Jump to content

gnarlymarley

Membera
  • Content Count

    348
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About gnarlymarley

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    gn02020202
  • Yahoo
    gnarlymarley

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    utah, USA
  • Interests
    reporting spam

Recent Profile Visitors

2,100 profile views
  1. The IPv6 ranges returned from the lacnic whois is being properly detected. It appears that most of the whois servers return inet6num, but lacnic seems to be returning inetnum. For documentation, the IPv4 seems to be coming back as NetRange for all whois. It would appear that lacnic is going to stay with this as they have used this since they started on IPv6. Can we have the code in the whois section be able to pick up lacnic's IPv6 range? The tracking URL that was fixed by the deputies on 24 Feb but have screenshot of before fix: https://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z6618132220z787713e4d45691f5d7d62752a3a7f109z Forum post from 2013: http://forum.spamcop.net/topic/13290-gmail-spam-from-ipv6/ Forum post from 2018: http://forum.spamcop.net/topic/30227-cannot-find-ip-range-in-whois-outputno-reporting-addresses-found-for-200112f0601a902000150/ Whois refresh page:
  2. gnarlymarley

    Unable to register - Invalid CAPTCHA

    I am not sure what I was thinking either. I went back to look at Ostap's post and he has the image with the spinning wheel. I think I was just asking for confirmation. Interesting. I have tried this with this on edge, internet explorer, chrome, and firefox on win10, win vista, and win 7 and it seems to work for me. I also tried it with chrome on android and works. I have both AVG and avast, but web http filter is turned off for me. (My win10 is a work computer and uses the work's proxy filter, so I might not be able to duplicate the issue on my win10.)
  3. Sounds like the administrator of the server you were trying to send to has mistakenly put "https://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?77.32.164.53" in their reject message. You might need to contact them to see why they think it is on the blacklist when it is not.
  4. gnarlymarley

    Multiple spam redirecting to TopOnlineBargins

    I found a term for this called snowshoe spamming. http://forum.spamcop.net/topic/43662-spam-from-91192400-9119243255-and-21761730-2176173255/?do=findComment&comment=151467
  5. gnarlymarley

    Multiple spam redirecting to TopOnlineBargins

    They sent it from different ISP to limit how quickly their IP is put into a blocklist. If they can jump around enough, their can keep sending out their spam for days. Now if everyone who got it reported it, we could get them on the block lists faster. This is why they like to remotely use routers and IP cameras to send their spam as they don't care if good people get blocked. SpamCop does have requirements to be added to the blocking list. My guess is what you saw for the change from Mivocloud to Psychz is that either they wanted to change, or Mivocloud turned off their service and the spammer moved on. (In my opinion, the faster we inconvience the spammer, they less they will desire to spam.)
  6. If the administrator doesn't care (or is even supportive of the spammer's actions), then that it will continue. What I did in the past (because they kept jumping around on IPs) was to block the whole IP range first in a firewall, then I did my own block list. This got their attention and they moved on to another ISP. This might be an issue as if you have the block list enable, then the reports stop and the IP falls off the list quicker. Hopefully, they run across a spamtrap which I believe it will continue to accept spam while it is on the block list.
  7. Being on a BL is only as useful if your email server/spam filter is configured to use it. A lot of providers discount BLs these days because some honest people can be blocked. Some admins have got overwhelmed by spam reports and just blocked all of SpamCop. Having a report sent by other means might cause the admin to ignore and block reports those too. I would prefer if the admins would just take action quicker rather than to just hit the delete all button.
  8. gnarlymarley

    Increase in spam out of google lately. Anyone know why?

    The problem with the week delay will be a similar reason why people complain about being on the blocking list. Spammers will use it to somehow deny real legitimate customers access. There will be some fine line somewhere where they could get it to work, but I don't know where that line is. It is interesting that spamassassin has three sections, not spam, spam, and an overlapping area. As a real person, I wouldn't want to wait a week but I do agree that spammers should wait. (But then with enough money, the spammers would probably sign up as a business and they would probably bypass the delay.)
  9. The only problem I have been able to think of with this feature is looping, where ARIN may think an IP is APNIC and APNIC thinks the IP is ARIN. So maybe need a local tracking variable along side it so once an IP is looked up, it does not go back to that same whois server.
  10. You can check if an IP hit enough spam criteria by putting the IP into the box by "Numeric IP address" and clicking the button at https://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml (which is found http://spamcop.net and clicking on blocking list).
  11. gnarlymarley

    Link obfuscation flaw?

    I think there is a reason behind this policy. I had a report head to an administrator about two decades ago under this policy and the administrator confused a link as the originator of the spam rather than to look at the headers. The link happened to be my work's website at the time, so they kept blaming me for the spam. That administrator was for a prominent university and I would have thought they knew better. Before that, I also wanted the links to be reported, but after I realized that some links could be friendlies added by the spammer to get into trouble. As an administrator I would like to know about people using my site in their spam, but I also realized that some of these administrators might not know how to read email or even understand spam reports. I believe the original reason they stopped reporting when too many links was resources because each report could create many new emails to each administrator.
  12. gnarlymarley

    spam from 193.142.146.221

    Interesting. I see the cached whois has both a remark and a "abuse-mailbox" entry. Does spamcop prefer one over the other? abuse-mailbox: abuse@hostslick.de
  13. gnarlymarley

    Increase in spam out of google lately. Anyone know why?

    I had a spammer try to use the google cloud, but they sent it to my spamtrap. Mysteriously everything got reported and they appears to be kicked off the google cloud. My guess is if we keep up reporting it, the spammers will give up on using google's systems. The speed of reporting seems to have a great effect on causing the spammers to no longer want to waste their time setting up a google cloud server.
  14. gnarlymarley

    Straight to tracking URL?

    The issue is the double dot in the Received line. The two dots make this an invalid record. If you change it to a single dot, it should submit.
  15. gnarlymarley

    spam from Google Mail Groups

    This is your logged link to which we do not have access. The link I would be able to access is called the tracking URL on the page.
×