emanmb 0 Posted December 4, 2017 (edited) One particular group of spams I get come from linode. com which SC doesn't report to them but to abuse#linode.com A devnull.spamcop.net. So after a lot of emails such as these coming through and being reported only through SC, I took a look at their site and decided they "looked legit enough" for me to fwd the spam to them directly. Seems it might have been worthwhile. Edited December 4, 2017 by emanmb Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
petzl 0 Posted December 4, 2017 13 hours ago, emanmb said: One particular group of spams I get come from linode. com which SC doesn't report to them but to abuse#linode.com A devnull.spamcop.net. So after a lot of emails such as these coming through and being reported only through SC, I took a look at their site and decided they "looked legit enough" for me to fwd the spam to them directly. Seems it might have been worthwhile. SpamCop has legacy issues where "blackhat" providers were working with spammers. Just because a provider may have come good won't change SpamCop Also applies to locked in spam reporting addresses that maybe decades old I always check with IPNetInfo (WINDOWS DEFENDER GIVES FALSE POSITIVE VIRUS WARNING ON THIS) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
emanmb 0 Posted December 5, 2017 Yes hence my quotation marks. Also SC may know something I don't. In this instance I just got tired of the host not receiving any info about this spammer thus allowing the spammer to operate w/impunity. I figured, I was already getting their spam somewhat regularly why not see if I can stop it. So yes this may not work in any other instance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
