Jump to content

paul.hunt

Members
  • Content Count

    47
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by paul.hunt

  1. paul.hunt

    Missing Reports

    For the past week or more, most of my submissions have gone missing. Example, today at about 1500 hours EST I submitted 12 reports (using Apple Mail Forward as Attachment) to submit.xxxxxxxxxxxxxx@spam.spamcop.net By 1615 only 2 had been processed. If today is like past days, the others will never be processed. Is there a problem? Thanks, Paul
  2. paul.hunt

    Missing Reports

    I'm not seeing them in the statistics.
  3. Does anyone else find this to be an odd error? Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 5.4.7 - Delivery expired (message too old) 'timeout' (delivery attempts: 0) Why would SpamCop never make any delivery attempts? I would think that would ensure a timeout.
  4. paul.hunt

    Email Undelivered - timeout

    Nope. One recipient only.
  5. paul.hunt

    Reporting problems today?

    Working fine right now. Speedy, in fact.
  6. paul.hunt

    Reporting problems today?

    Um, no. NOT working. Gateway Timeout The proxy server did not receive a timely response from the upstream server. Reference #1.da2f5cc.1341849273.9ecb439d
  7. paul.hunt

    Reporting problems today?

    Consistent timeouts are still happening: The proxy server did not receive a timely response from the upstream server.
  8. I don't understand why SpamCop can't filter spam which is almost identical every time. For example: Hello! I am tired tonight. I am nice girl that would like to chat with you. Email me at zp[at]NearOut.info only, because I am writing not from my personal email. Wanna see some pictures of me? This particular spam has been going on for months, and the wording rarely varies (if at all). Why doesn't it get filtered?
  9. My domain host (HostGator) says that somebody spoofed my email address and that I reported myself through SpamCop. If I cannot resolve this, they will no longer allow me to forward my email to SpamCop. They claim SpamCop did not provide them with a reporting ID but they have provided with "logs of this email transaction" as well as "The reported spam message was attached below and sanitized for reporting. The Exim data:<snip> The only thing I could think of doing was searching my past reports for that date and 2 days following and looking for the email subject. It wasn't there. I thought I couldn't report myself. Now what? Thanks, Paul
  10. paul.hunt

    [Resolved] My Host says I reported myself

    I heard from SpamCop and found the report in question (FWIW, searching for old reports could be made a lot easier by SC, IMHO). SC explained it very nicely. It appears that the report was mishandled by the hosting company that received it (theplanet.com). They treated it as a report on the source of the spam when in fact the report they received was referring to a spamvertized site. Since my hosting company, HostGator, uses theplanet's servers, theplanet reported to HG that I had reported myself as the source of the spam. Bottom line is that everything worked as expected at SC but that the report was subsequently mishandled. Thanks SC,
  11. paul.hunt

    [Resolved] My Host says I reported myself

    Nope. Not blocking. They have asked me to resolve how this happened. If It happens again, I will have to disable my forwarding to SC. I emailed him at the address he provided. I guess I will remail that.
  12. paul.hunt

    [Resolved] My Host says I reported myself

    No response from SpamCop as of 9 August
  13. paul.hunt

    [Resolved] My Host says I reported myself

    Information emailed 2 Aug.
  14. I have tried to submit a spam and get the message: No body text provided, check format of submission. spam must have body text. And it does. And there IS a blank line before it. I even deleted the entire body and replaced it with a blank line and some simple text. Same message. :angry: Here is one of the Tracking URL's: http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z2354750081za...d2b708a62e25a6z
  15. paul.hunt

    spam must have body text. It does!

    This is what follows the blank line: MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: 3td9k.klw78[at]foredu.com.cn Reply-To: esz999[at]yahoo.com.tw Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 00:06:23 +0800 X-Mailer:Dynamailer V 8.4 X-MimeOLE:Produced By Mircosoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Return-Path:esz999[at]yahoo.com.tw Interestingly I can't successfully paste the whole thing into anything but (Mac) Safari, (Mac) Firefox and Apple Mail. (Mac) Pages, (Mac) Word, (Mac) Dreamweaver, TextEdit - all drop the line "MIME-Version: 1.0" and substitute a second blank line. But if I start with "MIME-Version: 1.0", it pastes fine. I viewed the hex of the email. Starting at the last character of the last line of the header, "X-SpamCop-Checked: 69.56.174.194 200.252.96.20 61.59.12.183", we see 83 20 0A 0A 00 4D, with, of course, the 83 being the 3 and 4D being the M in Mime. So, if I understand what I'm seeing, the "MIME-Version: 1.0" line has a leadling null, which seems to break a lot of things. Hope this helps. Oh, yeah. And I can't paste that "MIME-Version: 1.0" line (unaltered) here in the forum and get it (or anything following it) to stick. It disappears when I do a "preview post". I have to delete that null even though I can't see it - nor does it occupy a visible position.
  16. paul.hunt

    spam must have body text. It does!

    I took your advice and finally tracked it down. It was in the blank line. There was no character there, not even one masquerading as a space, but I had to remove and replace that line to get it to go.
  17. paul.hunt

    spam must have body text. It does!

    Got it. Thank you. The "View entire message" shows it as ending: X-SpamCop-Checked: 69.56.174.194 200.252.96.20 61.59.12.183 But the paste went on and I can't make it stick here either; it pastes but doesn't show in preview if I try to include that "X-SpamCop-Checked" line above. That line was followed by a blank line, then: MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: 3td9k.klw78[at]foredu.com.cn Reply-To: esz999[at]yahoo.com.tw Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 00:06:23 +0800 X-Mailer:Dynamailer V 8.4 X-MimeOLE:Produced By Mircosoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Return-Path:esz999[at]yahoo.com.tw This is a multi-part message in MIME format --=_MoreStuf_2zzz1234sadvnqw3nerasdf Content-Type: text/plain; Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit EMBROIDERIES PATCHES*¨ë*¸* ¡[at] ¨ë EMBROIDERIES PATCHES FLAGS METAL BADGES" <snip>
  18. paul.hunt

    spam must have body text. It does!

    OK. I'm missing something here. When I click on the link: http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z2354750081za...d2b708a62e25a6z I get: The usual header and tabs, then: SpamCop v 2 Copyright © 1998-2006, IronPort Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Here is your TRACKING URL - it may be saved for future reference: http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z2354750081za...d2b708a62e25a6z Tracking message source: 200.252.96.20: Routing details for 200.252.96.20 [refresh/show] Cached whois for 200.252.96.20 : abuse[at]embratel.net.br mail-abuse[at]cert.br Using abuse net on abuse[at]embratel.net.br abuse net embratel.net.br = antispambr[at]abuse.net, abuse[at]embratel.net.br, mail-abuse[at]cert.br Using abuse net on mail-abuse[at]cert.br abuse net cert.br = postmaster[at]cert.br, cert[at]cert.br Using best contacts postmaster[at]cert.br antispambr[at]abuse.net abuse[at]embratel.net.br cert[at]cert.br mail-abuse[at]cert.br antispambr[at]abuse.net redirects to spambr[at]admin.spamcop.net Reports disabled for spambr[at]admin.spamcop.net Reports disabled for abuse[at]embratel.net.br Using abuse#embratel.net.br[at]devnull.spamcop.net for statistical tracking. Message is 6 hours old 200.252.96.20 not listed in dnsbl.njabl.org 200.252.96.20 not listed in dnsbl.njabl.org 200.252.96.20 not listed in cbl.abuseat.org 200.252.96.20 not listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net 200.252.96.20 not listed in accredit.habeas.com 200.252.96.20 not listed in plus.bondedsender.org 200.252.96.20 not listed in iadb.isipp.com No body text provided, check format of submission. spam must have body text. If reported today, reports would be sent to: Re: 200.252.96.20 (Administrator of network where email originates) mail-abuse[at]cert.br abuse#embratel.net.br[at]devnull.spamcop.net cert[at]cert.br postmaster[at]cert.br Report another spam? Welcome, <snip> Nowhere on that page is the word parsing found.
  19. paul.hunt

    spam must have body text. It does!

    All-in-one. Pasting entire message. I do this daily and this is the only time it has failed for me. And it fails consistently for this message. I am reading that as he clicked a link to view the entire message and he didn't see a body. I don't see such a link on: http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z2354750081za...d2b708a62e25a6z
  20. paul.hunt

    spam must have body text. It does!

    Pasting at: http://www.spamcop.net/. And I see the whole email paste, including the entire body. Where is this "View Source" link? Because I don't see it at: http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z2354750081za...d2b708a62e25a6z
  21. paul.hunt

    Account Settings Corrupted?

    You would think so. But I tested both ways. My host is fast at everything else, but not at forwarding (They claim it is a shared hosting issue). Double popping is (much) faster for me.
  22. Early Tuesday, March 25, (or late Monday) I suddenly stopped getting email. I have SpamCop pop my domain email, then I pop SpamCop. When I was finally able to check settings Tuesday night, I found that SpamCop was no longer popping my domain email. That setting was gone. When I re-entered the information it started popping again and sent me hundreds of duplicate emails going back to January. 1. I haven't accessed my settings for months. How did the external POP information get deleted? 2. I didn't, and don't, have "leave mail on server" checked. Yet it has apparently left mail on my domain server since January and then re-fetched everything it had already gotten back that far.
  23. paul.hunt

    Blogspot

    When Blogspot is used as a spam site, referenced in the spam, DO NOT device-null my copy to Blogspot. If I didn't want to complain to them, I wouldn't have copied to them!
  24. paul.hunt

    Blogspot

    And we have all seen how effective that has been. Sorry, Miss Betsy, but that's just wishful thinking. It's worse than that. SpamCop is not alone in not wanting to take effective action. I was personally involved in 2 cases. In one, a Nigerian scammer had been strung along for a number of months until he agreed to meet the "victim" in New York City. No law enforcement agency, from NYPD to the FBI, was willing to intercept him. The "victim" was simply given "advice" on how not to fall for scams and told to stay out of it. Despite credible evidence that a crime was about to be perpetrated on US soil, no one would act. In the second case, my personal email was used as the "FROM:" for a batch of spam out of Pennsylvania. I identified the ISP but they refused to release any information without a subpoena. I told them to preserve the information and I got the subpoena. After it was served, the ISP claimed that the date was past the archival period and the data was gone. I pointed out that the date they were referring to was not the date referenced in the subpoena. They promised to look into it and, after a suitable delay, promised to comply and forward the data. They waited until the real date was out of the archival period and then pleaded inability to comply. Bottom line? Law enforcement is useless, and we'll see another reason why below. And the legitimate businesses are only willing to address the problem when it affects their bottom line. Netiquette? That's not something they care about. Should we? In our personal actions on the net, yes, I believe that. And I practice it. But that concept shouldn't restrain our actions when legitimate protest is warranted. Reputable ISPs. And not even all of them (see above). And, of course, it's not just trojanned computers. You don't have to try very hard to find ISP's and hosts operating out of China, Brazil, and other countries that brag about the fact that their service is "bullet proof" and that you can operate any activity, legal or otherwise, from their servers without fear of being shut down. No has made it unprofitable enough for them to do this. And law enforcement clearly isn't doing the job either. You haven't heard me proposing to do "awful things", just to make it less and less profitable and convenient for spammers to operate and to apply more pressure to places like Blogspot (Google) and Geocities (Yahoo) to be more proactive in not providing spamsites hosting room. "Cut direct" only addresses the source of spam, not the websites that spam supports. Insisting that the hosts of such sites hear our complaints is hardly "lowering oneself to the level of the spammer", just as picketing in front of a business that pollutes isn't lowering oneself to the level of the polluter. Steven says that SpamCop places itself above vigilanteism. But the net effect of blocking lists is vigilanteism even if SpamCop isn't engaging in it itself. SpamCop is providing the tools for others to engage in that vigilanteism, for what else is blocking the entire email output of a particular source? I don't propose "awful things" or vigilanteism, just higher pressure activism. And that is a time-honored tradition.
  25. paul.hunt

    Blogspot

    I don't think Miss Manners sets the rules here. We're not talking social niceties. According to what I read, the vast majority of spam is criminal in nature, which puts it in a whole different arena. Where I come from, we don't allow Miss Manners to dictate our response to criminals and those who harbor them.
×