Jump to content
Borgholio

Details of update to Spamcop 5.0 coming tomorrow?

Recommended Posts

Yes, call me impatient, but I'm excited to find out what changes are coming in Spamcop 5.0.  Anybody have any release notes yet or probably not until tomorrow?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the update happened:

I get:

SpamCop v 4.9.0 © 2019 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. 

and the gmail IPv6 6to4 address is still breaking the parser (although I don't know if they'll ever fix it...)

Edited by RobiBue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this a result of the outage? Feel free to move to the appropriate board if necessary

 

 

Forbidden

You don't have permission to access /sc on this server.

Additionally, a 403 Forbidden error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it might have been, because:

drum roll please....

tadaaaa....

SpamCop v 5.0.0 © 2019 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.
Here is your TRACKING URL - it may be saved for future reference:
https://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z6513281086z5dbadb8092da4e5415ec84737bfedba2z

and the gmail IPv6 6to4 WORKS 🤩

Thank you Cisco! (took a while, but you finally figured it out without compromising the system 😉 )

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/12/2019 at 5:36 PM, Borgholio said:

Yes, call me impatient, but I'm excited to find out what changes are coming in Spamcop 5.0.  Anybody have any release notes yet or probably not until tomorrow?

and six hours after my post:

Drum Roll 🥁

SpamCop v 5.0.0 © 2019 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.

and better:

Gmail's fess-up with IPv6 6to4 WORKS!!!! 🤩

no release notes (yet) but at least some good news !!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Works great now! No more removing this:  Received: by 2002:a0c:ad25:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id u34csp810943qvc; Sat, 12 Jan 2019 05:34:56 -0800 (PST)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Borgholio

I think I've found/struck same issue/s 

[http://forum.spamcop.net/topic/30224-something-wrong-with-outlook-reporting/?page=2&tab=comments#comment-129011], hoping the SCF experts/experienced team members will clarify.... It's certainly interesting having [SC distribution] choices, I'd just like to know which parsing method to choose for the most accurate report... 

Tracking your post in case the answers appear:)and hoping, SCAdmin will publish a V5 "features" guide when they recover from the update-long-haul:)

 

Edited by ANGEL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/14/2019 at 6:58 PM, RobiBue said:

it might have been, because:

drum roll please....

tadaaaa....


SpamCop v 5.0.0 © 2019 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.
Here is your TRACKING URL - it may be saved for future reference:
https://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z6513281086z5dbadb8092da4e5415ec84737bfedba2z

and the gmail IPv6 6to4 WORKS 🤩

Thank you Cisco! (took a while, but you finally figured it out without compromising the system 😉 )

 

What about Microsoft IPv6 addresses it's the same problem. Well almost it parses fine except every spamreport goes to Microsoft which it shouldn't.

Edited by klappa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, klappa said:

What about Microsoft IPv6 addresses it's the same problem. Well almost it parses fine except every spamreport goes to Microsoft which it shouldn't.

I was hoping too the IPv6 issue was addressed with this 5.0 update.  I hardly get spam on Gmail, but Hotmail is another story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, nhraj700 said:

I was hoping too the IPv6 issue was addressed with this 5.0 update.  I hardly get spam on Gmail, but Hotmail is another story.

Really using either Gmail or Microsoft is bad since they collect everything. Well hope they do fix the ipv6 issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nhraj700klappa

re pre SCv5: Microsoft, specifically, and possibly Gmail:  a SC-Admin assisted me [understanding] the apparent "false" parsing of Hotmail headers by advising:

quote

"With Hotmail: the spam may have originated with Hotmail, likely not.

A couple of years ago Hotmail had to give up two /16 networks they were  using (33,554,432 IP addresses) as they were not assigned to them.  Microsoft had to quickly reconfigure their network and used IPv6 to do so.

Unfortunately when doing so, they did not do it carefully and make sure they had full name resolution through out the network, where the forward and reverse dns on each server matches.  This means we (SC)  can't trust their headers and will often take them as the source of the spam.

All is not lost though, as Hotmail's parsing engines when they receive the report does pass through the report to the right party.  It also helps Hotmail block new spam from that source.

Microsoft is working on resolving the issue, but it is a couple of hundred thousand servers.  They have told us though the fix is measured in years, not weeks or months."

unquote

Not sure if this info was shared with me in confidence & if, by posting here I've breached confidentiality, if so, SC-Admin who sent know's who I am & (in anticipation) I submit my🙇🏽‍♂️grovelling🙇🏽‍♂️ apology😔

Now we have SCv5, still waiting for considered advice/guidance (from SCFA/experts/members) as to whether or not (to work with getting the most accurate reports from SCv5), we need to parse the ENTIRE source data or still remove (from source data) the 1st [received] line?

Confusion due to:

submitting full source data produces one set of distribution "send to" report recipients🤔

submitting partial source data produces a DIFFERENT set of distribution "send to" report recipients🤔

Comments welcome.

Cheers.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I have noticed is better whois parsing.

https://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z6506971100z5bbf5782126fab6d9454281867af1419z

Hopefully, no more attempts to use search-apnic-not-arin@apnic.net as an abuse address.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, gnarlymarley said:

One thing I have noticed is better whois parsing.

https://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z6506971100z5bbf5782126fab6d9454281867af1419z 

Hopefully, no more attempts to use search-apnic-not-arin@apnic.net as an abuse address.

:( unfortunately nothing to do with V5 :(

https://www.spamcop.net/sc?action=showroute;ip=45.112.20.164;typecodes=16

Quote

Route added without comment

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/15/2019 at 3:16 PM, klappa said:

What about Microsoft IPv6 addresses it's the same problem. Well almost it parses fine except every spamreport goes to Microsoft which it shouldn't.

unfortunately M$'s IPv6 problem is different than Google's and wholly in M$'s court to fix it.

See my reply here:

 

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

×