lisati

Memberp
  • Content count

    366
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by lisati

  1. You probably have an ISP/Provider account on the spamcop reporting site, possibly (but not necessarily) with the email address that's receiving the reports as login i.d.
  2. As far as I know, listings are normally up to 24 hours at a time. If https://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml doesn't show any information that is useful to you, other pages, such as http://multirbl.valli.org/ might provide some extra clues as to what is happening.
  3. The pictured phone wouldn't do me much good. For some obscure reason that's buried in the mists of history, rotary dial phones here in New Zealand ended up with the digits 1-9 backwards compared to the rest of the world.
  4. If your provider changes some of its "behind the scenes" stuff, it will be a good idea to log in to your spamcop reporting account, click on the "mailhosts" menu tab, scroll down the page, click on the "add new hosts" link, follow the instructions, and, hey, presto, things should be sweet.
  5. Unless you're prepared to have a deluge of spam, or you are willing to spend time and energy having some fun with them, don't respond to spammers. Use services such as SpamCop to report spam. It might seem like you're not getting any useful response from providers, but I have occasionally had feedback to indicate that action has been taken. If you or your ISP are able to, use of blacklists and blocking lists such as the SCBL can be a big help stopping spam in its tracks. Reporting the spam you receive to Spamcop will help them build and maintain their list.
  6. My understanding is that the SCBL is more concerned with IP addresses used to deliver the spam than the sites linked to in the body of the email. Reports that get sent to the admin of the websites and their providers are like a bonus.
  7. You don't have to pay for Ubuntu either. I've never had to pay a cent for it in the ten years I've been using it. Purchasing stuff from Canonical is optional, as is making a donation when downloading.
  8. There are spam traps and there are spam traps, it can depend on how they're set up. Some are email addresses hidden on websites where only web crawlers and nosey people who view the page source would find them. Others, of a different kind of sneaky nature, are based on real email addresses that were once active and legitimate recipients of email but have been disabled or fallen into disuse - these will catch you out if you don't look after your mailing list carefully.
  9. Actually, Ubuntu is based on Debian. I regularly use Ubuntu, and did see some concern expressed a year or two back about what was being tracked, but the discussions fizzled out after the Ubuntu One file sharing service was shut down.
  10. True, I had thought of SFS, but have no admin/mod experience of the Invision software used here that would be of help automating the process.
  11. There seems to have been a flurry of spammy posts here in recent months. It's a shame that forum posts don't count towards building Spamcop's database.
  12. If they're legit (I doubt it) there's something seriously wrong with their mailout system.
  13. I don't have any direct experience with SendGrid, but suspect that it might not be your fault. The larger the provider, the bigger the chances of innocent victims being adversely affected by the bad behaviour of a small number of other users of their system. As I type, none of the IP addresses mentioned are currently listed in bl.spamcop.net, One possibility is that they were listed when delivery of the message was attempted and have subsequently been delisted. Another possibility is that the admin of the recipient's server is lazy and has configured their server with a generic message that erroneously mentions Spamcop. It might be worth some time checking the links mentioned in the NDRs (non-delivery reports). The link provided for genuine listings at Spamcop gives some advice on what to check for. In situations where the IP address isn't actually listed, you might want to use an online tool that checks multiple blacklists. This can sometimes provide clues as to what is happening and why.
  14. The filtering used by ISPs can be a little tricky to navigate at times. I've had a couple of weird discussions with mine over the years.
  15. Here's a tracking link: https://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z6401611819zadaa8e29814c0564d802a27b7d9c499bz For some reason, the parser is telling me, "Possible forgery. Supposed receiving system not associated with any of your mailhosts" for IP address 77.238.178.202 As near as I can make out, and unless I'm missing something, it's a genuine Yahoo server, but not one I'd normally see. What does seem odd, however, is that there's no sign of the To: or CC: headers appearing in the message source, as forwarded from one of my Outlook.com email addresses, but I wouldn't expect that to affect the parsing of the Received: headers.
  16. I was getting several qq.com spams every day for a while a few weeks back. I was wondering where they disappeared to. Sadly my ISP didn't accept qq.com as a valid domain to add to its user-defined blacklist settings, but I did manage to report most of them.
  17. The system used by spamcop works best if the original recipient of the unwanted mail submits the spam. An email from a colleague wouldn't normally be classed as spam, even if it's a copy of an unwanted email they've received.
  18. I normally read my gmail account using Thunderbird, and find the Habul plugin helpful. Habul has options for sending to several spam reporting agencies, including Spamcop, in the "correct" format.
  19. I read the answers from Gmail, and felt your pain. I had a very similar discussion, about 6 years ago, with my email provider, and with similar results.
  20. Having successfully used Spamcop to report unwanted emails for several years, and having tried the Copy/Paste method of reporting spam from Gmail, I don't think there's anything wrong with Spamcop. The problem has already been identified as Spamcop not seeing everything it needs to properly analyze the email, namely that the body of the email is missing. When you are viewing the email via webmail, do the emails you are reporting actually have any content?
  21. Odd....... I just did some tests from one of my gmail accounts, both "Copy to clipboard" and "Download original message" seem to be including everything needed by the parser. Having said that, I have occasionally seen emails come in which trip up the parser due to seemingly missing a useful body. If you're reporting such an email, A somewhat less than ideal workaround is to paste the message into the form, add a blank line at the bottom, and add on another line saying something like "[body missing from source]". I don't recommend doing this for ALL emails being reported, but only those where the body seems to be missing from the message source.
  22. Haven't had an issue here for a while.
  23. You need to copy the COMPLETE email, body and all, into the submission form, otherwise the SpamCop parser is likely to complain. By the way, what's with the blank quotes that cluttering up your post? It makes me wonder if you're yanking our chains.
  24. Do you use the "forward as attachment" (or equivalent) option of your email software/webmail?
  25. The point of registering "mailhosts" on your spamcop reporting account is to help Spamcop distinguish between your email provider and the other providers which may (or may not) be the true source of unwanted email. There's very little point in reports being sent your provider, or adding their details to the "spam source database" when their only role was to deliver it to your inbox or junk folder. As I understand it, the role Spamcop plays in the mix is to try to identify the true source of unwanted email, and build a database of known spam sources. They make this available via the Spamcop Blocing list. Any reports it sends to providers is a bonus, and any problems that fixed as a result is a double bonus. It is freely available for email providers to use as part of their spam filtering processes. The "report spam" button that some providers have as part of their webmail service is usually more limited in its scope, and usually only helps that particular provider tune its spam filters.