Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About PVanderVossen

  • Rank
  1. PVanderVossen

    Trying to understand block

    Oh, I would agree, it is definitely the spammers at fault. They obviously keep thinking of new ways to get their messages out, at no cost to themselves, but at great cost to everyone else. That definitely pisses me off to no end, but I didn't understand how adding our server to the block list was really accomplishing something. The example someone gave of the spammers using my servers undeliverable reports to deliver their spam I guess is a valid example, but I don't think its really fair to say our server is configured improperly. 5 years ago if my server sent a bounceback for a bad email address, it was not a problem. It probably only happened a few times a day. It is because the spammers are brute force attacking servers CONSTANTLY with invalid addresses that all of a sudden my configuration is offensive. That is why blocking my companies ability to send email is frustrating. We technically haven't done anything wrong, and we get blocked, and I don't see ANY of the spam fighting services even making a dent in the overall number of spam received. Sure Millions more get blocked then just last week, but they just double the amount they send out. I just get fed up with the entire situation, as I am sure many here are, and "targetting" legitimate mail servers just seems wrong to me.
  2. PVanderVossen

    Trying to understand block

    I think I understand the comments here, and I will be working on this within the next two days. Meanwhile I have a company of 65 people that can't send email to certain clients because of a stupid quirk in the way email is handled or rejected. I have a question in relation to Spamcop policy. I see on the front page: NEWS: Postmasters, please limit forgery blow-back: Delayed bounces, virus notices, vacation messages More.. If Spamcop realizes that servers are getting listed because a spammer has forged an address and bounced a undeliverable message back to a Spamcop honey pot, why can't spam Cop ignore undeliverable reports to their honey pots? It seems like that would be the responsible thing to do. Rather than require thousands of postmasters to modify the way their systems are bouncing emails, why not make one change to the way your service collects addresses?
  3. PVanderVossen

    Trying to understand block

    Which leads me back to this question : What happens when someone misspells an email address, are we not to send an undeliverable reply to them any longer? Excuse my ignorance of the ins and outs of hosting a mail server, since it is only one of about 1000 things I am charged with doing here. Are these my two choices? 1. Send undeliverable reports on undeliverable messages (thousands of which are undeliverable themselves) and be listed by SpamCop. 2. Eat the email, just delete the underliverable messages, and never notify the sender. This would seem the right technical solution, but doesn't really do much for the users I have on the system who have names that are hard to spell, and have customers who are trying to get email to them. Is their some third choice or method that I am not thinking of? Thanks.
  4. PVanderVossen

    Trying to understand block

    From the SpamCop listing : http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?action=blcheck&ip= 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. We are using OS X Server (postfix) for our email server, but also have a Windows 2000 box which is scanning our email for viruses and spam coming in (Interscan Messaging Security Suite from Trend Micro). I believe it is entirely possible for an email to be addressed to a non-existant user at my domain (about 13,000 of these are being blocked a day by Interscan) which succeeds at getting past my spam filtering. That email would then be sent to our postfix machine which would then bounce that email because it is not addressed to a valid person at our domain. My guess is that this bounced email is being sent to one of the SpamCop honey pots. Is that an accurate depiction of what could be happening to get us listed? If so, any recommendation of how I can fix that, short of manually listing every single possible account in the Interscan system. Since it doesn't have a direct link to our real mail server, it doesn't know what is a valid account or not. And even if it did, what happens when someone misspells an email address, are we not to send an undeliverable reply to them any longer? Any help would be appreciated. I did read as much as I could of the documentation on this site, but I don't really have anymore time to figure out why only 1 of about 100 different spam blocking lists has us listed. Hopefully a post on the forums will be more fruitful then reading generic FAQs. I suspect if I had a legitimate problem here, we would be listed in more places.