Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by zachariah

  1. I love that I can get Encrypted access via imap, pop, or webmail (https://webmail.spamcop.net/), to my spamcop email account. Is this available for the SpamCop Reporting System? If not, then please add it!!
  2. zachariah

    More humorous Spam

    here's one I got today (I especially like the subject)... Subj: MAYBE I spam for a good cause.... ?
  3. zachariah

    Blocked but not by SPAMCOP

    this doesn't really fall under this thread, (and I've known what spamtraps are for some time now) but your post got me thinking .... I have more than a few domains, and I could spare a few email addresses from each of those domains. Are there any block lists who want to have spamtrap addresses donated in order to trap more spammers? Would SpamCop be interested? Just wondering. (I did a quick google search but most results were articles about keeping web users from getting tricked by spammers)
  4. zachariah

    Help mails

    That's what I meant. And it seemed to me it would fix that problem, but I didn't see it explicitly mentioned, yet.
  5. Shoot, I accidentally just deleted the message, so I can't show you the source. I've never had this problem before. I have all my mail forwarded from my server (I have CPanel/Shell access to it) directly to my spamcop email address, and then IMAP that account. I didn't move the message around, it was put directly into my Held Mail folder by SpamCop based on an IP in the SCBL. After attempting to report it, I used Mozilla Thunderbird to view the source of hte message (which was in my Trash folder) and indeed there was no body to the message. I have two questions: Why won't it report with no body -- why does that matter? (I think I know the answer, but I want to hear from people who do know) How do I fix this if it ever happens again, or do I just let it go? Output from the reporting page:
  6. zachariah

    Help mails

    I'm hoping that the feature you describe (which we don't currently have) will end up a happy side effect of "Mailhosts".
  7. Thanks, I'll try that on the 2 more I just got. As for there being other threads I did a search, and poked around, but didn't find the other threads -- I did assume they were there, but gave up and made a new thread. Maybe I'll have more luck finding previously established threads the next time I need support. Thanks for trying to steer me on the right path, though.
  8. zachariah

    Rude Participant

    I have to disagree. The way I see it Lessig's plan only requires labeling and enforcement be legislated (the definition of spam does not need to be legislated) and would be an effective end to spam being sent from the US (and eventually globally as economic forces lead other countries to adopt the same plan).
  9. zachariah

    Rude Participant

    I see two possible answers: They wouldn't be held responsible -- it is the job of the vigilante (a motivated ($) individual) to find the real culprit who was attempting to send the spam. They would be responsible and people would learn real quick that security is in their ($) best interest. my quick responses to some of what else you said... Yes, some spam is untraceable ... for now. There is in the works tech fixes for better verification of senders. We have to wait and see how useful that is. As for free speach -- we need a constitutional amendment which says, "Corporate Speech is not Free Speech", or "Businesses are not People". That would clear up a lot of problems (and of course cause others). And here's both the links I referenced Lawrence Lessig's article September 16, 2002, A Bounty on Spammers (pdf) http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/ed...ial/5778539.htm (the May 4, 2003 news article already referenced in this thread)
  10. zachariah

    Are we making a difference

    Yes we make a difference -- how big? I have no idea. Its really sad that the US federal law is so lousy and crushed the (short lived) new and beautiful California law against spam. Bu, I hope that (under the federal law) at some point reports from SpamCop users are used in court against spammers. It's nice that we are (at least sometimes) shutting down spammers at the source, but we really need to make it so spam doesn't pay. I'd still like to see us to heading down a path such as the one suggested by Lawrence Lessig in his article September 16, 2002, A Bounty on Spammers (pdf) at http://www.lessig.org/content/columns/ which describes his plan. He even risked his career on his convictions... from: http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/ed...ial/5778539.htm "... last week, U.S. Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D., Calif.) introduced a bill that, if properly implemented by the Federal Trade Commission, would actually work [to eliminate most spam]. I am so confident she is right that I've offered to resign my job if her proposal does not significantly reduce the burden of spam." -- Lawrence Lessig
  11. zachariah

    Rude Participant

    It's only a coincidence that most are opensource/free. The scope for my list is supposed to be the programs which in my 10+ years of tech support have given me the least headaches. I do use GAIM on Linux and it's nice that AVG is free, but Trillian is just a little better (IMO) on Windows, and NAV is still AV king in my book. Additionally, it should be noted that I donate regularly to the opensource projects from which I use software, so none of those are free for me anyway. I did go crazy with my sig after thinking to put in a link to Firefox in my sig. I ended up putting in a bunch of my favorite software. In the time it took me to review how it looked, yourbuddy managed to comment on it (before my final draft) -- which was actually helpful. Now I have un-bolded the software names, and limited the list to software which will likely help SpamCop users have less spam, see fewer ads, avoid viruses, and avoid spy-ware. All of which should theoretically lead to less spam and less calls for help on this board. I think I have pushed the sig beyond the boundaries of what can be called spam -- not that all will agree, however. ...just more details to add to the debate...
  12. zachariah

    POP log in from webmail

    You can't do a manual POP, it just does it automatically about 3-4 times per hour.
  13. zachariah

    Secure Login

    you're welcome
  14. zachariah

    Rude Participant

    strange -- most forums I visit do have an "ignore" option Yes, if you want to limit discussion - lots do. I like all the "advertising" in your "signature" Would that be a form of spam I suppose, but I was meaning it to be some helpful software to avoid spam. hmmm ... I see revision in my future. Edit: Yes, I have now trimmed it a bit and now it only includes software to avoid ads, avoid security holes, and avoid spam.
  15. zachariah

    Avoiding LOGIN page?

    Firefox (free stand-alone browser) and Mozilla (free application suite including email client, web page composer, and irc chat client) are both excellent at doing what you want. Opera (ad-ware or pay browser with email client) also does what you want. I recommend any of these over Internet Explorer, not just for functionality, but also for security of the PC you're using and because they have more complete support for the HTML specification.
  16. zachariah

    Rude Participant

    strange -- most forums I visit do have an "ignore" option
  17. Here's how to renew multiple accounts (in one family) to get the pay-all-at-once discount... Go to the address listed in the renewal notice email: (this is the secure version of the URL -- I added an "s" to the "http" and it worked so I'm recommending everyone else do it to encrypt their traffic as well) https://mail.spamcop.net/account_renew.php Enter your username and password, as instructed. Check what's there:If your accounts are already linked, just keep going. If not, then email support at spamcop.net and send all of the usernames so they can link the accounts together. Then, the regular renewal link will automatically give you the discount. And, on a realated note, here's the info on How do I sign up for multiple accounts under the "family plan"? to get yourself started if you don't have the "family plan" yet. Here was my orignianl post:
  18. zachariah

    19Apr04 (Web)Mail Issue

    Webmail is very slow for me, as well. IMAP is slow, too. (edit1:) Oh, and it usually doesn't slow during lunchtime. (edit2:) VER gives this error (edit3:) Everything appears normal now
  19. zachariah

    Filters for POP3 Collection?

    The filters on the spamcop server are only run when using webmail. Unfortunately, you'll have to use your email client to filter out those messages.
  20. zachariah

    POP log in from webmail

    Can you POP that account from an email client such as Thunderbird, Mozilla, or Outlook? if so then login to webmail and go to: Options -> SpamCop Tools -> Configure external POP servers. and only put in your "POP Server" (copy and paste it out of the email client), "Username", and "Password". If it doesn't work at this point, it will give you an error message. I am assuming that your "cannot find server" message was seen on this page. If you see it again, then maybe email support at spamcop.net
  21. Its totally a matter of preference.
  22. can't we just clone him -- he's so useful
  23. So, with is there any way to make it so??