Jump to content

jseymour

Members
  • Content Count

    93
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by jseymour

  1. jseymour

    Prodigy (?) Bouncing SC Reports

    Where did that "abuse" address come from? Did you submit a spam that generated a report to that address? If so, perhaps a spammer managed to get a fake abuse address listed with abuse.net for his domain. I can't believe that a real abuse department would use such an address. My guess is that prodigy.net is an innocent bystander here. But I'd need to see a tracking URL to be sure...
  2. Sounds like you're missing a critical mailhost entry. In this case, the message came from mail.r8ix.com [64.58.169.60] and Spamcop doesn't know about it. Click on the Add/edit your mailhost configuration and make sure the mailhosts list includes this host.
  3. I've wanted a feature like that, as well. Sometimes I've submitted a batch of spam for regular reporting, but then something comes up and I don't have the time to go through them. I don't think this is relevant. Unless I misunderstand, David is asking about spam that have already been submitted. IMAP only helps when sifting through the messages and deciding which ones to report.
  4. jseymour

    Lost and Confused about blocking

    If I were you, I'd edit the above message to remove the email addresses! It's best not to post such things in public places - where they can be harvested by spammers...
  5. jseymour

    why are some spams rejected?

    I know it can be done. I do it routinely with Mozilla and used to do it routinely with Outlook Express. You may need to view hidden folders or some such. "Held Mail" is a sub-folder under "Inbox", if it helps. If you can get the spam directly into your Held mail folder, you might consider reporting it via the VER interface (instead of webmail). The link is http://mailsc.spamcop.net/reportheld?action=heldlog (VER stands for Very Easy Reporting - and despite the fact that I've heard rumors of its eventual demise, it's still my preferred interface to Spamcop).
  6. jseymour

    Why is this blocked?

    The system at fc.olentangy.k12.oh.us is the one doing the blocking. Isn't that you? The IP address you mention is listed on the SORBS "DUL" list (which means it's a dynamic IP address). My mail server would reject connections from them, too. They should be using their ISP's mail server to send their messages. Perhaps fc.olentangy.k12.oh.us is blaming Spamcop regardless of which blocklist they're using for the reject. If so, they should fix that ASAP.
  7. I interpret this to mean that messages with NO MIME headers will be rejected - not just messages with BAD MIME headers. This is, in my opinion, loony.
  8. jseymour

    Ignore and Kill

    SpamAssassin can't do its work until the entire message arrives. At that point, it's not practical to hold the connection to the sending server open while SA runs. This means that Spamcop must accept the message before it can make a determination whether it should be "killed". Once accepted, the only options are to drop it in the bitbucket or generate a new bounce back to the (probably forged) sender. The latter is unacceptable as it's a form of abuse by itself. I think the former is a bad idea because the point of Spamcop is to report spam, not simply filter it. As for using the blocklists: Again, it may not be practical during the SMTP dialog to do the necessary lookups to get the settings specific to that user. Unfortunately, I believe the only good way to get that kind of capability is to run your own mail server.
  9. jseymour

    VER user-interface enhancement

    This would halve the amount of clicks, and make it much quicker to properly carry out full reporting. Good news: This request has come up several times before - so it seems to be a popular idea. Bad news: It hasn't been implemented, yet. Nor, to my knowledge, has it ever been acknowledged by the powers-that-be. Perhaps it's too difficult - relative to the benefit gained...
  10. jseymour

    messagelabs problem

    It could be a line-wrap problem. If any lines in the header wrap, then the parser will probably fail in dramatic fashion. If you're sending to your submit.* address, a much better method would be to use your mail client's Forward as Attachment option. (In Mozilla, you'll find it under Message / Forward As).
  11. For this message: http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z368553816zd3...dbeddc625d136az I get this warning: "mail.mindspring.net flagged as trusted, but not configured It appears you have not configured your own mailhost" Mindspring is not one of my mailhosts and shouldn't be "flagged as trusted". The spam in question arrived at my server from maynard.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.243], yet the parser went past it and wanted to send reports to earthlink.net. Is this a global glitch or something specific to my account?
  12. jseymour

    Avoiding LOGIN page?

    Not IE in this case. When I was using IE, it remembered both of my Spamcop webmail passwords just fine. Now, I'm using Mozilla and it also remembers them both. However, once IE has been told not to remember passwords for a given site, it will never ask again. I think the only way out of this is some kind of registry hack - but that's just a wild-ass guess.
  13. None that I can think of. Since Spamcop removed the public evidence for listings, I've stopped defending them when people complain about listings.
  14. Thanks. But I'd have to send a manual report since the parser went beyond 207.69.200.243 and determined the source was 24.215.179.135. Couldn't this be one of those clever forgeries we're all worried about?
  15. jseymour

    Mailhosts vs. Yahoo

    I have a yahoo.com address that receives nothing but spam. Those messages are automatically forwarded to my spamcop address for reporting. I succcessfully added that address to the new mailhosts system and several messages seemed to have been parsed properly after that. But now, I'm getting the vast majority (perhaps 80% or more) where the reports want to go to Yahoo since the mailhost is not detected. This appears to be happening because the messages came from a Yahoo mail server unknown to Spamcop. Do I need to go through the "add host" logic again? It seems to me that Yahoo's mail server setup must be horribly complex. How can we and/or Spamcop keep up on such things?
  16. jseymour

    Mailhosts vs. Yahoo

    I resubmitted my Yahoo address to the mail host system and, after a couple of false starts, eventually got it to work(*). This morning's batch of email seems to have gone through without any parsing errors. Keeping my fingers crossed... (*) The false starts were my own fault. I was forwarding the confirmation emails from the wrong address and they were (apparently) being silently ignored.
  17. jseymour

    Suggestion

    When mail is filtered by Spamcop, it is forwarded to my secret email address. When an ISP responds to a report, it is sent to that same secret address. Since the destination is the same in both cases, I can't easily filter between the two at my mail server. I can do it at my mail client, sure, but I'd very much like to avoid downloading all my report responses along with my normal email. Any chance the system could be tweaked to allow for a second secret address so that these two (very different) functions can be isolated? And to clarify: I have Spamcop configured to send ALL report responses (even robot replies) to me and I don't want to change this. I'm not annoyed at the responses. I just want to control them a little better on my end. I'd also like to be able to tell Spamcop to automatically CC me on all reports sent on my behalf - but I'll leave that suggestion for another time... :-)
  18. jseymour

    Suggestion

    IMAP isn't the right solution for me. I'm forwarding all mail to Spamcop, and the filtered mail comes back to my server. What I want is for the ISP replies to come back to a different address than the filtered mail. This has nothing to do with multiple forwarding addresses. I'm not constrained. I could set up procmail to do the filtering after the message arrives. Or (as I do now), I can use filtering at my email client. It just seems that the best solution is to have Spamcop direct the two very different types of messages differently. Not a big deal either way. Just thought I'd get my suggesting in the hopper in case anybody's thinking of improvements someday...
×