Jump to content

rsh@idirect.com

Members
  • Content Count

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About rsh@idirect.com

  • Rank
    Member
  1. rsh@idirect.com

    Why block NASA?

    See below with full headers and complaint from NASA about the blocking of a newsletter to me from them because of SPAMCOP running at Monmouth University, since the email site they send the newsletter to is [at]alumni.monmouth.edu and Monmouth is contracted with SpamCop. I do NOT want to loose emails from the Government of the U.S. because SpamCop gets it wrong <grin>... and I no longer have the specific email that was blocked, since once I read them I delete them. But I really don't need these warnings. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- X-Apparently-To: rsh_rsh[at]rogers.com via 98.139.219.164; Mon, 05 Mar 2012 01:59:43 -0800 Received-SPF: none (domain of mediaservices.nasa.gov does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-YMailISG: hx5jKYYWLDthr0_fMMYndQeGQqFsZz25wT7xm5ik9eXApwxA lrlEc_TinQ5Qg3xos8fW4jS61YowiOmqJIaXoyDTGPn0p1ePo2w_A3gh_0WZ nkLlaEtFc4Cci.xXmCJ_rbg9Ms86gDsof6RU3qhQaV6qUCXDUWaPH5P5T1ka ENmKx6GFkoBEp5nvgzqc4zRueQPVqjDWuMM33wWz.7vWhpRHKXPB73y5CaG9 VxWAakDwf33xjfaElEgYeA3jP3SpiExREoaVaWb1aALBtc0_Di.te8hv3Kte PiBk6Qb7vfFavVlXo9GZkkCjpcKGv0BUbmGjajJdVTYc_6DUJhVtuCvsdLty 6SFg4iuT9d0.l2T2shrf5snytdTCawPtMv_lPG1J X-Originating-IP: [192.100.64.12] Authentication-Results: mta1004.rog.mail.sp1.yahoo.com from=mediaservices.nasa.gov; domainkeys=neutral (no sig); from=mediaservices.nasa.gov; dkim=neutral (no sig) Received: from 127.0.0.1 (EHLO mail.monmouth.edu) (192.100.64.12) by mta1004.rog.mail.sp1.yahoo.com with SMTP; Mon, 05 Mar 2012 01:59:43 -0800 Received: from smtp.monmouth.edu (smtp.monmouth.edu [204.152.149.12]) by mail.monmouth.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q259xg8f009394 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <robert.heuman[at]alumni.monmouth.edu>; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 04:59:43 -0500 Received: from da-etch-lap07.wh.sprintip.net (mediaservices.nasa.gov [65.165.5.239]) by smtp.monmouth.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4) with SMTP id q259xf5Q032686 for <robert.heuman[at]alumni.monmouth.edu>; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 04:59:41 -0500 Received: (qmail 22078 invoked by alias); 5 Mar 2012 10:00:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ksc-help[at]newsletters.nasa.gov; run by ezmlm Date: 5 Mar 2012 10:00:31 -0000 Message-ID: <1330941631.21932.ezmlm[at]newsletters.nasa.gov> From: ksc-help[at]mediaservices.nasa.gov To: robert.heuman[at]alumni.monmouth.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: warning from ksc[at]newsletters.nasa.gov X-spam-Level: X-spam-Score: -6.909, Required: 3 X-spam-Matches: BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_FAIL,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.71 on 192.100.64.12 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.71 on 204.152.149.12 X-Text-Classification: other X-POPFile-Link: http://127.0.0.1:8080/jump_to_message?view=359 X-Agent-Received: from 2 rsh_rsh (127.0.0.1); Mon, 05 Mar 2012 11:10:29 -0500 X-Agent-Train-Legitimate: 0 X-Agent-Junk-Probability: 0 Welcome to ksc[at]newsletters.nasa.gov mailing list. Messages to you from the ksc mailing list seem to have been bouncing. I've attached a copy of the first bounce message I received. If this message bounces too, I will send you a probe. If the probe bounces, I will remove your address from the ksc mailing list, without further notice. I've kept a list of which messages from the ksc mailing list have bounced from your address. Copies of these messages may be in the archive. To retrieve a set of messages 123-145 (a maximum of 100 per request), send an empty message to: <ksc-get.123_145[at]newsletters.nasa.gov> To receive a subject and author list for the last 100 or so messages, send an empty message to: <ksc-index[at]newsletters.nasa.gov> Here are the message numbers: 1428 --- Enclosed is a copy of the bounce message I received. Return-Path: <> Received: (qmail 7684 invoked for bounce); 22 Feb 2012 18:26:14 -0000 Date: 22 Feb 2012 18:26:14 -0000 From: MAILER-DAEMON[at]da-etch-lap07.wh.sprintip.net To: ksc-return-1428-[at]newsletters.nasa.gov Subject: failure notice Hi. This is the qmail-send program at da-etch-lap07.wh.sprintip.net. 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. <robert.heuman[at]alumni.monmouth.edu>: Connected to 204.152.149.12 but sender was rejected. Remote host said: 553 5.3.0 spam blocked by SPAMCOP
  2. rsh@idirect.com

    Slow response from SC

    I've been getting 19 and 20 hour response time from SpamCop... I submit several messages that are less than an hour old and wait and wait and wait ... and many hours later I get the email back that I can now link in and submit them. Started yesterday and has not gotten better today. RsH
  3. rsh@idirect.com

    SpamCop switches display mode on me

    Done... Posted request in New Feature Request...\
  4. rsh@idirect.com

    Simple view and technical view - automated switch

    Then you would set your preferences to technical detail view. Then all of yours come as full technical detail. I have my preference set to Simple output view, so get annoyed when I get the full technical detail view for all of my submissions when only one needs it. This would never impact those who select to get the full technical details for every message all the time.
  5. rsh@idirect.com

    Why Atlantic Time?

    When I post here I get the time reported to me as being an hour later than it really is in the Eastern Time Zone, so it appears the server is in the Atlantic Time Zone [or it is still on Daylight Savings Time]... Is this the intent? Does anyone know, or care? Curious...
  6. SpamCop switches to the technical mode on me again and again, forcing me to log on and switch it back to simple mode. I personally do not mind the full technical details when there is a problem, but more than 90% of the time the simple mode will do, and I would prefer the simple mode be on for EVERY spam except for those few that require me to see the full technical details. Instead, if one message needs the technical details be supplied to me I get them for every one of the messages I have submitted as spam, be it 10, 20 or 30. My choice would be for ALL to be in simple mode unless there is a problem and then to get the technical details for only that one problem message. That would draw my attention to the fact that that particular message IS a problem. As it is now, I have no idea which of the 10, 20 or 30 that were submitted in one block via Agent and Forward Verbatum is the problem, so I am more likely simply to be annoyed and ignore the whole issue. I doubt that was the intention, but as long as I can block submit them using Forward Verbatum, that will be the case. Besides, the simple view is a shorter and faster transmission and will save bandwidth, which should aid SpamCop in the long run, and only providing the full techincal details where they are actually needed likely will result in more users selecting the simple view as their default choice.
  7. rsh@idirect.com

    SpamCop switches display mode on me

    Which forum is 'that forum' as it has switched back to the technical mode on me again and again forced me to log on and switch it back to simple mode. I personally do not mind the full technical details when there is a problem, but 90% of the time the simple mode will do, and I would prefer the simple mode be on for EVERY spam except for those few that require me to see the full technical details. Instead, if one message needs the technical details be supplied to me I get them for every one of the messages I have submitted as spam, be it 10, 20 or 30. My choice would be for ALL to be simple unless there is a problem and then to get the technical details for only that one problem message. That would draw my attention to the fact that that particular message IS a problem. As it is now, I have no idea which of the 10, 20 or 30 that were submitted in one block via Agent is the problem, so I am more likely simply to be annoyed and ignore the whole issue. I doubt that was the intention, but as long as I can block submit them verbatum, that will be the case.
  8. rsh@idirect.com

    SpamCop switches display mode on me

    When one block selects a list of messages and selects 'Forward Verbatum" using "Agent" as the email product to the email address for SpamCop, which is the way I use it, one cannot add anything to any section of the message. After all, Forward Verbatum is literally that. One does not even have to open or look at the message. I can block 10 or 20 messages that I know are all spam and simply right click on the block and select "Forward Verbatum", click on the To line and select the SpamCop address from the address book, and click send. I am not about to look into each message and then add anything, as then it is no longer "Verbatum" or as received. Since the instructions are to use Forward Verbatum, <spam has no body> can never be added. Once I am informed that the message has been sent successfully, I delete all of the blocked batch of spam messages and they disappear into neverland... and I then clean out the garbage pail to free up the hard drive space as well. I have no idea how one using their own email product and forwarding "verbatum" could possibly add <spam had no body> to any section of the message.
  9. rsh@idirect.com

    SpamCop switches display mode on me

    1. I use Agent and am not sure what you mean by a tracking URL... 2. SpamCop has reverted to the technical view again, even though I have it set to what I call the simple view. Since I get the responses in Agent, the last one submitted, which is not yet processed to send out the reports, is at http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z729720580zb6...1d65cf4d106468z The above may be the URL you want... http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z729718980z3b...6533efe8d40f00z is one where all I got was the header with its subject line about internet pharmacies. As far as I am concerned this is spam but SpamCop is reporting no body so no report... I am not clearing that one out yet either. http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z729718975zaf...87d98883f5de7bz is one where no one seems to want the report, so I am not getting the box that will let me send the report. Instead I am getting a try again later, yet this is the first of 5 spams, all send in one batch as Forward Verbatum in one message to SpamCop. A bunch of different issues, perhaps, and perhaps why the view I am getting has switched to the technical view, but it never switches back afterwards with messages that do NOT have a problem... Ugh!
  10. rsh@idirect.com

    SpamCop switches display mode on me

    So is a solution planned? When I submit 25 or 30 spams, having to play this game because the full technical details are showing is a bit of a pain, and having to page down on 25 or 30 screeens several times to get to "Send Report" is also a pain. I would like to keep simple until I want technical... and not have it decided for me on some sort of unknown criteria that are simply not relevant to my decision making process. I know they are spam or WORMS or FRAUD messages before I even submit them TO SpamCop, after all...
  11. rsh@idirect.com

    SpamCop switches display mode on me

    http://www.spamcop.net/mcgi?action=showadvanced Show Technical Details during reporting Simple output Show technical data SpamCop can reveal the logic it uses as it finds the right reporting parties for your spam. This can be helpful for advanced users who want to double-check SpamCop's logic, or for new users who want to learn from SpamCop's example. I have Simple output selected but keep getting switched to Show technical data. When this happens, which is every few uses of SpamCop, I have to go back to this page and simply scroll to the bottom and click on "Save Preferences" and I am back to what I call the simple view... but that simple view is NOT being retained for any great length of time. Tomorrow I will suddenly be back the the show technical data view without my having changed the preferences... and that is what I am trying to get resolved.
  12. rsh@idirect.com

    False sending date messages

    Okay... so I have to watch for one that rejects on date. You are correct and this one did not, so it turns out to have been a poor example. Will post the next one that meets the criteria you cover. TIA
  13. I keep trying to set my account to give me the short view of the reporting on spams and after two or three sessions of reports the display switches back to the long, detailed, view. I long on, page down to the bottom of the preferences screen and send the result back to SpamCop and it switches back to the simple view for a few more sessions, and then goes back to the long view with the pages of detail that I only want sometimes. I cannot seem to get the database to keep me set the way I have my preferences set up. Does anyone have an answer as to why this happens or how I can solve the problem if it continues to happen? The short view is the one that shows my average reporting time near the top of the display after I send the message onward, while the long one shows me how old the message I submitted is before I send it on, for those who might not know. Added at about 1:10PM EST ... just handled 32 spams and had to go into Preferences and do as above, simply paging down to the bottom and setting them as per the choices in the list again to get back to the short format. Next time I get to the long format again I will post that here as well.
  14. rsh@idirect.com

    False sending date messages

    Just received the following and will likely be told by SpamCop that it is over 2 days old, when it is NOT and in fact the sender deliberately is using a stale date. I get a number of these. Is there any solution to this problem? -------------------------------------------------------------- Return-path: <oaoai[at]pisem.net> Envelope-to: rsh[at]idirect.com Delivery-date: Sun, 06 Feb 2005 08:55:21 +0000 Received: from adsl-67-120-101-247.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net ([67.120.101.247] helo=pisem.net) by keymaster.look.ca with smtp (Exim 4.20) id 1CxiCP-0002pJ-0r for rsh[at]idirect.com; Sun, 06 Feb 2005 08:55:21 +0000 Date: 1 Dec 2004 08:49:47 -0600 From: Paula Mcdowel <oaoai[at]pisem.net> To: <rsh[at]idirect.com> Message-ID: <20041201084947.Lt9KwnepnrKV[at]pisem.net> X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: oaoai[at]pisem.net Content-type: text/plain Subject: [spam] R0lex starting under $200 X-spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on chi.look.ca X-spam-Level: X-spam-Status: No, hits=-98.2 required=9.0 tests=DATE_IN_PAST_96_XX, USER_IN_ALL_SPAM_TO autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Version: 3.1 (built Tue Feb 24 05:09:27 GMT 2004) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes X-Text-Classification: spam X-POPFile-Link: http://127.0.0.1:8081/jump_to_message?view=33 Authentic Replica Roleex wrist-watches here We are offering Genuine Replica Roleex wrist-watches for a superb pricee ! http://srlmfzjp.ichbhhebfi.com/?M2OiilhmWRnofMM2g6A
×