Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
CaLy

Lot of mails in my ISP´s email

Recommended Posts

Hello !

I am Carlos Octavio, from Rosario (Argentina) ...

My ISP is Arnet (arnet.com.ar) , i have my email there but i am migrating to another one, because i have problems with that account... And I want to know why it´s that... if it´s me, or if it´s related to my ISP.

Everyday i have a lot of mails (like 100 or more, sometimes 300+) with mailer daemon fail message, something like

The following message to blabla[at]bla.com was undeliverable.

The reason for the problem:

5.3.0 - Other mail system problem 550-'5.7.1 Message rejected as spam by Content Filtering.'

or

This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification

THIS IS A WARNING MESSAGE ONLY.

YOU DO NOT NEED TO RESEND YOUR MESSAGE.

Delivery to the following recipient has been delayed:

blabla[at]blabla.com

Message will be retried for 2 more day(s)

----- Original message -----

...

The fact is i NEVER sent that message/s ...

in headers it says it was my email the sender, but i dont have them in the sent messages ... so:

is it related to my isp opened port 25, or ... what?

Thanks !!

Carlos Octavio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, Carlos,

...Sorry to hear of your problem. My not-too-expert guess would be that either someone else is sending e-mails with your name forged as the "From" or "Reply-to" address or someone has "broken into" your account and is sending them (check your "Outbox" or "Sent Mail" folder to see if you can see these outgoing e-mails there). If the e-mails are in fact not coming from your account, then the problem is compounded by either:

  • the fact that there are e-mail servers mis-configured to initially accept these forged e-mails and only then decide that they are spam and send them back to you, mistakenly thinking that you are the sender, with the rejection message.
  • or your e-mail provider or ISP is refusing to send them and incorrectly sending the rejection message to you instead of to the actual sender.

I would suggest that you refer this whole matter to your e-mail provider, your ISP and/ or whomever is sending the rejection messages to you. If these suspected spams are not coming from your account, the suspected spam should be

  • rejected at "handshake time," not accepted and sent to the "From" or "Reply-to" address, if the e-mail is being rejected by the e-mail provider to which the e-mails are being sent.
  • returned to the actual sender if it is being rejected by your e-mail provider or ISP, not to the "From" or "Reply-to" address.

...If the suspected spam are coming from your account, you may want to change your password to one that is hard to guess: at least eight characters, including at least one lower case alpha character, at least one upper case alpha character, at least one digit and if accepted at least one "special" character (not alphanumeric).

...Buena suerte!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply turetzsr ...

I have downloaded one mail received today...

Can I show you the complete mail with header?

I mean not in here or message, just through a pastebin link or whatever ... and not in public (here), of course...

Also, i remember some time ago i checked in some database to check spam database or something like that... my isp was in the opened ports ISPs, so i am afraid the problem can be because of that.

Thanks and have a nice weekend in advance!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is happening is that SpamCop is blocking all emails being sent from the server your email service is on. SpamCop make no effort to identify the real culprit. The just go ahead an block all the users on a given server. There may be 1 spammer using a server where there are hundreds of legitimate users and rather than help the ISP find and eliminate the problem, they go an block everyone.

The 100's of thousands of legitimate users damaged by SpamCop and other incompetent spam blocking services need to get together and build a class action lawsuit.

Actions like SPamCops would not be tolerated in any other line of business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
<snip>

Can I show you the complete mail with header?

<snip>

...You're welcome to do that but it won't help you. Only your e-mail or internet provider and whoever is rejecting your e-mails can do anything about this problem.

What is happening is that SpamCop is blocking all emails being sent from the server your email service is on.
...Fact: It is not possible for SpamCop to block any e-mail, even if it wanted to do so, as no e-mail passes through its servers.
SpamCop make no effort to identify the real culprit. The just go ahead an block all the users on a given server.
...Fact: SpamCop publishes a blacklist of IP addresses from which spam has been seen to come; it blocks nothing. Other service providers, as the owners of the resources abused by spam, use the SpamCop blacklist in whatever manner they deem fit, some by blocking all e-mail from the IP addresses in the blacklist (contrary, incidentally, to SpamCop's own recommendation).
<snip>

There may be 1 spammer using a server where there are hundreds of legitimate users and rather than help the ISP find and eliminate the problem, they go an block everyone.

...Fact: SpamCop replies to inquiries from verified admins of the IP addresses and provides useful information to them to assist in their attempts to eliminate the spam. They also send notifications on behalf of users who report spam using the SpamCop spam reporting tool to the registered abuse addresses of the IP addresses reported as spam sources except in cases where the admins have requested they not be sent, the messages bounce, the "abuse" address is clearly the spammer or a spammer-friendly admin or other good reason.
The 100's of thousands of legitimate users damaged by SpamCop and other incompetent spam blocking services need to get together and build a class action lawsuit.

<snip>

...See SpamCop Glossary article "Cartoony."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None of this is good enough if innocent people are being damaged by it. Just saying that SpamCop are not doing the blocking is mute. They are providing the information, and that information more incorrect than it is correct. therein lies the incompetence and the irresponsibility.

Look, it's not my fault you don't get this. To me it's obvious and for SpamCop to participate as the source of this useless information makes them culpable.

Like I've said on this site an elsewhere, I HATE spam. but just publishing Blocklists at teh IP level is both incompetent and irresponsible .

See SpamCop Glossary article "Cartoony."

I am not a spammer, not in any way shape or form, and I really resent your suggestion that I am. I own two businesses. A on-line retailer of MCU prototyping equipment, and an enterprise IT infrastructure consulting firm. My business has been damaged by SpamCop!

If I were to bring a lawsuit, it would be on terms associated with business lost due to incorrect (libelous) information being spread. Not from the perspective that I could not get my unsolicited email blast out.

Perhaps you missed my use of the term innocent.

Edited by WCoyote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
<snip>

that information more incorrect than it is correct.

...Evidence? Yes, innocent e-mail is sometimes blocked by possibly overzealous admins using the SpamCop blacklist but that isn't based on any incorrect information provided by SpamCop -- SpamCop is providing exactly what they say they are providing -- a list of IP addresses from which significant spam (relative to total e-mail volume) is reported to be coming and/ or which are sending to SpamCop spam traps.
<snip>

Look, it's not my fault you don't get this. To me it's obvious and for SpamCop to participate as the source of this useless information makes them culpable.

...Back atcha! :) <g> SpamCop has been at this for years and have weathered many such attacks.
<snip>

just publishing Blocklists at teh IP level is both incompetent and irresponsible

...So you say but you offer no alternative than to go after the actual, specific abuser. If that were possible, I'm sure SpamCop would do that (or do nothing at all).
<snip>

I am not a spammer, not in any way shape or form, and I really resent your suggestion that I am.

...Hm, I must have missed that -- who suggested you were a spammer and where? Are you referring to mention in the Glossary entry "often made by spammers?" The fact that you are not a spammer does not mean that you can't use a cartoony threat, it is simply saying that it is something spammers will sometimes use. But I see how it can be taken as such a suggestion and I apologize for not having ready it more carefully before posting it.
<snip>My business has been damaged by SpamCop!
...No, it hasn't, it was damaged by spammers that your service provider is allowing to share the outgoing e-mail server through which your e-mail went and the provider of your customer/ potential customer using the SpamCop blacklist to block your e-mail, contrary to SpamCop's recommendation. Or your customer could have whitelisted you, if their provider's service permits that.
<snip>

If I were to bring a lawsuit, it would be on terms associated with business lost due to incorrect (libelous) information being spread.

<snip>

...No one libeled you. I am not a lawyer (nor do I play one on TV :) <g>) so I do not know whether you have a legal right to communicate with anyone via e-mail; I suspect there is no such legal right, other than possibly between you and other customers of your e-mail provider, because AIUI e-mail is not a guaranteed delivery mechanism (although it only very rarely fails to act like one, fortunately for us users!).

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  

×