Jump to content

lisati

Memberp
  • Content Count

    423
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by lisati


  1. Most of the spam I receive at my hotmail/outlook accounts gets flagged for reporting to report_spam@..... as well.

    There are a couple of options. If you've done the "add fuel to your account" thing you might want to consider looking for the abuse address for the apparent sending server/device, and adding that as a user defined report.


  2. Jumping in relatively late into this discussion, I've had Google block my attempts to submit reports from time to time too. My ISP does it as well. One  workaround I use is to send the reports and submissions from an email account that I'm paying a little extra money for that lets me whitelist recipients. It's not perfect, but I have seen a significant improvement.


  3. Short answer: you do the best you can with the information at your disposal.

    It is possible to develop a sense of which  parts of the information in any given email will be the most useful in figuring out where to send your complaints. Sadly, it's sometimes necessary to stop short of using what would seem intuitive, e.g. doing a deep scan of ALL the received header, flicking off a grumpy response to the alleged sender, etc.


  4. Apologies for the delay in replying.

    As helpful as the "X-Originating-IP" address can be in gathering clues to an email's apparent source, they can be forged.

    What some providers do is an analysis of the content of the email, sometimes the headers only, sometimes the complete email.  Depending on the results of the analysis, the options open to the provider  include (1) rejecting the email outright (works best when done BEFORE the complete email has been accepted for delivery), (2) flag the email as spam (possibly by altering the subject), (3) flicking the mail into a spam or Junk folder, or  (4) accept the email unchallenged.

    Be extremely wary of solutions based on some kind of challenge-response system. Because the sender address can easily be forged, it's very easy to annoy innocent third parties


  5. @Bernhard:

    I'm not sure why your server is blocking based on the mailspike "rep" (reputation) list. I had a look at their web page, and get the impression that it's not a general purpose list suitable for blocking everything from a listed IP address.

    Mailspike's "bl" and "z" lists seem better suited to blocking/rejecting unwanted incoming emails.


  6. What? Did I blink and miss something by not visiting this forum for a few days?

    Anyway, it must be time to consider a hot cuppa in anticipation of a speedy recovery......


  7. 6 hours ago, petzl said:
    Parsing input: 66.85.138.70 No recent reports, no history available. No spam reports made not on any block list?

    Ah, I see what you did there. :D

    To add to what Petzl was saying, plugging in the IP address in a site which does rDNS checks, I see a possible problem, the rDNS comes back with a different domain name which in turns points to a different IP address. That could be what's tripping things up for osas.


  8. Why do you think that your domain is listed on the Spamcop list? Spamcop lists IP address, not domain names.

    If you are referring to the listings on the RFC-CLUELESS listings, you will have to refer to their website.


  9. 3 hours ago, petzl said:

    That is a public list which is available free to many ISP's, many have secret blocklists that are never known by anyone but them..

    True. When I was running my own email server a few years back, I had what amounted to private blacklists, hidden from public view until an incoming email ran foul of the filtering I had in place. I never got round to running a DNSBL/RBL.


  10. Just a thought: if Google, or any other provider for that matter, does something at their end that interferes with Spamcop's ability to correctly identify the source of an email, it's not necessarily Spamcop's fault.

    The team at Spamcop are under no obligation to jump to attention and make changes every time we, the users, encounter something that trips up the parsing and reporting process. They will have their priorities, which might not always coincide with what we'd like to see happen.

    There have been some good suggestions in this and similar discussions. I wish you all well.


  11. Having seen gmail addreses in some of the spam I receive, I like the idea.

    Having said that, I anticipate a challenge to whoever works on making the necessary changes at Spamcop's end - I have yet to discover a reliable method of automatically validating email addresses without the risk annoying or inconveniencing innocent bystanders. I suspect that many of the cautions against autoresponders and challenge/response systems apply to email addresses found in the email body too. Take a look here:  https://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/329.html

×