Jump to content

jamesmichaelnewton

Members
  • Content Count

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About jamesmichaelnewton

  • Rank
    Newbie
  1. Ok, it just kills me to admit this, but after extensive searching, the only threads I can find where you replied to me... you were very nice... and kind... and... even... (choke) helpful... Apparently, after reading all the posts over the years where you were rude to someone else, my memory warped and I ASSumed you had also been rude to me. That is a bad thing to do, and this is a classic example of how people get bad reputations which are some times (not necessarily this time) ill deserved. I was wrong, you were not rude to me, and I very much apologize for the false accusation. But my other points ("fact remains..." above) stand and (I think) are valid. I would still love to be wrong.
  2. I said elitist and rude, not scumbag. I also said unhelpful, but you certainly have been that at times, so I revised my statement on the web page to remove your name (more below). I'm sure you are a wonderful person and an asset to the organization. I don't know you, but I'll be happy to give you the benifit of the doubt in any area I haven't seen evidence to the contrary. You HAVE been a royal jerk to people, including myself, in the past. I must say, and I did say, that you were pretty much polite in this thread, and so perhaps people change. Based on that hope, I revised my statement; removeing your name. And I do call it that. All you have to do is post a link to the FAQ item and leave it at that. Maybe even add "Your question is answered in this FAQ item" Right, Dan is Don, my bust. Corrected now. I refered to him as a deveoper because he was the only person who responded when I tried to contact the developers to suggest / help get rid of this problem with the ID string not being deblanked. Look, the fact remains: The mailhosts config is a royal pain. It is confusing as all heck (at least to me and the many other people who have posted in this forum) and the documentation could be improved. I've have offered to help update that documentation and that offer stands. The fact remains: People who need help are often offended in these forums. Right or wrong, that is the case. I can't send people into a system that may well be a negative experience for them; it reflects poorly on me if I do. And finally, the fact remains: The spamcop RBL is unusable if it takes this hard line approach to gmail and other large ISP's. In the USA we have this thing about it being better to allow a 1000 guilty men to go free rather than commiting one innocent man for something he didn't do. Based on the volume of innocent email gmail sends, that ratio is certainly being violated by spamcop and it is a damn shame.
  3. Thanks for trying Will. I must say that the responses to this post have been polite and at least attempt to be helpful. Even wazoo was not rude this time. (so far) ASSP is not a "service" it is an anti-spam filter that sits in front of my main MTA on my same machine, as a proxy, checks incoming email via RBL's, Bysian, Regx, grey listing, etc... and blocks spam AT the instant of connection, letting the sender know it was not accepted. I certainly agree that it should report itself in the headers as my host rather than as "ASSP.nospam" and I have reported that suggestion in the past to the ASSP developers. I will do so again. But it doesn't. And it is popular. So if SpamCOP wants to accomodate it's users, SpamCOP needs to deal with that, or warn ASSP users to stay away. My mailhost is on my machine on my IP address. 66.13.172.18 is mail.massmind.org. Check the reverse DNS. It also sends email for piclist.com, efplus.com and sxlist.com. All of those domains are mine, and only massmind.org was among the options listed by the config. That server is totally, 100%, and in every way under my exclusive control. No one sends an email out of that machine without my permission. I OWN 66.13.172.18. I pay my ISP for exclusive use of that static IP. interestingdevices.com, nothing at a .nl address and none of the other stuff that showed up is in any way sending anything through that ip or that mailhost. The hosts listed in the pull down for the example above make no sense. interestingdevices.com has never been registered to my IP as far as I can tell. It is certainly the case that no .nl domain was ever registered to an IP in the USA. Even if there is some reason why all that should be there, why not change the documentation to explain it? It amazes me that people continue to use SpamCOP given the poor user experience that results. The thing about the spaces after the ID in the registration email just blows me away. Here you have what is apparently a common user issue, as evidenced by the existence and viewing statistics of the sticky post in the forum, and yet when the developers are repeatedly made aware of the issue, and help is offered in the simple task of adding an RTRIM to the parsing scri_pt the only response is "We sent the test message in properly formatted plain text. There were no spaces after the X-SpamCop-Conf line when it got to you." Well, yeah... Duh... YOU were perfectly right and in "perfect land" you would never have to compensate for anyone else doing something that, as far as I can see, doesn't violate any RFQ, but doesn't happen to fit with your narrow view of how the world should be. In the real world, if you want users to use your system, you compensate for common user interface issues. All of this, combined with the fact that SpamCOP keeps blocking innocent gmail users (again, yes YOU are pefectly right, and you can shoot yourself in the foot all day if you wish, but don't expect me to trust your judgement anymore) leads me to believe that SpamCOP is no longer worth recommending. http://techref.massmind.org/techref/langua...pam-rpt-vbs.htm 2007.05.11 08:38:27 Update: I no longer recommend or use SpamCOP. Their MailHosts configuration has become more and more convoluted and confusing, the "user to user" help forum is populated with rude, elitist, and unhelpfull people (e.g. wazoo) and Their developers are uninterested in improving the user experience. For example, when registering a mailhost, there is an ID number in the header that must match the ID in the body of the email they send. Some MTA (including ASSP) pad header lines with spaces (which, as far as I can see, does not violate any RFQ), but this causes the match to fail because they do not trim the spaces before comparing the values. Despite the fact that there is a well visited, sticky post on Their forum explaining the issue, the developers (Dan) are totally unwilling to take the few seconds it would require to add an RTRIM to the header parsing scri_pt. Even after manually trimming the values, the resulting MailHosts listing apparently shows every domain ever registered to your IP address rather than your current domain or RIP. This is confusing at best and is not mentioned in any documentation I could find. combined with the fact that SpamCOP keeps blocking innocent gmail users leads me to believe that since IronPort took over, SpamCOP has gone to heck. Someone please prove me wrong, or convince me that I'm stupid. I would MUCH rather be wrong and/or stupid and see SpamCOP as making sense, but at this point, I don't and I must be honest about it. Sorry.
  4. My server at 66.13.172.18 is now running ASSP in front of the original MTA. This is great most of the time, but ASSP does occasionally miss a well done spam. Those are the ones I assume are the most valuable to report, so I'm trying to do so. spamcop.net is refusing the reports now. For example reporting: Return-Path: <root[at]admin.xfloyd2.net> Received: from admin.xfloyd2.net ([127.0.0.1]) by nt2.massmind.org (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-0U10L2S100V35) with ESMTP id org for <webmaster[at]massmind.org>; Tue, 8 May 2007 07:39:35 -0700 Received: from 209.216.249.72 ([209.216.249.72] helo=admin.xfloyd2.net) by ASSP.nospam; 8 May 2007 07:39:35 -0700 Received: (qmail 16277 invoked by uid 0); 8 May 2007 06:08:24 -0500 Date: 8 May 2007 06:08:24 -0500 Message-ID: <20070508110824.16271.qmail[at]admin.xfloyd2.net> To: webmaster[at]massmind.org Subject: Your Payment has been sent to payments[at]diamondjewelry.com From: service[at]paypal.com <service[at]paypal.com> followed by the source of the actual email results in this response: Parsing header: 0: Received: from 209.216.249.72 ([209.216.249.72] helo=admin.xfloyd2.net) by ASSP.nospam; 8 May 2007 07:39:35 -0700 No unique hostname found for source: 209.216.249.72 Possible forgery. Supposed receiving system not associated with any of your mailhosts Will not trust anything beyond this header No source IP address found, cannot proceed. I assume this is due to the inclusion of ASSP. So I tried to re-register the mailhost for 66.13.172.18 following the procedure outlined. I entered my regular email address and tried "massmind.org" for the "standard name of this email provider " the first time and "assp.nospam" the second time. After following the return link, posting in the header and account configuration email (and removing the extra spaces from the X-SpamCop-Conf: line (would it kill you to add a trim command to the scri_pt? :angry: ) ) Both times, the result was a Mailhost name of "interestingdevices.com" with Hosts/Domains: set to "computeam.nl" and a relaying ip of 217.148.95.15. Not only are those domains and addersses NOT in any way associated with me, they are not even found anywhere in the headers or body of the configuration email. The pull downs for Hosts/Domains: and Relaying IPs: DO include the accurate values "assp.nospam" and "66.13.172.18" but since there is no submit button on the page, and no text field to hit enter in, I don't see how I can post the corrected information back. Interestingly enough, with the incorrect information in the mailhosts list, the reporting of the above mentioned phish appears to work, although I have no idea how. I really don't care if you respond or not, I'm just trying to report my experience in hopes that it will make you wonder how people can avoid being confused as all get-out by your system. Go ahead wazoo, tell me what an idiot I am.
  5. jamesmichaelnewton

    Confirmation codes do not match?

    I thought I had checked for that before, but I did find a large number of spaces on the X-SpamCop-Conf: line after the code in the header of the email... My MTA may have added them; I don't know. Removing them allowed the configuration to proceed. Thank you for the assistance. May I suggest, with the understanding that i'm not on your programming team and I don't know if there is some reason why you can not, that a quick "trim" would be a good idea before the comparison?
  6. Faithfully copying the headers and body of the "SpamCop account configuration email" into http://www.spamcop.net/mcgi?action=mhreturn results in the following: I'm old and blind but those sure do look the same to me... Is it putting a space or tab before or after? I checked the headers and body and I don't see anything unusual around the codes... I'm starting to report in volumn again and would really like to make sure I have all the t's crossed and i's dotted.
×