminar. What it illustrates may be in question.

Way too subtle, Lou....I'm sure he won't get the implication. ;-)

DT

I did send this to you. What is with this board; I am trying toget answers and you just keep criticizing and scowling; please gie me another avenue to speak with a SpamCop representative other than having anyone and everyone respond towhat they think of my posts. Do people really have nothing better to do with their days than rip other people apart. I need to get this fixed; if there is nothing you can or will do then just say that so I can look somewhere else for the answer. I have already contacted my provider and they are checking into the situation (again). I will contact my clients and see if they have some restriction for my emails. You can all go play with someone else's posts now; I have much better things to do.

Now that's actually useful. I think that the point of transmission is indeed your web-hosting provider, SimpleNet.com. Unless you're leasing a dedicated server from them, it's possible that many other hosting customers are sharing a single outbound IP with you. Whether that's true or not, there are very few "manual" SpamCop reports (but I did find some) about traffic originating from that IP, which is good. However, there were some that look like after-the-fact bounces (NDRs, aka "backscatter"), which is bad:

Submitted: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 4:17:25 AM -0700:
failure notice

* 3349914138 ( 209.132.4.31 ) To: abuse#simplenet.com[at]devnull.spamcop.net
* 3349914137 ( 209.132.4.31 ) To: level3[at]admin.spamcop.net

Submitted: Sunday, August 03, 2008 6:25:13 AM -0700:
failure notice

* 3340690224 ( 209.132.4.31 ) To: abuse#simplenet.com[at]devnull.spamcop.net
* 3340690223 ( 209.132.4.31 ) To: level3[at]admin.spamcop.net

Submitted: Monday, June 16, 2008 4:04:57 AM -0700:
failure notice

* 3200214795 ( 209.132.4.31 ) To: level3[at]admin.spamcop.net
* 3200214794 ( 209.132.4.31 ) To: abuse#simplenet.com[at]devnull.spamcop.net

In addition, SimpleNet is apparently refusing to receive SpamCop reports, which is not a wise decision on their part:


As mentioned earlier, email traffic from that IP is hitting "spam trap" addresses, which are email addresses that should NEVER receive any messages, by definition, so the problem is most decidedly located at the server, and it's up to SimpleNet to fix the problem, period.


No...you misunderstand. SpamCop isn't actively blocking any of your messages, but the SpamCop Blocking List is indeed involved, in that it's being used by third parties to block spam, and your messages are the "collateral damage."

DT

[on edit] "seanman" has left the building, but only after reading all these messages...which should have provided him with plenty of helpful information, despite his cartooney threats, etc.

Do comments like that really make you feel good? I'm guessing you're seven, maybe eight years old....
I can gather the rest of the needed information without reading these playground comments.

Comments like what? My, my, what a thin skin we have Mr. "seanman." I'd suggest you quickly turn off your computer, lest you see anything that further offends your sensitivities. You were acting like a jerk, and so I called you on it. If you're referring to my reference to "cartooney threats," that's standard anti-spammer jargon, not any sort of "playground" insult...and the shoe fits....extremely well.

Now just chill out and realize that all of us here have actually been trying to help you, despite your particularly bad behavior. We have provided you with the correct information, as opposed to the incorrect, misleading information that your provider might be feeding you.

DT

I just answered email from someone asking about 209.132.4.31 = mail1.hs.sntoo.net

I wasn't able to connect the email to this thread. If it was seanman who wrote, then he (she?) now has all the info he needs to get the problem fixed. If it wasn't seanman, then I will happily answer him if he chooses to contact me.

The problem is autoresponder traffic from 209.132.4.31 hitting our traps.

I removed the server from our list as a measure of temporary relief, but it will go right back on the list as soon as another email hits our traps.

- Don D'Minion - SpamCop Admin -
.

It was me and I sent the information along to Simplenet. They are going to migrate my websites to another system which should (may) help with this problem. I finally got the information I needed from you to hopefully fix the issue. I am not a spammer but I have been caught up in a "machine" because of someone else's actions. In my wonderful day I have learned that anyone can "steal" my email address or "abuse" the same IP address that I use which results in not only the offender being tagged but all the innocent people right along with them. It is then up to the legitimate ones to go through the nightmare I have. Even after doing this, it looks like nothing will be resolved when someone else uses an autoresponder. I guess what I don't understand is how I can be caught up in this mess when SpamCop knows the actual address that caused the issue but chose to block everyone. I took the information given me and looked at the website of this individual. It is a site discussing a murder case and evidence; not what I thought I would see from a dirty rotten scammer; so perhaps a bunch of people got caught up in SpamCop's system who never should have been there.

I honestly do not know how your system works and didn't even know you existed until you came crashing into my life. I am a good person with a tremendous amount of frustration because I cannot contact my customers. I have been the "victim" whether the criminal was a spammer or SpamCop (or a little of both). I have looked at several articles about SpamCop since that has been the reasn for my non-productive morning and I can see that my frustration is certainly felt by others. You are a relatively young company trying to police the internet for criminals. Now you just need to learn how to make only bad people suffer instead of anyone who comes your way.

Most companies would not be able to indiscriminately wreak havoc on people's lives like you do. As a matter of fact, companies who have done this in the past have been successfully sued because of negligent actions. I am not being rude, just stating a fact. There has to be a check and balance in place; otherwise you can just keep doing what you do to anyone you choose; that's not good for anyone.

What a sad world we live in. I am truely disappointed in what we have become. What SpamCop does is wrong for people like me. I just hope that you evolve and change the way you do things so others don't have the issues that I have endured.

Again, a bit of a lack of understanding seems to be apparent here.

From what we have seen, you are using a shared outgoing mail server. SpamCop detects spam from that server, and adds it to their list. This a single mail server with a single IP address, that is as fine a granularity as a blocklist can possibly have, so I'm not sure how you expect them to list half a server.

How to avoid this in the future? Well, lots of ways actually:

1) Run your own mail server, where you have complete control over it, and hire a competent mail server admin to administer it for you.

2) Find an ISP that is proactive about dealing with spam problems. The fact that your ISP has intentionally disabled SpamCop reports means that they would not have gotten any kind of early warning that there was a problem developing on their server. Had they been receiving reports, they would have known about the problem immediately, and it could have been dealt with, potentially before it led to a listing in the SCBL.

3) Find an ISP that will lease you a dedicated mail server. This way you don't have to worry about what other customers of the ISP are sending through the same server.

Oh, and as far as lawsuits go, you are welcome to contact a lawyer, but every time someone has sued a blocklist provider, and the blocklist provider has put up a defense, the plaintiff has consistently lost. Why? Because the blocklist provider is doing nothing more than provide a list of IP addresses that meet certain criteria. What a mail server admin does with that information is entirely up to them. Some use it as part of a spam scoring system, others block email outright. Their server, their rules, noone is obligated to accept email from anyone on the internet if they don't want to.

Will, perhaps there is a "lack of understanding" as I am not an IT specialist like you. I looked at some other posts and I did see that you actually give useful information instead of just beating up on people who need help; thanks for your suggestions, they have been noted and I will follow up on your advise.

My issue is with accountability. SpamCop can point the finger at someone else but when it gets right down to it: they were the ones who blocked my emails and there is no easy way to get off the list. If they choose to knock everyone out of their right to use email, and do not provide an easy solution (trust me, no part of this has been easy), then they do become a huge part if not the underlying source of the problem.

Again, thanks for your advice; I really do appreciate it!

Explain to me how spamcop, who does not own any servers between you and your intended recipient, could possibly block your email? All they do is provide mail administrators with a list of IP addresses that have been seen recently sending a high volume of spam. The key here is "Recently". If an IP address stops sending spam, it automatically comes off the list, simple as that.

There is still a 'lack of understanding' I am afraid. The control of spam is not easy. Estimates are that up to 90% of all email is spam. Server admins have to use all kinds of filters to keep spam from entering their customers' mail boxes. Actually, blocking at the server level is the best kind of filter because if there is a server with legitimate email also coming from it (as in your case), then the legitimate emailer gets a heads up that something is wrong at their end. The only way to stop spam is at the *sending* end.

I am glad that you got some good advice on how to fix your problem. If more people on the *sending* end of a server that is sending spam were willing as you are to fix the problem, then perhaps the whole problem would get easier for everyone.

Miss Betsy

Once again no... Read the error message again:

Connected to 64.217.170.11 but sender was rejected.
Remote host said: 550 5.7.1 Rejected: 209.132.4.31 listed at bl.spamcop.net

Your server 209.132.4.31 connected to 64.217.170.11 (remote host) which said: I reject this message because it is listed on bl.spamcop.net. The remote server did the rejecting. The admin of that server has chosen to block (against spamcop's recomendation, I might add. SpamCop suggests using this list as part of a scoring system) messages coming from servers on this list.

Again wrong... fix the mail system you are using so that it does not bounce messages to innocent third parties and the IP will automatically fall off the list... how much easier is it than that?

You can also use a different IP address and as long as that IP address stays clean, you will have no problems. If however, you have the same people managing that server, likely they are using the same configuration and the problem will eventually happen again.

Nobody here has forced, prodded, or even asked the server administrator of 64.217.170.11 to use the spamcop list. Nobody here has forced, prodded, or even asked the server administrator of 64.217.170.11 to block servers on this list.

I forwarded the information (that I finally got from SpamCop) to Simplenet and they have resolved the issue. I hate spam as much as anyone but we need to go after the culprits; SpamCop has "bad" information that affects a lot of people, good and bad. The scales of justice have certainly swung the wrong way. If I could have easily gotten the information from SpamCop I would not have wasted my day "talking" with so many people; some of which obviously have the overall IQ of a mop. There needs to be an easy, open way for anyone to track why their IP adresses have been tagged; it souldn't be so hard for innocent people to find the answer. I would be a little more sympathetic toward SpamCop if I didn't know they were making a BUNDLE to put together lists. A lot of people have told me what I should do or what somebody else should do; it's funny to think the only ones getting paid for their efforts or comments today all work for SpamCop! The pied-piper of email justice (or injustice)!! Guilty until proven innocent and so many pople believe this is right! Amazing..... Even though I have had so much fun today, it's time to go do something productive

SpamCop requests that the link: http://spamcop.net/bl.shtml?{client_addr} be used in rejection messages. That would have pointed you to the correct location and you would have seen the mid-directed bounces problem.

You could also have gone to http://www.spamcop.net and clicked on the Blocking List tab and gotten to the same page.

Or you could have gone to http://www.spamcop.net and followed the REPORTED FOR SPAMMING? Learn more link. At the top of that page is: Has your email been blocked? Please see: SpamCop blocking list

Once there, you enter the IP address from the rejection message and you would have gotten the same information I posted after you provided me your IP address, early this morning.

The problem was caused by your mailhost (whoever runs 209.132.4.31) bouncing messages to the spamtrap. Any messages sent to a spamtrap are, by definition, unsolicited messages and carry a higher weight in the calculation of a listing.

The IP address of the server connecting to your mail server is the ONLY information that can not be forged because it is needed for the 2 way communication. Thus, it is the only thing that can be used to effectively block messages. It does cause problems for people with shared servers, but it is up to the management of those systems to run them properly.

The SpamCop blocklist is the only one I am aware of that automatically expires listings when the spam stops. On a properly run system, you should not be blocked more than 24 hours, as most. The problem gets fixed, the spam stops, and the IP falls off the list. In your case, step one was never done.

Where are you getting that impression, pray tell?


Who do you think is getting paid around here? The only one is the SpamCop Admin, IIUC.

The server you were using *was* guilty...Don has granted it a temporary reprieve, but if SimpleNet goofs up again, your messages will likely get blocked somewhere "out there" (IOW, not by SpamCop).

DT

Just noting: a ton load of editing done within this Discussion, removing wasted/empty vertical whitespace, removing much unneeded quoted material .. stuff documented in the Forum FAQ .. link at the top of this and every page.

And to think that this could have been accomplished quite a while ago .. had you provided the necessary data in your starting post .. had this ISP/Host not decided to NOT receive SpamCop.net reports ... based on the apparent actual 'problem', had this ISP/Host kept up with the current status of e-mail, spammer activity and abuse, configurations, it might not have happened at all ....

???? Data is available for the most part. Note Steven's previous post, note all the FAQ/Wiki entries available to exlain things. Again, had data been provided in the starting post, the discussion probably would have taken a whole different twist.
http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?action=checkblo...ip=209.132.4.31 (still showing as 'not listed')
http://www.senderbase.org/senderbase_queri...ng=209.132.4.31
Volume Statistics for this IP
Magnitude Vol Change vs. Last Month
Last day ...... 3.8 .. 27%
Last month .. 3.7

Not the typical spammer controlled numbers seen here, suggesting the misdirected-bounces scenario. On the other hand, might it also be assumed that "you" are also not responsible for all of the 10,000+ e-mails-a-day seen from that IP Address?

Countless hours have been spent developing FAQ/Wiki entries to provide answers (before they are asked) ... SpamCop.net offers numerous web-pages that offer specific details. Do you have a real answer for how to make it more "open" ...?????

Please explain. The majority of SpamCop.net tools and data are free, which doesn't easily translate into "a BUNDLE"

Only one person posting into this Discussion receives a paycheck from SpamCop.net. Everyone else is a SamCop.net user, volunteering their time, knowledge, and energy offering assistance to other users, to include those impacted by configurations of their ISP/Host and/or e-mail recipient ISPs/Hosts.

And yet, the end result does appear to be an issue of spew from your ISP/Host e-mail provider and the configurations of those receiving ISPs/Hosts involved. So yes, there was/is an issue of "guilt" involved. However, it has to pointed out again apparently ... the ISP/Host involved with your outgoing had issues, the ISPs/Hosts involved in receiving your e-mail made decisions and configuration settings that placed your outgoing e-mail into a problematic situation. I definitely recommend a visit to What is SpamCop.net?

I have no idea what moving the web-sites to another server is supposed to accomplish. The issue was with a shared e-mail server. One can only assume that the 'migration' is supposed to also move you to another e-mail server that isn't currently listed in a BL ..???? (Noting that there are literally thousands of other BLs out there, all with their own listing/de-listing rules, very few as forgiving as the SpamCopDNSBL.)

Spamcop does not have 'bad' information. If the IP address is listed, it means that unsolicited and annoying/dangerous email is coming from that IP address. Those who choose to ignore the report will eventually have that IP address listed on other spam lists - none of which is as easy as spamcop to get off of.
I am in sympathy with 'so many people with ...IQ of a mop' The first people to answer a complaint often seem not to know anything or not to be able to do anything. However, to be fair, one does have to know how to ask the question. There are really no 'innocent' people on the internet. Anyone who uses the internet should know something about how it works. My analogy is that most people know when to take a car to a mechanic or to do simple maintenance because they understand how an automobile works. There are some ignorant people who drive cars (and who have accidents when there is rain or cause accidents because they don't maintain their cars), but they are not 'innocent.'
You have it all backwards. The internet is run on netiquette. The polite thing to do when someone is rude (whether he called your phone number on purpose or accidentally) is to inform him politely that he is intruding (you have a wrong number) and if he persists in calling, it is ok to ignore calls from that number. You were informed that your IP address is sending unsolicited email. And then your emails were ignored. No one said you were guilty of sending unsolicited email, only that email from the same server was spam.

Miss Betsy

I have joined a class action lawsuit against SpamCop. It appears there are thousands of people who are tired of having their rights trampled. Here's a great site to visit. http://niba4u.com/

http://www.shopmystate.com/logon/Library/Swami-090301.html thiswill lead you to an excellent letter written by another company who is sick and tired of SpamCop's arrogance.

Here is a copy of the email I sent to the group filing the lawsuit.

My emails to my clients were rejected because of someone else on the server who had an auto responder on their website. I posted on SpamCop's boards to get help. I was belittled, badgered, and called names by other people visiting the boards. I looked at other people's posts and this seems to be the way innocent parties are treated. I was told it was my server's fault and they needed to fix their system. I was ridiculed for not knowing the inner workings of email and SpamCop. I have saved all the postings and emails for evidence of how I was treated.

These people are pompous, arrogant, self-appointed "crusaders" who presume people guilty until proven innocent; even then it does not matter if YOU are innocent, if you share the same IP address with an offender you will be thrown out of your right to send email. What hey do is no different than everyone who lived on the same block being arrested because one of their neighbors has committed a crime. Once everyone is thrown in jail you have to plead your case to SpamCop's judge and jury. In the end it doesn't really matter if you are innocent, if someone else on your block commits a crime in the future, you will be put through the whole nightmare again.

They also point their finger at everyone else (the IP provider, the recipient of your emails, your system, etc... and claim they have nothing to do with your problem, that they only provided a list that people chose to use. The huge flaw in this is they have provided an inaccurate list of the true "spammer".

I would be proud to help the fight against this corporation and would be thrilled to join your class action suit. If you need any more information I would be happy to help.

Here's a funny final note; my email to the group was rejected because of SpamCop's list!! I am oicking up the phone right now.

Here's another tidbit...
The Spamhaus Project now has a judgment against them for
$11,715,000, PLUS almost another 2 million in litigation fees. Why? For blocking legitimate email!
Spamhaus plans to ignore the judgment - read the judgment . The link to the judgement can be found at http://niba4u.com/ .... and yet you still think SpamCop is the answer..... how ridiculous!

I HATE spam asmuch as anyone but when my right to send emails, spreadshhets, and invoices to my LEGITIMATE clients is denied, then I have a RIGHT to fight back! I send approximately 40 emails per month but was blocked because of someone else's auto responder. THIS IS WRONG!!!!

I strongly reccommend that I never see a bounceback from SpamCop again. If this company does not have the capability to "whitelist" me then they have no right to block me!

Don't even point the finger at anyone else; this is SpamCop's aggressive program that has infringed on my RIGHT to send email! I am most certainly not alone in my thinking so I would hope everyone has the intelligence to understand that SpamCop really doesn't know how to block spammers withou hurting innocent people along the way. They don't care that they do it and they want to blame everyone ele for their system's "glitches".

Good... Now the phrase "cartoony" fully fits.

Good luck with that lawsuit.

If you scrutinize the rejection notice you got, I think you'll find that it was sent to you by your own service provider when it tried and failed to deliver your message to a network that wouldn't accept it.

SpamCop is not blocking your email. It's not physically possible because your email doesn't go through our system. Only the receiving system can block email, which is their absolute right to do, on any basis they choose, at their whim. It's their equipment, and their choice.

I understand your frustration over this, but unfortunately, there is no way an ISP can tell the good guys from the bad guys just by looking at the email when it arrives. The "From" address on spam is *always* forged. It is impossible to identify the true sender without forcing his host to reveal his identity (lawyers, court orders, money).

Some of these spammers are sending hundreds of millions of spam messages every day. That's not all spammers counted together, either. *Each* major spammer is sending mail at that level. Add the literally thousands of small-time spammers to that and you have a problem of epidemic proportions.

Service providers are sick and tired of having to accept all that traffic, and then bounce a third of it because it came to nonexistent addresses, and then handle complaints from their users, and add more computers and staff to handle the traffic and complaints, and spend more money..... etc, ad nauseam.

They're tired of it and they're not going to put up with it anymore. They are going to refuse *ALL* mail from known spam sources until the source gets rid of its spammers. They no longer have any sympathy for the innocent bystanders, such as yourself, who are using a mail server which has found its way onto one of the several major blocking lists.

- Don -

Let's not forget that you are free to SEND all the email you want. The challenge is getting the destination network to accept it.

Service providers get to manage their network any way they want. They have the absolute right to reject mail from 209.132.4.31 for any reason they want, or for no reason at all. They are not obligated to accept any mail from anybody at all.

No one is forcing you to send your mail from 209.132.4.31. That is your decision. You have the right to change to a service provider who doesn't allow their users to send unsolicited and unwanted email.

Your service provider could have quickly and easily changed the IP of their outgoing mail server and completely avoided the blocking problem, but they didn't. You should be talking to them about why they allowed the blocking to continue when they could have, and should have, fixed the problem as soon as they found out about it.

If you don't like the fact that some networks are refusing your emails, take it up with them.

You might want to ask your lawyer to check this out:

On June 25, 2004, The Honorable SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG, United States District Judge For the Northern District of California, ruled that "Pursuant to § 230 of the Communications Decency Act, SpamCop is immune from liability for publishing or distributing the reports of registered users."

- Don -

cartoonie or munchkin trolls are the same in my book. This guy has made up his mind before understanding the facts. I don't even think he cares to take the effort to understand why this is happening to him. On the other hand I am glad there is a SpamCop to stand up to such threatening thugs. We are all tired of wading through hundreds of unwanted e-mail just to find one that you were waiting for all day. I will continue to report every piece of junk I get. Thank you SpamCop for a job well done.

You may not be alone in your thinking, but there are even more people who think that it is their RIGHT to refuse email based on the source IP address to avoid paying for unwanted, unsolicited email.

I repeat, there are no 'innocent' people on the internet; there are only people who ignorant of the rules of internet traffic.

There were no glitches in spamcop's blocklist. The only glitch was your choice of an email service. If you want to pay for unreliable service, then you are welcome to do so. If all your emails do not arrive at their destination, then that's your problem with your email service provider. Competent, responsible email service providers rarely have 'glitches' with either outgoing or incoming email.

Miss Betsy

You came here and in a twisted sort of way, you asked for help. A number of folks made an attempt to explain, point to data, answer your general query. Some responses you have appeared to have actually scanned, as you appear to have gotten a bit excited over omse content. Yet, I can't seem to force myself to use the description of "you read" those same comments, as the whole situation, who's responsible for what, how things actually work still seem to be totally unknown to you. This last posted detail makes this whole Topic a basic rant, therfore it's going to be moved to the Lounge area. Again, you asked for help, you received help, yet you only want to rant. This is not SpamCop Blocklist Help material at this point.

What a silly analogy.

Sorry, but you still don't have a clue, do you?

As noted in numerous places, stated within this Discussion repeatedly, it's up to the Receiving ISP/Host as to what rules, constraints, filters, etc. are placed against incoming connections. That you seem to be suggesting that an outfit wishing to open a class-action lawsuit against SpamCop.net would be using an e-mail server that uses the SpamCopDNSBL is absolutely bizarre. Perhaps there is a clue there <g>

Wondering just what company is being talked about here. SpamCop.net does not handle your e-mail sent to someone else, so there would be no whitelisting process there at all. Any argument about incoming filtering/rejection configurations would have to be taken up with the recipient ISP/Host, whomever that might be.

You can send all the e-mail you like. It's the choice of the recipient and the flow of ISPs/Hosts between your outgoing e-mail client and intended target as to whether or not your e-mail is acceptable that seems to be the decision process that has you up in arms.

The major point: you have your anger mis-directed at the wrong target. Please do some more actual resarch.

If your "clients" want to receive mail from you, then THEY are the ones that need to white list your address.

PS Thank to Don for his posts to this topic. They are very informative and well written.

Wazoo says this is a silly analogy and it is because not all the neighbors in the same block as a criminal are arrested. However, you can't get a cab or get a pizza delivered in certain areas because of the reputation of criminal activity - even if you are completely innocent of any crime and also hate criminals.

Miss Betsy

Well and truly listed again - http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?action=checkblo...ip=209.132.4.31 - looks like about the only significant period it hasn't been listed in the last week-8 days is the interval of respite granted by Don. No other blocklists triggered. No member reports recorded, spamtrap(s) solely, apparently misdirected bounces, despite which clues level3/simplenet have been unable to take effective action.

Senderbase is seeing considerable volumes of outwards traffic (not bad for a 'blocked' IP) - but not at all consistent with spam runs. That server (mail1.hs.sntoo.net) is showing reduced activity - but no more so than its unlisted stablemate, mail2.hs.sntoo.net - http://www.senderbase.org/senderbase_queri...ng=209.132.4.31

	Magnitude	Vol Change
		vs. Last Month
Last day	3.4	-57%
Last month	3.7	-

address	hostname	Fwd/Rev	Daily	Monthly	RBL listings
		DNS Match	Magnitude	Magnitude
209.132.4.31	mail1.hs.sntoo.net	Y	3.4	3.7	1
209.132.4.32	mail2.hs.sntoo.net	Y	3.4	3.8	0

The timing (of re-listings) and the possible consistency of listing may be instructive if the machine(s) triggering it is unknown.

I second the note of appreciation for his posts to Don, noting that others 'here' tried also (unsucessfully but eloquently) to correct the O/P's 'mythconceptions' - but gratitude to the O/P for highlighting the opportunistic little industry that has sprung up to prey on others of a like mind.

An appropriate, but very overdue action, to be sure.


That's about as likely as snow in July....in Phoenix.

To quote a famous cartoon character, "what a maroon!"

(And I could swear I just saw him in this topic, trying to post a message...and then "poof!' -- he disappeared and there's no post. I just checked his user info...he was here...didn't he say he had better things to do?)

DT

Just gathering 'evidence' David - he said he was doing that (and you don't see any copyright notice on the board content do you?) Evidence for the big "class action lawsuit" brought on behalf of the reputed thousands who want a piece of SC for their (undoubtedly) various reasons. I thought you were paying attention?

Well, I contacted my clients who had modified their system which cleared out their whitelists. They have corrected my address (and will be very busy adding all their other wanted mail) in their system. You have blamed Simplenet for my troubles so any suggestion on the "best" provider would be appreciated.

In response to a lot of backtalk about my concern over the difficulty of getting information; it would have been nice if I would have gotten a response from SpamCop when I disputed the listing instead of being ignored. No one would have ever heard a word from me if I had just gotten a word from them.

I do not disagree that something has to be done about spam; I am just not sold that this is the answer. I am just one of millions of people who have done nothing wrong but have been listed with SpamCop. I don't know what a better solution is, but hopefully something will change.

I own 2 businesses, care for my son who has autism and my father who has advanced Parkinsons. My years of retail and customer service experience have given me an opportunity to make a living and still have time to care for my special needs family. I employ 26 people who make an average salary of 52K per year. I am a responsible citizen and a good person. I am intelligent, hardworking, and understanding.

I recently purchased the second business which will hopefully be an opportunity in the future for my son to make a living and not rely on the already stressed social security funds. Every day I try to teach him how to be a good citizen. I do not normally have time to worry about "glitches" or SpamCop or blacklists or whitelists, etc... as I am sure most of you don't either.

You have all had some pretty interesting comments because of my frustration on having to deal with the fact that a program dumped me into a pool af potential scammers and I was being told it was "my own fault" for not knowing enough. Hopefully someone will invent a better system than SpamCop or perhaps SpamCop will begin replying to listing disputes.

I know I have ruffled a lot of feathers and have been told that I need to "educate" myself. Unfortunately no one can "know it all" and I will probably never have the time to learn the complete functions of the internet and the obscure workings of email. These are tools for me, not my passion.

Any advice about an alterntive to Simplenet would be appreciated (although I have been with them for years and I have a great working relationship with them. They are very frustrated with SpamCop and disagree with the way they do business.) They have always responded to my requests for help or modifications and I have never had any issues with the 2 domains I have with them. Both sites are used to upload and download massive amounts of data as my one company submits extensive photographs of retail locations for surveys and market analysis reports. Another provider would have to be capable of handling large amounts of information and have SSL capabilities. To have to change my sites would be a huge task for me so if anyone knows how I can possibly register with SpamCop to be omitted from the lists, that would be wonderful.

Thanks

It doesn't work that way - you need to be whitelisted with any (of your business) clients whose providers use the SCbl, assuming they can do that (if they're business they should have a fair chance). Most would not even be aware but you know of some of them. And that's assuming your network doesn't use the SCbl to block their outwards mail (stranger things have happened but there's no sign of it in the rejection notes you provided). Whitelisting is the concept you're reaching for but it can only be applied at the receiver's end, by the receiver.

Others may be able to address your other points. Yes, there is some sympathy for your situation. You are not one of the 'enemy', that is evident.

[On edit - Oh yes, and I retract my previous post - I obviously misinterpreted your prior brief visit].

You still do not seem to understand what is going on. There is no need to make any massive changes. The only change that is needed is the email server used to send your mail.

It should be noted that there can be a significate delay between the time a user appears to be posting and the time that the post shows up. I have seen that frequently with Wazoo's posts. The underline disappears from the name but it can be many minutes until the post shows up in the list of new posts.

My email is run through my domain which is run by Simplenet. I guess I on't understand how I can just change my email server when that is the same outfit that does my web sites (one of which is where my emails pass through).

Are you sure you are talking about e-mail? E-mail is not recommended as a method to send massive amounts of information. Then I am not sure what you consider to be massive. A 10meg file is massive for e-mail and many users, including corporate users, are unable to receive such large email messages. I once tried to send an Excel spreadsheet mailing list to a mailing house via email, only to find out that the 8meg spreadsheet exceeded their file size limits. Also the terms "sites", "upload" and "download" are more commonly used for other methods of file transfer, not email. Email more commonly uses the terms send and receive.

Only the email that is being delivered TO you goes through your domain. Outbound mail goes through what ever SMTP server has been selected for the purpose.

Yes a minute or two....but not over half an hour, which was the case tonight. Not a significant issue, in any case. It's interesting that the OP is still posting, minus the cartooney threats, but still not understanding at all how all this works or bothering to listen to all the good advice he's been given. The server in question is still apparently hitting the spam traps and the provider is still refusing to receive SpamCop reports...but then spam trap hits don't generate reports anyway. I'd never buy hosting from a company that buries its head in the sand and refuses to receive abuse reports.

DT

It appears you have calmed down a bit. Thanks. I'm going to guess that you might now be able to appreciate the humor in the following reply.

First of all, go back and take a look at Telarin's Linear Post #22 in this Topic. Although e-mail may be part of your web-hosting package, there is no requirement that you use it. There are literally thousands, if not millions, of places out there that will handle your e-mail, lease you your own server, etc.

Now for the humorous part ... I could even recommend you contacting JT (see Section 8 - SpamCop's System & Active Staff User Guide ) about hosting your e-mail. However, if you would also then take a look at one of the Announcements here, you'll see that even SpamCop.net e-mail account holders have run into problems due to hackers and spammers. Are you laughing yet?

The basic point is that it takes a pro-active ISP/Host to handle, if not prevent these situations from coming up, minimzing their effects. It takes a knowledgable user to point out and/or recognize when the folks in charge of the server aren't actually on the ball. Trust me, there's a world of difference between managing a web-server and an e-mail server.


As usual, I'm not fully aware of things at present. But I have to note that I have been working the server pretty hard since sometime a bit after lunch yesterday. Some code changes made, a bunch of database cleanup, rebuilding of some data. The timeframe involved may also have been while I was slamming the keyboard ...????

David,
You are quite wrong as I have read through these posts and researched several sites to look for answers. Your posts have consistently contained nasty comments directed at me personally where my frustration is with the situation. You have seized every opportunity (numerous times in error) to badger me personally. I am looking for an answer to problem that has arisen because of SpamCop putting me into a spam list. I am looking for a company that either 1) provides only email support at either a small or no charge that is on top of every list that is put out or, if an inexpensive email option isn't available then the name of a company that can provide me with BOTH email and web hosting. THAT company would have to handle large amounts of data to my websites, not my email. Looking at Wazoo's "humorous" post, it seems that everyone, including SpamCop users, have had problems with SpamCop. Your insults toward me are inaccurate and personally offensive. I posted out of frustration and after much bantering I am looking for what folks here say is my only option; dump Simplenet and get a "better" email server. I am only looking for cost effective solutions to the problem I have been put in. If there is actually a better solution and Simplenet is the root of my problems then I will seek email (and, or) web hosting elsewhere; just looking not to have to spend more money than I currently do because of SpamCop's lists.