Jump to content

Derek T

Memberp
  • Content Count

    602
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Derek T

  1. What you don't say is whether or not they subscribed in the first place. If I get mail from a company that I have dealt with but have not specifically aked for follow-up mail, I report it as spam. spam is defined by conSent , not ConTent. Do you use a 'confirmed opt-in' system? If not, why not? Why should anyone unsubscribe from anything they've not subscribed to in the first place? You must realise that spammers use 'unsubscribe' only to confirm that they have a 'live one' no-one is going to unsubscribe unless they specifically subscribed these days. Spammers spoil it for everyone.
  2. Derek T

    Why my mailserver is blocked?

    195.146.81.132 listed in bl.spamcop.net (127.0.0.2) Since SpamCop started counting, this system has been reported less than 10 times by less than 10 users. It has been sending mail consistently for at least 21.5 days. It has been listed for 27 hours. * In the past week, this system has: Been detected sending mail to spam traps * Been witnessed sending mail about 120 times The spamtraps are the most likely cause of the listing: these are addresses that have never sent mail and should never receive it - they are 'bait' for the spyders harvesting addresses. Looking in Senderbase, the volume of mail through this IP is up over 3000% in the last day: could the machine be compromised? One common reason for the spamtrap hits is the server sending virus 'bounces' to the 'from' address, could this be the cause? For more info on what went to spamtraps email deputies <at> spam.spamcop.net, only they are privy to this information.
  3. Derek T

    Reporting Spam

    Hi, Did you read the Outlook FAQ? There is a 'feature' in Outlook that makes it incpable of sending the headers in a way that SpamCop can recognize. I believe that there is a plugin available that corrects this. I am not an Outlook user, someone who knows the name and location of the plugin is sure to drop by soon Sorry I cant help more, but a search of the client configuration FAQ would be a good place to start. Derek
  4. Just a small point of etiquette/nomenclature spam is a delicious chopped ham and pork product and is a registered trademark. spam is far less tasty! The manufacturers of the former get quite upset (uderstandably) at people confusing the two I am not a SpamCop employee, just a very happy user, but have you considered forwarding ALL your mail to a paid spamcop account (US$30 a year) and then POPing (or IMAPing) your mail from there? Many of us do. That way the spam ends up in a 'heldmail' folder and is very easily reported while the genuine mail gets through. The number of false positives drops rapidly as you build your personal whitelist. The advantages of this over filtering on content is are (i) you never POP the spam onto your own machine and (ii) SpamCop uses real-time blacklists of spamming server IP's and so is able to react very quickly to ongoing spews. hth Derek
  5. Derek T

    taphilo.com domain listed

    No, sir, you have the choice of hosting your domain with a less spam-friendly ISP. As long as you stick with your current host, unless you can put pressure on them to clean up their act, this problem will most likely recur. Move your domain to a different (clean) IP and proble will go away. SpamCop does NOT work by domain.
  6. Derek T

    When will be de-listed????

    Exchange eh? that explains a lot! Best thing to do with exchange IMNSHO is to put a linux distro disc in the CD-ROM and select the 'delete all windows partitions' option during install
  7. 65.88.98.1 not listed in bl.spamcop.net Since SpamCop started counting, this system has been reported about 40 times by about 10 users. It has been sending mail consistently for at least 61.4 days. In the past 55.6 days, it has been listed 5 times for a total of 2.2 days * In the past week, this system has: Been reported as a source of spam less than 10 times * Been witnessed sending mail about 1150 times * Other hosts in this "neighborhood" with spam reports: 65.88.98.68 * 65.88.98.116 [ as you can see, it really does and has already! Sorry, but that's B.S. they have already HAD the evidence, they MAY even have acted on it and stopped the spam, but looking at the 'others in theneighbourhood' bit I suspect they are not very proactive. You may need to get a new ISP.
  8. Derek T

    Please remove from your list

    64.27.65.41 listed in bl.spamcop.net (127.0.0.2) Since SpamCop started counting, this system has been reported about 340 times by less than 10 users. It has been sending mail consistently for at least 106.7 days. In the past 468.4 days, it has been listed 3 times for a total of 5.9 days * In the past week, this system has: Been reported as a source of spam less than 10 times * Been detected sending mail to spam traps * Been witnessed sending mail about 230 times * Other hosts in this "neighborhood" with spam reports: 64.27.65.31 * 64.27.65.43 SpamCop is NOT a list of open relays. SpamCop maintains a real-time list of actively spamming IP servers. Please read the FAQ 'why am I blocked' for more details. You may not be an open relay but you do appear to have a big problem: being reported 340 times is not good news! Neither is sending mail to spamtraps - they are addresses that have never sent and should never receive e-mail, they are laid as 'bait' for spiders inside web pages. Someone is sending a lot of spam through that server. If you post details of whether the server is used by a single user or shared, what type of server it is etc. someone with much more knowledge than me will be along with suggestions of which vulnerabilities are most likely the cause. The good news is that the SCBL is real-time and that the listing will be dropped (automatically) within 48 hrs (usually) of the last spam report. Hope this helps Derek T (not an employee, just a happy user)
  9. Derek T

    are the deputies around today

    You thought that was polite? You must be from New York. You poted a reply to an existing thread. The moderator has simply moved it, and all the replies to it, back into that thread where it belongs. Please engage brain before operating mouth.
  10. Derek T

    are the deputies around today

    Well, that's somethinng you need to take up with him/her. You are paying for a service which you are not getting because he/she has misconfigured the server. Spamcop lists are used by some admins to reject incoming mail, this is the first time I have heard of anyone using it to block OUTGOING mail from their own customer! As spambo has siad, your IP is NOT and HAS NEVER BEEN listed by spamcop. Just because a misconfigured server says it is dosn't mean it really is. OITC or whatever you call them, also quoted by the misconfigured server is not part of the spamcop site. Your issue here is with XO communications. You're not and never have been listed by Spamcop but are listed by two minor blocklists according to dnsbl.info see http://www.five-ten-sg.com/blackhole.php?i...3&Search=Search for your five-ten-sg llisting information. I suspect this may be the cause of your trouble. Either way, it's nothing to do with spamcop, whatever the failure messasge might say! hth Derek
  11. Derek T

    Guess I need help....

    Yep, thanks. The problem has now 'fixed itself' as that mail server is no longer listed. IP's drop off the list within 48hrs of the the last spam report. HOWEVER this is only one of the mail servers run by TDS that have had spam reports, and it is listed currently in other blocklists so you need to ask yourself whether TDS are just unlucky and clearing up spam problems as soon as possible or either clueless or 'couldn't care less' in acting against spammers. The bottom line is that if the latter, they will probably end up on the blocklist again in the future; you may want to change to a provider with a better record. hth Derek
  12. Derek T

    I sell gems on my site, BUT it seems...

    This is Spamcop, AOL is down the hall>>>>> If you have a bounce that mentions spamcop please post it here. INTMW you might like to read some of the pinned FAQ's.
  13. Derek T

    trusted, but not configured

    Is it? OK have done! Thanks
  14. 2: Received: from pr105.neoline.com.br ([200.141.131.105]) by audiogram.mail.pas.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 3.36 #4) id 1B7jri-0007YQ-00; Sun, 28 Mar 2004 15:38:55 -0800 mail.pas.earthlink.net flagged as trusted, but not configured It appears you have not configured your own mailhost: Mailhost: audiogram.mail.pas.earthlink.net Please correct this situation - register every email address where you receive spam What's all this about? I've had this response twice today and a few yesterday. In all cases they are from servers that I've never heard of, have no account with and have never (to my knowledge) flagged as 'trusted'. tia Derek
  15. What's all this about? I've had this response twice today and a few yesterday. In all cases they are from servers that I've never heard of, have no account with and have never (to my knowledge) flagged as 'trusted'. tia Derek Processing spam: From: auretagio[at]wp.pl Subject: =?windows-1251?B?SGV0ZXIwIGd1eXMgaGF2IW5nIHRoZWlyIGYhcnN0IGdheSBmLi5jaw==?= 0: Received: from unknown (192.168.1.101) by blade4.cesmail.net with QMQP; 25 Mar 2004 20:06:54 -0000 Internal handoff at SpamCop 1: Received: from smtp.wp.pl (212.77.101.160) by mailgate.cesmail.net with SMTP; 25 Mar 2004 20:06:53 -0000 SpamCop received mail from 212.77.101.160 Hostname verified: smtp.wp.pl 2: Received: from 69.37.212.196.adsl.snet.net (auretagio[at][69.37.212.196]) (envelope-sender <auretagio[at]wp.pl>) by smtp.wp.pl (wp-smtpd) with SMTP for <frd[at]aol.com>; 25 Mar 2004 20:44:37 +0100 error:smtp.wp.pl flagged as trusted, but not configured error:It appears you have not configured your own mailhost: Mailhost: smtp.wp.pl Please correct this situation - register every email address where you receive spam Tracking message source:69.37.212.196: Cached whois for 69.37.212.196 : abuse[at]snet.net Using abuse net on abuse[at]snet.net abuse net snet.net = abuse[at]snet.net Using best contacts abuse[at]snet.net 69.37.212.196 not listed in dnsbl.njabl.org 69.37.212.196 not listed in dnsbl.njabl.org 69.37.212.196 listed in cbl.abuseat.org ( 127.0.0.2 ) spam report id 825390508 sent to: abuse[at]snet.net May be saved for future reference: http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z371487326z1f...255615e017226cz
  16. Derek T

    Exactly: why?

    Stopping the spam would be a good start IP's are delisted automatically 48 hrs (or less) after the last spam.
  17. if you check that IP at Senderbase it shows a 38-fold increase in traffic in the last 24hrs. My guess is that you have a compromised machine there that a spammer has used / is using.
  18. sinbad7, people here really are trying to help you. please post a 'bounce' with ALL the headers so that the 'experts' can see what's going on. your problem seems to be very unusual and without all the necessary information we're all groping around in the dark.
  19. Derek T

    AutoResponder

    Hi Thomas and welcome. I'm afraid that if you want to use the free service you have to live with the autoresponder. NO spam REPORTS ARE MADE until you click on the link in the response and complete (manually) the reporting process. This is how Spamcop is designed and helps prevent false positives; you have to press the 'report' button having reviewed Spamcop's parse. OTOH for US$30 a year you can have a spmcop account and either a. set up your ISP to forward to Spamcop and then POP the filtered mail from Spamcop's server or b. use the spamcop address and get the filtered mail sent to your ISP I use (a) because it allows me to change ISP and keep a permanent e-mail address. hth Derek I don't work for Spamcop, just a happy customer!
  20. Derek T

    what is wrong here..?

    See the pinned FAQ on 'would send behaviour', there are no boxes to tick because of one or more of the reasons therein.
  21. Derek T

    yourbuddy trolling 1

    why do you all keep feeding this troll?
  22. Derek T

    Banned But No Link-Back

    As nobody else has answered this, the answer is YES. rDNS is a seperate issue: you can do it whether or not they fix rDNS. rDNS has nothing to do with the 'from' field matching the 'reply to' field. I do hope I've understood the question properly! Derek
  23. Some while ago I set up the spam 'hits' level to the recommended '5'. Recently quite a large number of 4+ spams have been getting through. I'd like to experiment with lowering the level and see how many false positives I get. Blowed if I can remember/find out how to change the level! Can someone please enlighten me? Thanks.
×