Jump to content

Javier

Members
  • Content Count

    27
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Javier

  • Rank
    Member
  1. Javier

    Spamcop Alternatives?

    I am in a similar situation: I have several email accounts that are forwarded to an account in Spamcop (this SC email has never been used, in spite of which is lately receiving spam directly addressed to it, which makes me think that the SC user list has been compromised in some way, but that's another matter). With respect to alternatives to Spamcop, I'm considering Hushmail.com, although it is hard for me to 'digest' its interface, used as I am to the clean Spamcop interface. Anyway, I still hope that the Spamcop actual 'issue' can be resolved satisfactorily for the users. Perhaps Cisco can take over the email service from Cesmail or subcontract a webmail service with a company in a way that it result transparent to the end user.
  2. Hi, thank you Don and Petzl, for the explanation and the advice.
  3. (I'm a bit lost with the forum organization, so I'm not sure if this is the correct place for asking these questions. My apologies if I have done it wrong) I'm trying to educate myself about the mechanics of the spam reporting process, and today I have been puzzled by this spam (I have changed the "Delivered-To" part, replacing my real address by "me"): http://oi61.tinypic.com/sgtt1t.jpg My real Spamcop address is of the type "me[at]spamcop.net" and I never use it to send email, because it only serves as recipient of addresses "me[at]mydomain.com" that are forwarded to "me[at]spamcop.net". Looking at the spam headers, I see that it is addressed to "tangent[at]spamcop.net", and that the email system have delivered it to "spamcop-net-me[at]spamcop.net". My question is: None of these addresses (tangent and spamcop-net-me) are mine, so, how is that the spam have end handed to "me[at]spamcop.net"? If someone of you can enlighten me about this small "mystery" I would be grateful to him/her (and I will end the day a bit less ignorant). This is the link to the spam tracking URL: http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z5929781322zc...4b5323548818c5z Thanks and Regards, Javier.-
  4. Hello Don. I have PM'ed you two of these emails. If you need some more, please let me know. The delivery failure notices from Yahoo have more details, as they include part of the "original" message. I'm not an expert, but looking at them I would bet that an spammer have spoofed (or get a foot into) the SpamCop mail server. Regards, Javier.-
  5. Hello, thank you for your reply. I have changed the Spamcop webmail password and have run a full scan (no virus nor spyware detected, however). Today I have received another fifteen or sixteen more of these notifications. As I have seen that other member have posted about this same issue I'm thinking that a sort or header spoofing is behind this.
  6. Hello at all. I am receiving several notifications of 'Delivery Failure' from MAILER-DAEMON[at]c60.cesmail.net about email messages that I have not sent (in fact, the recipients are unknown for me). They are like these: Any hint about the cause of this issue? Javier.-
  7. Thanks, Wazoo. My first intention was to create address books (all private, of course) for 'Family', 'Friends', 'Work', and so on, to keep separated the addresses and make easier to manage and use them. I will check the documentation that you have pointed me to.
  8. Is there a way to create more Address Books? I'm willing to organize my contacts in groups and the default address books -'Contacts' and 'Private Addresses'- are a bit restrictive to my needs (in fact, it don't seem possible to rename them, neither).
  9. Hi, Steven. Thank you for your reply. Yes, you are right: I need to authenticate to send mail thru my ISP' SMTP server. I see. So the results that I have obtained are due to my ISP trusting the 'bona fide' of his users (that is, me, in this case).
  10. It is supposed that mail servers should bounce NDR's to local users only (or so I have been told). So I have been making some checking about my actual ISP behavior regarding this matter, and I have got mixed results that don't fit with the ones expected (by me). I will be grateful if you let me know if -as I think- my ISP have a wrong configuration (or not entirelly desirable), or it is me and my assumptions the ones that are wrong. - The first check I have made is to send a email (with "me[at]myISP.com" in the 'From' field) to an address that I know for sure that it don't exist (let's call it "notexist[at]otherdomain.xyz"), via my ISP mail server. As expected, the otherdomain.xyz mail server sent a 550-error to myISP.com server, and then myISP.com server bounced it to me[at]myISP.com: Until here, all correct (or I think so). - The second check, I sent the same email to notexist[at]otherdomain.xyz via my ISP mail server, but I changed the 'From' field to "me[at]elsewhere.com" (a discardable email got on purpose). I was expecting that my ISP received the 550-error, and after realizing that me[at]elsewhere.com wasn't a local user, it simply discarded/deleted the bounce. Instead of it, my ISP mail server bounced the NDR to me[at]elsewhere.com: Is this behavior correct? (to bounce the 550 to an address -me[at]elsewhere.com- external to the server receiving it -myISP.com-)? Shouldn't instead be deleted the 550-error message, without further bounces?
  11. That was my first idea, but the filters only would act on the emails in the 'Inbox' and 'Held' folders, without deleting the invalid ones that slip under the SpamAssassin radar and reach my "final" email account (a double filtering for invalid addresses would be necessary: in the SC Webmail and in my mailbox). Thus, I thought about deleting them at arrival to SC Webmail as a more "elegant" and cleaner solution. Regarding the server load, certainly I don't know the innards of the system but, deleting the mis-addressed mails at arrival (and before reporting) wouldn't reduce the amount of reports finally parsed & submitted by SC (and thus the server load)? You made a valid point here. Probably it would be necessary to add 'Undisclosed recipients' to the valid "To:" field list.
  12. I have searched the suggestion forum but I have not seen anybody asking for this feature in the SpamCop webmail. I funnel email from several domains to my SpamCop webmail account. Then, after filtering the junk emails, I have it configured to forward the 'legit' ones to an email address provided by my ISP. The facts are that I have no control over the 'catch-all' of some domains and, as result, my SC webmail account receives an humongous amount of crap addressed to non-existent accounts under these domains, making easy to pass unnoticed the false positives (drowned amidst a sea of spam) when reporting the junk. So, my suggestion is to implement in SC Webmail the ability of checking the incoming email against an user-created list of 'authorized' recipients, and filter/delete the incoming emails not addressed to the 'authorized' email addresses contained into this list. It would be sort of disabling the catch-all for the SpamCop Webmail (and would be a complementary feature to the actual 'whitelist').
  13. FWIW, in my personal experience the spam hitting my addresses has increased x7 since March 07. From 300 junk mails in a "bad day", now I'm receiving +2000 daily and counting. Around a 3% of it slips under the SpamAssassin radar and ends in my mailbox and I further "treat" it with MailWasher before download to my system the legit email. To this date I report all junk that SpamCop quarantines in my 'Held' folder (and the further ones catched by MailWasher as well), but if the trend continues to increase I probably will be obliged to just forgot the 'Held' folder and let it be deleted by SC, as my day only have 24h (and I don't expect to hire someone to report the spam for me).
  14. Javier

    Spam sent to Reports Address (Report ID)

    Hum. Is this spam catched by Spamassassin (and so put in the 'Held' folder)? If it is passed directly to the 'Inbox' or forwarded, I could manage it, but if it is held (in between the +2000 junk mails/day in my 'Held' folder), that can be a problem...
  15. Well, in fact I did exactly that.
×