Jump to content

Telarin

Memberp
  • Posts

    814
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

1,951 profile views

Telarin's Achievements

Advanced Member

Advanced Member (3/6)

0

Reputation

  1. The PBL should only ever be checked against the immediately connecting IP address. You should never have a problem with this list when you are sending to an external address. The problem does pop up however when sending to yourself at SpamCop, because the connection goes Your Home Computer -> SpamCop SMTP server Since the SpamCop filters check against that connecting IP address for mail delivered locally, it is picking up the IP of your computer as the sending server. At least that is what I assume. Without seeing actual message headers, it would be hard to know exactly what is being done. The point being, while this is a problem when sending to yourself, it should not be a problem when sending externally, as the recipient server will see the SpamCop SMTP server as the connecting IP, not your home computers IP.
  2. I believe that there has to be something in the bottom "BODY" box on the submit page.
  3. That sounds a tad on the illegal/privacy violation side to me. They got in trouble just for doing traffic shaping, which doesn't even involve scanning their customers computers, I suspect actually going in and somehow scanning running applications (which would be impossible if the customer is behind any kind of firewall/router configuration) would be a whole bunch of lawsuits waiting to happen.
  4. If I remember rightly, they do offer free AV and Firewall software in many areas. Of course, getting a customer to use them is much like getting a teenager to use free... um... nevermind. Anyway, how would you know if they have FW and AV software installed until after it is too late?
  5. I suspect a lot of the reason for them being at the top is simply volume. When you have that many users, no matter how fast you respond to compromised machines spewing spam, a certain amount is going to make it out. The alternative of course is to block port 25 by default, but considering the amount of upset customers even small changes create, I would suspect blocking an entire port (which I'm certain a LOT of their customers use to send mail through webhosts, private mail servers, etc) would create an unacceptable volume of support calls and angry customers in general. When SBC implemented port 25 blocking in my area, they spent about 2 weeks innundating their customers with emails and letters informing them of the changes, and how to be exempted from them if you needed direct access to port 25. Even so, I probably had 4 or 5 of my customers call me because they couldn't send email anymore after the change, due to the fact they were trying to send their email out through a mail server provided by their web host. A simple call fixed the problem, but it just goes to show how unlikely it is that people will pay attention and actually make necessary changes before something like that causes them a problem.
  6. Well, if you have a name and a location, you could always try looking for a good old phone number using one of any number of online phone books. You might also try googling for the person by their old email address and see if you can find any references that might contain screen names for IM programs you could use to contact them, or might even contain their new email address.
  7. This would indicate that the email address you are sending to is not known by the receiving server. Apparently your friend has changed email addresses.
  8. One has to wonder how much spam actually is going out through legitimate outbound MXs. From what I have seen 99.9% of spam is sent "direct to MX" by a proxy trojan, and so would bypass their outgoing anti-spam system entirely. Seems like it would be easier to deal with outbound spam on the MX by simply monitoring volumes, and reading and acting on complaints in the abuse mailbox in a timely fashion.
  9. Yeah, it seems to take a while to load the first page, but once it is loaded going back and forth from page to page is much faster. Perhaps its the delay in loading those pages of the database from disk to memory. They're handling a lot of data, so not sure what they could do about that other than moving to a cluster capable database system like MS SQL or Oracle and offloading those particular functions to read only nodes on the cluster.
  10. The "Older Reports" link on the report history page seems to have been restored and as far as I can tell is working as it should.
  11. I would say that 400 messages all at once is probably pretty high volume. On the other hand, if you are just sending to 20 people at a time, and don't do all the groups on a single day, then I doubt that would be considered high-volume
  12. I just logged in to view my report history (to get a list of IPs that don't want reports so I can add them to my personal BL), and everything reported priort to 9:39 AM Spamcop time is gone. There is no "next page" link on the page at all. Anyone else have there report history disappear like this?
  13. Telarin

    Test topic

    I think its because we're all interested to see what you are testing...
×
×
  • Create New...