Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
trisha506

No action taken by Spamcop

Recommended Posts

I paid for an account with Spamcop ONLY because I thought that it was a great organization doing something very valuable. To date, the end result on EVERY email I have forwarded is NO REPORT FILED.

When I link to the majority of them, I get a message that "Sorry, this email is too old to file a spam report. You must report spam within 3 days of receipt. (This mail was received on Wed, 7 Apr 2004 01:37:44 -0400)

Nothing to do." Yet those very emails were both RECEIVED and FORWARDED on April 7th!

I forward all of my emails in a totally timely fashion. What am I paying for? I have gotten NO satisfaction from this organization!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The spamcop.net parser goes by the date that your mail server claims it received the spam. This mail server is the one that you receive your mail on either at your company or your internet service provicer (ISP).

Your mail server writes that information on each e-mail before passing it on to you.

If the clock on the mail server you receive the spam from is wrong, it will have the results that you are seeing.

If you can send and e-mail to your self, and then parse it with canceling the report, you can check the time stamps of your mail server. you can then post the resultant headers here, replacing your e-mail address with nobody[at]example.com.

-John

Personal Opinion Only

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on your commentary, one would have to ask to see the headers of one of your spams to see where the problem is. The SpamCop parser gets its "Time received" from the most recent "valid" header line, usually the line placed in the headers by your ISP. In the past, some of these issues turned out to be the ISP in question, for whatever reason, "they" had e-mail travelling across multiple "internal" servers, and e-mail was getting held on one of these servers. So you may have received it today, but it may have been sitting on one of your ISPs servers for a week .... again, providing the headers from one of these spams is the only way anyone here can attempt to find the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got a few spams with wrong dates in the headers, I could study them and get a report changing the dates manually, if the time stamp is automatic, I wondered how and if the spammer had changed the headers somehow...I check my mail often and report it as soon as I get it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I got a few spams with wrong dates in the headers, I could study them and get a report changing the dates manually, if the time stamp is automatic, I wondered how and if the spammer had changed the headers somehow...I check my mail often and report it as soon as I get it...

If you're changing dates and submitting them to get a successful parse, you're setting yourself up to either get fined or banned. Yes, spammers can and do forge header data, but, as stated elsewhere )and by many others, so even if you don't like my answers ..) the "time received" is normally from your ISP's date-time stamp, so if there's an issue there, either your ISP needs to set their system clock or you're suggesting that the spammer has control of your ISP's servers, which is another whole problem situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I copied and pasted this right from Spamcop. I am a total novice at this stuff, whereas you guys know what you are looking for. Just know that I forwarded the email in question on April 7th, the day I received it, and got this response for Spamcop on the same day, April 7th.

SpamCop version 1.3.4 © SpamCop.net, Inc. 1998-2004 All Rights Reserved

spam Header

This page may be saved for future reference:

http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z395985536z8c...9292bec3287271z

Skip to Reports

Return-Path: <mhslbrkm[at]yahoo.com>

Received: from cablep-219-54-61.cablep.bezeqint.net ([62.219.54.61])

by fed1rmmtai07.cox.net

(InterMail vM.6.01.03.01 201-2131-111-101-20040311) with SMTP

id <20040407053744.GBAN3856.fed1rmmtai07.cox.net[at]cablep-219-54-61.cablep.bezeqint.net>;

Wed, 7 Apr 2004 01:37:44 -0400

X-Message-Info: 413BMExwi98147jeb1HfafP1sk19nhCWDwzzXQLjMTcnl9gx

Received: from yahoo.com ([19.62.66.255]) by iea021-g6.yahoo.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(1.8.7750.6502);

Wed, 07 Apr 2004 12:34:12 +0600

Received: from yahoo.com (yahoo.com [203.241.222.247])

by yahoo.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id gb252OXGON3557

for <x>; Wed, 07 Apr 2004 05:37:12 -0100 (EST)

(envelope-from mhslbrkm[at]yahoo.com)

Received: from D1525180100653 (modemcable5.3274-20.hyl.yahoo.com [18.64.84.118])

(authenticated bits=6)

by yahoo.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id OQU47ok343AN87

for <x>; Wed, 07 Apr 2004 02:36:12 -0400 (EST)

(envelope-from mhslbrkm[at]yahoo.com)

Message-ID: <1er2___________________________V782[at]vk732138058538987>

From: "Denver Riggs" <mhslbrkm[at]yahoo.com>

To: <Trisha506>

Subject: conakry vacuous saute eelgrass sequent calfskin dapper malnourished talisman triplett stipulate chip locomote euphemism flail sensuous dacca ban merlin metalwork grown yourselves

Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2004 08:30:12 +0200

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: multipart/alternative;

boundary="--824580825284260656"

View entire message

Parsing header:

Received: from cablep-219-54-61.cablep.bezeqint.net ([62.219.54.61]) by fed1rmmtai07.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.03.01 201-2131-111-101-20040311) with SMTP id <20040407053744.GBAN3856.fed1rmmtai07.cox.net[at]cablep-219-54-61.cablep.bezeqint.net>; Wed, 7 Apr 2004 01:37:44 -0400

62.219.54.61 found

host 62.219.54.61 = cablep-219-54-61.cablep.bezeqint.net (cached)

host cablep-219-54-61.cablep.bezeqint.net (checking ip) = 62.219.54.61

Possible spammer: 62.219.54.61

Received line accepted

Received: from yahoo.com ([19.62.66.255]) by iea021-g6.yahoo.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(1.8.7750.6502); Wed, 07 Apr 2004 12:34:12 +0600

19.62.66.255 found

host 19.62.66.255 (getting name) no name

62.219.54.61 not listed in dnsbl.njabl.org

62.219.54.61 listed in cbl.abuseat.org ( 127.0.0.2 )

Open proxies untrusted as relays

Tracking message source: 62.219.54.61:

Routing details for 62.219.54.61

[refresh/show] Cached whois for 62.219.54.61 : abuse[at]bezeqint.net

Using abuse net on abuse[at]bezeqint.net

abuse net bezeqint.net = abuse[at]bezeqint.net

Using best contacts abuse[at]bezeqint.net

Sorry, this email is too old to file a spam report. You must report spam within 3 days of receipt. This mail was received on Wed, 7 Apr 2004 01:37:44 -0400

Nothing to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This page may be saved for future reference:

http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z395985536z8c...9292bec3287271z

That's old spam now, and there is no way to know what happened then. SpamCop does everything live and in real time.

The next time SpamCop refuses to process fresh spam, send me the tracking URL from the parse (like the one above), and I'll take a look.

service at admin.spamcop.net

- Don -

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, Trisha!

Okay, I copied and pasted this right from Spamcop.  I am a total novice at this stuff, whereas you guys know what you are looking for.  Just know that I forwarded the email in question on April 7th, the day I received it, and got this response for Spamcop on the same day, April 7th.

<snip>

Sorry, this email is too old to file a spam report. You must report spam within 3 days of receipt. This mail was received on Wed, 7 Apr 2004 01:37:44 -0400

Nothing to do.

...One question remains to be asked and answered, I think: when did you follow the instructions in the reply you received on April 7 (something like:

Use links to finish spam reporting (members use cookie-login please!):

http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=<long alpha string>

If it was after April 10 at 1:37:44 EDT, that would explain the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

trisha506

Okay, I copied and pasted this right from Spamcop. I am a total novice at this stuff, whereas you guys know what you are looking for. Just know that I forwarded the email in question on April 7th, the day I received it, and got this response for Spamcop on the same day, April 7th.

Looking through your spam sample, I don't see anything there that could have possibly caused an issue dealing with dates and times. So that does not appear to be the problem. Unfortunately, that then points to Seven T's rsesponse as being the more likely one ... the time frame that appears to have elapsed between the time of your submittal and the time you hit the buttons to try to send the complaints out.

This would suggest that your involved in the "SpamCop is slow" scenario (probably also related to the "Is SpamCop dead" Topics .... There are a number of these "discussion point" here in this Forum thing and also over in the newsgroups. One coversation over the week-end here .. one user saying that a bunch of SpamCop responses just showed up all of a sudden, not having received anything for a number of days ... but another user reporting that reports had been coming all along ... This obviously is not answering the "why is SpamCOp slow" thing, but it appears that this may be why your "Send Complaints" click was answered with the "it's too old" answer ... SpamCop itself didn't send your note out in a timely fashion. Maybe you'd like to join in with your unhappy thoughts in a Topic at http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=939 ... Again, I'm suspecting that this is where the problem is, rather than the concept that you're doing something wrong (unless it is that you aren't checking your e-mail in a timely fashion ... but even at that, some users talk of receiving this feedback response in minutes when things are working, so I am sort of ruling this out)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all very much for your responses. Thank you especially, Wazoo, because I think you've given me the answer. It's not anything that I am doing wrong. I too have forwarded my emails within minutes of receiving them and gotten back the "untimely" message.

I am definitely going to check out the unhappy person discussion.

Not to sound entirely stupid, but I do need to ask a question regarding tehnical aspects of SpamCop. Do I have any responsibility beyond fowarding emails and providing the entire header to Spamcop? Once I provide that information to Spamcop, do they (supposedly) do the rest, or am I supposed to be a participant at some point after I forward the email? The reason I need to ask is because I have been informed that I haven't yet sent any timely emails so I don't know if I have to do anything beyond what I have already done.

Thanks

:)

Edited by trisha506

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
<snip>

Not to sound entirely stupid, but I do need to ask a question regarding tehnical aspects of SpamCop.  Do I have any responsibility beyond fowarding emails and providing the entire header to Spamcop?  Once I provide that information to Spamcop, do they (supposedly) do the rest, or am I supposed to be a participant at some point after I forward the email?  The reason I need to ask is because I have been informed that I haven't yet sent any timely emails so I don't know if I have to do anything beyond what I have already done.

Thanks

:)

...SpamCop sends you back an e-mail with instructions similar to

Use links to finish spam reporting (members use cookie-login please!):

http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=<long alpha string>

You must then follow those instructions (that is, click on the link in the e-mail that includes the long alphanumeric string). A web page will pop up and (unless you are a mole reporter) give you one or more checkboxes with e-mail addresses to which it will report the spam; you must unselect those you believe to be wrong, then click the button to send the reports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do I have any responsibility beyond fowarding emails and providing the entire header to Spamcop?

Techy note: please change "entire header" to read as "providing entire spam" and we'll all be happy <g>

But yes, if the point comes that your "untilely responses" become timely, then you'll be offered the opportunity to agree (or not) with the SpamCop parsing tool's decisions on where the spam complaints should go. This is where you want to make sure you're not reporting yourself, or your own ISP (unless that's a correct decision) ... and perhaps you'll want to make a decision on whtehr sending a "driect" complaint at all to some parties. Maybe should also note that not all of what I said is totally true if you've signed on as a "mole" reporter. Things will look a bit different if this is the case, but still valid is that no report will be made until you "agree" and press that button.

Thank you especially, Wazoo,

You're much welcome ... I think Steve T was actually there, but I just decided to use a lot more words <g>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
<snip>

Thank you especially, Wazoo,

You're much welcome ... I think Steve T was actually there, but I just decided to use a lot more words <g>

...Wazoo -- the "more words" were apparently relevant, since she thanked you, not me, which means that your reply was helpful whereas mine was not. So stop giving credit where it isn't due and being so modest!! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So stop giving credit where it isn't due and being so modest!!

heck no! You hit the obvious first, I just built around it ... as far as being modest, don't recall ever hearing anyone make that suggestion to me before <g> ... besides, I'm still trying to dig my way out of the "get over yourself, you jerk" status<g>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So stop giving credit where it isn't due and being so modest!!

heck no! You hit the obvious first, I just built around it ... as far as being modest, don't recall ever hearing anyone make that suggestion to me before <g> ... besides, I'm still trying to dig my way out of the "get over yourself, you jerk" status<g>

...Hey, there's always a first time! <g> :D

...Do you have emoticons turned off? If so, I'm pleasantly surprised you aren't angry with me for being a jerk, myself! <g> :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oops -

I entirely missed the response from Don. Thank you very much Don. I will do exactly as you suggested.

Btw, the only reason I thanked Wazoo "especially" is because he used enough words to cause me to understand. So I essentially condemn myself here and admit that I am almost entirely technically challenged and admit to understanding very little when it comes to computer jargonese.

Still, I hate spam and have a right to live free from it!

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
<snip>

Btw, the only reason I thanked Wazoo "especially" is because he used enough words to cause me to understand.

<snip>

...Yep, exactly my point -- that what I wrote didn't do the job (tell you enough to help solve the problem) whereas what Wazoo wrote did. <g> :D

So I essentially condemn myself here <snip>

...Wrong, IMHO (in my humble opinion). You aren't (well, shouldn't be) expected to be technically proficient -- that's why the Help forum exists! <smile> :) The bottom line is that you got answers from someone (two people, in fact -- Don and Wazoo) that get you towards where you want to go, and that's good enough for me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well for whatever it's worth, I really appreciate your positive attitude and understanding nature! And as I post this, it seems that the problems have been taken care of and Spamcop is working properly!

YAHOO!!!!!

Thanks Steve

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the problems have been taken care of and Spamcop is working properly!

Wow! It just doesn't get any better than this <g> Thanks for the feedback.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well for whatever it's worth, I really appreciate your positive attitude and understanding nature!  And as I post this, it seems that the problems have been taken care of and Spamcop is working properly!

YAHOO!!!!!

Thanks Steve

:)

...You're very welcome. :)

...Just wish it were working for me! Never received a reply from SpamCop for the last e-mail I sent. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just counted. I forwarded 67 emails to Spamcop between 7:25 last night and 8:23 this morning.

I just counted. Spamcop sent me 17 acknowledgements between 7:52 last night and 3:16 this morning.

Not real good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since Spamcop still owes me 50 acks, I see no reason to forward the stack I have in my inbox.

Does anyone know of any other anti-spam site?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is where you want to make sure you're not reporting yourself, or your own ISP (unless that's a correct decision) ... and perhaps you'll want to make a decision on whtehr sending a "driect" complaint at all to some parties.

A possibly dumb tangent question from another newbie...

My understanding was that the reporting options that are already checked by the SpamCop parser are ones that are nearly guaranteed safe bets, and that the unchecked items are the ones that really require a decision. Thus, as someone not too knowledgable about tracing e-mails, I've always just submitted my reports without checking or unchecking anything. Is this a bad practice?

And -- my newbie-ness is about to really manifest itself here -- please elaborate: by making sure you're not reporting "your own ISP", what exactly do you mean? Does that mean simply making sure it's not sending a report to an "earthlink.com" address if you subscribe with them? Or is there some IP address I need to be looking out for in the "RE:" line above each list of report recipients? (And if so, how does one find out what that is?)

Thanks in advance,

D.C.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×