Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Bumpkin

But *I* want to report them!

Recommended Posts

When I get an e-mail that states "copy and paste this URL to your browser", it's become difficult to keep my fingers from typing in the "http://www." in front of it!

I know I can't alter the spam, but how do I get these reported without spending a ton of time manually parsing?

:blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...You have me totally confused (maybe it's just me). What is the source of these URLs -- are they return e-mails from your e-mail submissions of spam to SpamCop or are they URLs actually in a spam or ...????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They appear to be URLs in spam that are not recognizable enough by the Parser as URLs, so Bumpkin and others have to parse them manually. It is possible that TPTB can tweak the Parser to recognize them, and emails to deputies[at]spamcop.net should help that process along.

Edited by Jeff G.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...You have me totally confused (maybe it's just me).  What is the source of these URLs -- are they return e-mails from your e-mail submissions of spam to SpamCop or are they URLs actually in a spam or ...????

30660[/snapback]

The e-mails are all spam spam spam.

"To get your lifetime prescription for \/|[at]gr[at] copy and paste this URL into your browser: XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX/viagra4u" (and if not an IP address, it's somewierdcombinationofletters . com/something)

There's no "http://" indicating that there's a url to be found (not sure if that's the trigger in the parser).

I've got an itchy trigger finger :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bumpkin, your trigger finger appears to be too itchy in most of these cases - without 'http://' or 'www.' or '<a href="' to go on, the Parser will have lots of trouble identifying URLs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bumpkin... Parser will have lots of trouble identifying URLs.

30708[/snapback]

So, algorithms anyone? text with dots and slashes...maybe if it finds a .com/etc. but then the spammer could (esp with html mail) load the email with lot's of fake url snippits (the good ol' white text on white in 3pt font trick.) if it's not an actual link... it's kind of tough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, algorithms anyone?  text with dots and slashes...maybe if it finds a .com/etc.  but then the spammer could (esp with html mail) load the email with lot's of fake url snippits (the good ol' white text on white in 3pt font trick.)  if it's not an actual link... it's kind of tough.

30715[/snapback]

I know....I know....

Get microsoft to stop turning every *.*.* set of text into a clickable link ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With friends like Microsoft's "helpful" programmers, who needs enemies? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...You have me totally confused (maybe it's just me).  What is the source of these URLs -- are they return e-mails from your e-mail submissions of spam to SpamCop or are they URLs actually in a spam or ...????
The e-mails are all spam spam spam.

"To get your lifetime prescription for \/|[at]gr[at] copy and paste this URL into your browser: XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX/viagra4u" (and if not an IP address, it's somewierdcombinationofletters . com/something)

There's no "http://" indicating that there's a url to be found (not sure if that's the trigger in the parser).

<snip>

30704[/snapback]

...So your problem is that the SpamCop parser is not recognizing the spamvertized web sites? In that case, I don't see an alternative to manual LARTs. SpamCop's are only advisory, anyway -- it doesn't add spamvertized IP addresses to the blocklist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've noticed many full addresses slip past the parser, like:

www.optin2millions.com

with no text around it. Now it seems odd to me that the parser can miss that, but catch a web address in a string of letters and numbers that are meaningless. (if I come across another, I'll post it here.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First thought, body text and header description need to match ,,, i.e. header says HTML but the URL is plain text ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've noticed many full addresses slip past the parser, like:

www.optin2millions.com 

with no text around it.  Now it seems odd to me that the parser can miss that, but catch a web address in a string of letters and numbers that are meaningless. (if I come across another, I'll post it here.)

30728[/snapback]

Technically, your first example is NOT a link and should never be shown as a link, but Microsoft has decided to present it that way in most of it's applications.

What the parser is finding is (most likely) a legal way to represent a link (per the RFC's). If so, it is constructed correctly and spamcop programming can be made to find it. There are an infinite number of ways to make an improperly formatted link and no simple way to detect all of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is also the bug in which the Parser "sometimes fails to find links that are really there - refreshing usually helps", as I wrote in The Link Analysis Process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's one, gents:

http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z790097217z2d...a1e9d2316ac8eez

AFTER I completed the report, if I hit "parse", it can then find the site, but the initial parsing did not.

30736[/snapback]

Yes, this is the bug Jeff G. mentioned earlier. The parser is finding the link but not reporting it.

I was mistakenly thinking you could see the link in the message but spamcop was not finding it. Sorry for any misdirection Brandon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no prob. So what is the best way to circumvent this? Copy the email in raw form, then paste in the processing box?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no prob.  So what is the best way to circumvent this?  Copy the email in raw form, then paste in the processing box?

30751[/snapback]

That sometimes helps.

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  

×