Jump to content


Forum Admin
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Farelf

  1. Farelf

    Problem Sending Reports

    (Also Don's advisory). All okay now? Came good my location a little before 03:00 GMT - with an accompanying wash of spam to my inbox.
  2. Farelf

    ID of SPAM target

    Wouldn't worry about it, HM. Maybe they they take SpamCop reporters *off* their lists (the more efficient tactic). In any event, there are surely a great number of ways they can trace reporters if they have a mind to do so. Keeping a register keyed to the sender alias would be the obvious thing. More likely purpose of nonsense/random words & paragraphs is to make content analysis more difficult. Could be catharsis too. If some of that stuff is *not* random, we have got us some sick puppies out there!
  3. Farelf

    Funny Email

    Sorry, yeah it looks a bit melodramatic, doesn't it? No mystery, no known harm, I just don't like them but mention them for the possible interest of those made of sterner stuff than I.
  4. Farelf

    Funny Email

    dhanna will say, if dhanna wants but there has to be a heap of these "services" out there - for people who see email marketing as a legitimate tool of free enterprise ... and the others. If you really want to get your BP up, have a look at: http://www.cheapbphosting.com Be aware - they issued me no cookie requests but I have no idea if they log visitors elsewise. Thought I'd better add that! I blundered in there once, in innocence, and am still recovering, I felt like a long-tailed cat in a room full of rocking chairs. cheapbphosting.com is *not* to be confused with cheaphosting.com.
  5. Hmm, a few more than one BigPond server listed, it seems (in addition to poor Nick's). The "neighbourhood" list is variable but over a few quick runs I currently find listings for: So whats this? Has SpamCop declared war on the Commonwealth of Australia? Gotta be *someone* there who's not spamming. Ah well, who needs the Free Trade Agreement anyway? As for the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (scheme = plan for Americans), we've just discovered this neat alternative ... Hey, that's a *joke*, people.
  6. Farelf

    Habeas Reporting?

    Thanks Wazoo. I just reported another one and *this time* was sufficiently awake to read the line "Habeas headers found - reporting" in my confirmation. I'm learning (slowly)
  7. Farelf

    Seems like more spam now

    khaaliq, I'm sure if you chime back in with your further queries/response someone can give you further advice because where you're at is insufferable and good guys suffer more than enough from *unavoidable* causes already. Wazoo, in particular but not exclusively, has been a great help to me (and many others). Back to rjb 001a. Miss Betsy is absolutely right - don't open the things if you don't have to. Sorry, I wasn't thinking - I *have* to open mine, I use Netscape (4.79). My alternative is to use inline email forwarding, which doesn't work well with NS Messenger's handling of HTML (also, some of the emails "evaporate" before spamcop processing). The point being, one of the bugs in spamcop's interaction with early Netscape is the retention of .tmp files for each submission, which allows the easy and accurate tracking of the "spam experience" (does that make it a feature instead of bug?;-) So, if it is any reassurance, below is my record since I last purged my tmp files. Serial-----Date------Count----Wk Mov---DAY ----------------------------------Av 1----------27 Feb----23--------23---------Fri 2----------28 Feb----30--------26.5------Sat 3----------29 Feb----43--------32--------Sun 4----------01 Mar----48--------36--------Mon 5----------02 Mar----53--------39.4------Tue 6----------03 Mar----38--------39.1667--Wed 7----------04 Mar----45--------40--------Thu 8----------05 Mar----33--------41.4286--Fri 9----------06 Mar----23--------40.4286--Sat 10---------07 Mar----27--------38.1429--Sun 11---------08 Mar----15-------- 33.429---Mon The "weekly moving average" doesn't become a full weekly average until day 7 (and daily counts are too volatile to be of much use) but clearly the trend is improving, albeit over a short time-base. My time-zone is GMT+8:00 which will have an impact on the dates, particularly relative to the Americas. The numbers were around 15-20 a day, tops, before I started spam reporting on 20 December, they quickly ramped up after I started exclusively pasting to the web page (roughly mid January). I stopped opening the things on-line around the beginning of February (about as sharp as a bowling ball, that's me) and now, just maybe, the trend is starting down for real. Too early to tell but at least you can see we're not facing unremitting escalation. Note - we're talking mole reporting here, none of the reports go to hosting IPs which could introduce other factors. So, if you can, hang in there. Every contribution helps, I'm sure.
  8. Farelf

    Seems like more spam now

    khaaliq - 500 spam a day! Commiserations my friend, more knowledgeable folk than I can give you further advice if you continue the thread. rjb 001a, you're more in my league, I am also a mole of recent vintage and variable spam beseigement. Firstly, mole reports do not go to the "offending" IPs, there is little or no way the reports as such can bring down the spammers on you. Refer to the FAQ on (the new) "mole reporting" - I think the relevant part is 'SpamCop now offers new and existing users an option to withhold almost all data - registering reports in SpamCop's database, but never sending reports to the "ISP" (all too often, the spammer, or a spam-friendly host).' You say you submit via the spamcop web page - so do I. Just make sure you go off-line when you open your spam to view and copy it. There is some suggestion that opening to any live external links (graphics, etc), even previews, might register "the other end" and confirm your presence. I didn't bother going off-line initially (after all only 1/3 - 1/2 had live links) and found my spam volume increased, quite quickly. I've stopped doing that, view off-line, submit on-line, bit of a drag *but* now the volume is going down again (slowly). Maybe coincidence but I'm sticking with it.
  9. Farelf

    "SpamCop Encountered Errors"

    I was hoping someone with actual knowledge might have picked this up before now, mrmaxx (not being a spamcop email account user myself and not having a clue as to the capabilities of the "Very Easy Reporting" system you're using), and can't see that it's been addressed on another forum. I presume you have checked out the FAQ? The starting point would be: http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/335.html I know one of the reasons I had to quit email reporting was because my email "forwarded as attachment" frequently lead to the same dreaded message "SpamCop could not find your spam message in this email" which you're seeing. I tried pasting to my keyed submission box in spamcop.net and finally, with pasting the "page source", had 100% success in getting my spam fully processed, including the URL links to spamvertisements. As for spam with no viewable body, I have noticed this happens with my (early) Netscape application when the page source shows declared boundaries but the post-header section is malformed by the omission of a line break before the boundary - that is, when it is like this fragment: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--21559756486133000" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-IP: ----21559756486133000 Content-Type: text/html; The body is actually readable when this is like: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--21559756486133000" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-IP: ----21559756486133000 Content-Type: text/html; Presumably there *are* viewers/email applications apart from Netscape Messenger which can view the original version (or else spamdom contains elements more stupid than seems compatible with the ordinary rigours of natural selection) but spamcop can't parse the body either, producing a different processing error.
  10. You beat me to it, Spambo. Yes - one of the reasons I now paste "page" source to the submission box is to amend text-only parts to: Content-Type: text/plain when that's what they are. One of the allowable interventions according to the FAQ (somewhere). On a similar tack, but giving a different spamcop message, is the mangled X-line. Several variations but the one I'm seeing lately is like: X-Originating-IP: [nnn.nnn.nnn.nnn ] which needs to be: X-Originating-IP: [nnn.nnnn.nnn.nnn] or spamcop curls up its toes at the point of looking for URL links. I assume repairing these is not "materially altering" the message.
  11. Something seems to be happening - I paste my stuff to the submission window, having 'lost' a few emails in the past and experiencing delays with others - but processing time *does* seem to be up at the moment. I noticed something in a recent spamcop response which might be indicative - 'anti-spam[at]ns.chinanet.cn.net bounces (102 sent : 23203 bounces)'. This is all white man's magic to me but the bounces seem a trifle exuberant, especially if other sources are (maybe) doing the same?
  12. Farelf

    Command-Line Editor Wars

    Wazoo, Seems like just yesterday but no, I've moved on, C:/Windows/Temp is the general default. Know where I can get an upgrade of Edlin for Windows? Not surprised re Google definition - it's just I didn't want to use the Anglo-Saxon version of "naughty bits for a head", nor be sexist by specifying male naughty bits : ]
  13. Farelf

    Change in resources?

    Re Netscape 4.79 problems. Thanks one and all - also, I belatedly found the FAQ topic http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/280.html FWIW several nsformXX.TMP multipart form files are created for each spam individually processed, one of which is apparently deleted when the Netscape session is ended. The one which persists (and thus needs eventually to be deleted manually) includes the spam message as pasted for processing, whether subsequently reported or not, which might occasionally be a handy reference. The location (directory) of the TMP files may relate to an initial Netscape installation value, "n" upgades ago (rather than the current default Windows temp directory), in any event it does not seem to be addressable from Netscape should a more convenient location be required. I found mine could be successfully changed in the Registry, being confident enough (or sufficiently foolhardy) with Regedit: HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Netscape\Netscape Navigator\Main\Temp Directory
  14. Farelf

    no links found

    Much appreciated Wazoo makes sense, dunno what I would do without you. I'm only getting a handfull of them a week, usually about some form or another of insurance and it was driving me mad, trying to work out what was happening and why. Since the wonky X-line varies I would think it is deliberate so yes, very "cute".
  15. Farelf

    no links found

    Sorry - as posted above might have the continuations in the header mangled, I pasted it from the same text file which worked fine pasting into spamcop submission box. May need correcting before submission.
  16. Farelf

    no links found

    Absolutely! Just to double check, I've just tested the below (updating date to allow processing) with the line "X-acrylic : PBSMPZGAJQYG" - links not found, then without that line, links are found. It also worked on a similar message more recently received. Sample of just 2 admittedly but try it yourself. Received: from (unknown[](misconfigured sender)) by prserv.net (in1) with SMTP id <2004022206180510106s9qfie>; Sun, 22 Feb 2004 06:20:52 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [] Message-ID: <OBFYXUFPTJMPELRKFCFPYA[at]yahoo.com> From: "kial" <dyoung6330[at]rbtb.co.uk> Reply-To: "kial" <dyoung6330[at]rbtb.co.uk> To: "Ronald" <Brown> Subject: roadside assistance 24/7 s]s-z] Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 11:10:41 +0500 X-Mailer: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 12:11:41 +0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--5399960001844296293" X-Priority: 3 X-IP: X-acrylic : PBSMPZGAJQYG X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 X-UIDL: 2004022206180510106s9qfie0008lr ----5399960001844296293 Content-Type: text/html; Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <HTML><P ALIGN=3DCENTER><FONT COLOR=3D"#ff0000" SIZE=3D3 PTSIZE=3D12 FAMI= LY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"><B>Car troubles never happen wh= en it's convenient for you</FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" BACK=3D"#ffffff"= style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D2 PTSIZE=3D10 FAMILY=3D"SANSSE= RIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"><BR> </B><BR> <BR> <B><A HREF=3D"http://www.auto-warranty-quotes.com/?partid=3Dkgr">Auto Warr= anty Quotes</A></B></B><BR> <BR> <BR> </FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" BACK=3D"#ffffff" style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR= : #ffffff" SIZE=3D3 PTSIZE=3D12 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D= "0"><B>Save 60% on Extended Warranty Coverage for your Vehicle<BR> </FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" BACK=3D"#ffffff" style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR= : #ffffff" SIZE=3D2 PTSIZE=3D10 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D= "0"></B><BR> <BR> <A HREF=3D"http://www.auto-warranty-quotes.com/st.html">Go here if you don= t need a warranty</A><BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> Ensin Wind, LTD <BR> 65B les tides Blvd, Suite 5874 <BR> Laval QC H7M 2M5 <BR> Canada <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> </P></FONT></HTML> ----5399960001844296293--
  17. Farelf

    no links found

    A wrinke on the same topic ... I too (mole) have been getting a few cases where the links show in the email (using Netscape Messenger), spamcop finds the source of the email OK but when it comes to tracking links produces a message containing: error: couldn't parse head Message body parser requires full, accurate copy of message More information on this error.. no links found I have accordingly been submitting reports with the links unidentified but observation shows these spam have in common a strange header line like: X-acrylic : [some characters] or X-inexcusable : [some characters] (note space before the colon, don't know if it is this or the subject which is significant). Anyway, a little experimentation reveals that spamcop *can* identify the links with this line removed. So, is it permissible to remove the offending line in this circumstance? It is not altering the body of the message in any way. Or can spamcop be tickled into dealing with it? I hesitated over posting this because it seems to me that, once aired, some resolution is needed fairly quickly.
  18. Farelf

    Change in resources?

    Wazoo, Wazoo, Wazoo - you were right on the money first time. Apart from the Navigator disk cache which can be an issue, Messenger does indeed create a .tmp file for every email received - not in the folder it has been told to on my installation but in the parent (C:/DOS in my case) and *yes*, the magic number does seem to be 1024 and, though it takes a very long time to get to that number, it eventually does and slooooows response right down. Thanks a million, thank heavens you know about this arcane stuff, thank goodness Bill Gates isn't the only pudendacephaloid out there (getting tired of blaming him for everything), sorry to be so "dense" and I'm back in there smiting them hip & thigh
  19. Farelf

    Change in resources?

    Yes, it would certainly be on the odds that any "resource" issue would be at my end but I haven't (intentionally) downloaded anything to this machine except email since my last update of Symantec virus definitions and I certainly haven't installed anything since then (blush - Feb 6th). Come to think of it, I will update and scan JIC.
  20. Farelf

    Change in resources?

    Thanks Wazoo - that's "clearing disk cache" and it DOES seem to help, but only fractionally (one of the "perseverence" things, along with minimizing open applications, freeing up available RAM with Freemem). It remains inordinately difficult for me to get my stuff processed by spamcop and this is a sudden change compared to the previous 2 months. And I haven't changed anything (OK, we ALL say that but I haven't).