Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
craigd

unable to get blacklist reports - driving us mad

Recommended Posts

Hi, Spamcop sends notification of spam reports to the owner of the IP address of the mailserver. In my case that is two steps from my email address and in practice one of these two steps is not forwarding the reports. This is incredibly frustrating, why can't spamcop send notifications to the domain email address?

Our reverse dns is valid. A whois check will show two (not one, two) valid email addresses. If the spam reports could be sent to these addresses we would be able to at least determine why our mailserver is being black listed. :(

Or at least if we can have some other method to access the spam reports. There must be some way that we can automatically validate that

One the ONE occassion a spamcop employee responded to our emails we found the report came from a subscriber who had opted in to a genuine opt-in newsletter (I assume they forgot they'd subscribed). Subsequent reports we can't find out about so far. :(

Just to forestall a couple of responses I might get:

# Change IP addresses and go where the owner will reliably forward reports. Not possible for a range of reasons, many of which should be obvious.

# The fault is my mailserver configuration. I seriously doubt it. We have valid reverse dns, SPF records on sending domains, good security, careful logging which would detect any compromise of server, etc, etc.

# The fault is the emails we send which are actually spam. I don't think so, because the few mailing lists we run are all legitimate and well-run opt in news services. A small number of our customers send personal email via the server and some send highly commercially valuable emails such as invoices to their customers. However, if spamcop knows better, unfortunately we have yet to find out several days after we began asking.

# Its not convenient for spamcop to look up whois records or provide any alternative (timely) way for server administrators to find out why their server is black listed. This may be true, but its even more inconvenient for us to have a large number of invoices to genuine customers bounce because someone forgot they subscribed to a newsletter. Spamcop is imposing a substantial commercial cost on us and I don't think it is unreasonable for us to ask that spamcop provide a working method to find out why this has happened and to take action.

# You're only blacklisted for 24 hours, just be a bit patient. Patient? You take the calls from my clients explaining why their important emails are not getting through. You feel free to explain to them that probably they'll get through tomorrow (maybe).

# Spamcop doesn't block emails. Correct, it doesn't. However, in practice a large number of email providers block all email from any IP address listed by spamcop. To say spamcop is not responsible for the failure of this email to get through may be theoretically correct but not practially correct.

# You're a spammer, you must be if you don't like spamcop. OK I acknowledge its not easy to tell the difference between someone who intentionally sends unsolicited email. I would hope the professional manner of our email contacts, that we have clear reverse dns and valid contact details, that our IP address does not change, that we deal with highly reputable companies, that we answer phone calls (not that spamcop would know that), and many other reasons show that we are a legitimate business which is not breaking the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You missed the most important part, and that is the IP address of the mail server is the address that is being affected, not yours or anyone elses email address or domain. The odds are that reports are not being forward to you because they do not relate to you.

Secondly, domain addresses in email are worthless. 99+ percent of all spam uses forged domain names, so sending reports to the domain name is a waste of time.

It would be nice if it were possible to trace mail past the mail server that sent it, but this can not be done by SpamCop (to many forgeries)

We regret that you are adversely affected, but at this time there is no other way of handling it.

It is the responsibility of the mail server to control the mail that is sent through it.

The users of any given mail server are at the mercy of that mail server. If it gets listed as a source of spam, then anyone using it is affected. Is it far? Probably not. But then having to deal with the spam that comes from any given mail server is like wise unfair to those who receive it.

note: there is one point that is unclear about your post.

Do you own and operate your own mailserver? or is it run by the owner of the IP address?

Please post the IP address so we have some idea what you are talking about. With out the IP address and your domain name it is impossible to provide you with any help. The headers from one of you outgoing emails would also help us to provide some possible guidance.

But as it is all we know is that some unkown IP address that you do not own appears on the SpamCop BL and adversly affects mail being sent by your unknown domain.

If the IP address involved is the one being used on a mail server that you control it is possible to have SpamCop send reports directly to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You missed the most important part, and that is the IP address of the mail server is the address that is being affected, not yours or anyone elses email address or domain. The odds are that reports are not being forward to you because they do not relate to you.

Secondly, domain addresses in email are worthless.  99+ percent of all spam uses forged domain names, so sending reports to the domain name is a waste of time.

It would be nice if it were possible to trace mail past the mail server that sent it, but this can not be done by SpamCop (to many forgeries)

We regret that you are adversely affected, but at this time there is no other way of handling it.

It is the responsibility of the mail server to control the mail that is sent through it.

The users of any given mail server are at the mercy of that mail server.  If it gets listed as a source of spam, then anyone using it is affected.  Is it far? Probably not. But then having to deal with the spam that comes from any given mail server is like wise unfair to those who receive it.

40981[/snapback]

Hi, thanks for your quick response.

the IP address is 203.31.48.230 I administer this server and its definitely being black listed and I definitely can't find out why.

OK domain addresses in email are worthless, I understand, but when the domain of the mailserver correctly resolves on a reverse dns then I think the domain would not be worthless. However, you may tell me that this step is often taken by spammers and so the address on the mailservers verified (by reverse dns) domain is not useful. Surely there could be some other mechanism, for me to authenticate myself as the legitimate contact for the blacklisted domain without having to wait for spamcop to reply to my email (which I can understand takes time, especially when I am on a very different time zone, being in Australia).

The final part of your response assumes that spam is being sent from my mailserver. At this stage I do not believe this is the case. I do control as far as is practical the mail sent through my mailserver and attempted to describe the sort of email that is in my previous post. I've been reading your forum further and found people blacklisted who had purchase mailing lists - they should not be surprised, but I am quite confident this does not apply on my mailserver because I have a limited number of trusted customers who know well our rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Or at least if we can have some other method to access the spam reports. There must be some way that we can automatically validate that

40980[/snapback]

You MIGHT be able to create an ISP account and define what ranges of IP's you want reports for. I say might because I have done this, but was already receiving reports because the Class C is registered to my company.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You MIGHT be able to create an ISP account and define what ranges of IP's you want reports for.  I say might because I have done this, but was already receiving reports because the Class C is registered to my company.

40984[/snapback]

Hi Steven, thanks for this suggestion. I have created an ISP account, so far I haven't been able to extract anything more than the same result you get by searching on the IP address. This would seem like a good way to get access to the detailed reports and to register my email as the correct contact for reporting to. However, the low level of validation to get the account (just a valid email address) would suggest to me that I'm probably not going to get the information I need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The cause of listing is that reporters have reported spam. If you are confident that nothing is going out through the mailserver, then it might be that there is a compromised machine. If you look at other logs (like firewall logs), you may find suspicious activity. Also, an insecure form on someone's website is another common problem.

Miss Betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The cause of listing is that reporters have reported spam.  If you are confident that nothing is going out through the mailserver, then it might be that there is a compromised machine.  If you look at other logs (like firewall logs), you may find suspicious activity.  Also, an insecure form on someone's website is another common problem.

Miss Betsy

40986[/snapback]

Hi Miss Betsy, thanks for the suggestions. I cannot rule out the machine being compromised, which is one reason I am so keen to see the specific spam reports. If it turns out the machine is compromised spamcop will certainly get a very big thankyou from me, because none of our monitoring shows anything that would look like a server compromise. Mail volume is within normal range, nothing unusual showing in my logs (security and mail), no unusual ports in action, etc.

We only run in-house developed forms on web pages on this server, and our practices while probably not perfect are pretty tight, so again I am fairly confident that a broken/insecure webform is not the issue. Its a good suggestion, though and I've asked our senior developer to look into this further.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would tend to doubt that you have a compromised machine based on the huge reduction in mail traffic in the last 30 days which has continued into the last 24 hours. Over the last 30 days mail traffic has been reduced by approx 88%

Is is safe to say that your network owner is Australian Capital Region Network

and your domain name is weftweb.net ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would tend to doubt that you have a compromised machine based on the huge reduction in mail traffic in the last 30 days which has continued into the last 24 hours.  Over the last 30 days mail traffic has been reduced by approx 88%

Is is safe to say that your network owner is Australian Capital Region Network 

and your domain name is weftweb.net ?

40990[/snapback]

Thanks for looking into this.

I believe you're correct on the owner of the IP range. We pay an ISP for our IP addresses and they in turn pay for a larger range of addresses. Its basically a wholesale/retail system. This is quite common here in Australia, I don't know how it works elsewhere.

Yes, our domain name is weftweb.net and the server's reverse dns is mail.weftweb.net. You will see two valid contact emails on the whois record for that domain, both of which come to my office although not direct to me.

One reason mail traffic has reduced is that due to our blacklisting woes we have directed some email via another of our servers (don't worry its not an open relay). We thought our problems were over so switched back to mail.weftweb.net and then found we were back on the black list :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

203.31.48.230 - IP hosts 43 Total Domains ...

I do not think it is infected either but I do know someones newsletter is sending email(spam) to people who did not request it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
203.31.48.230 - IP hosts 43 Total Domains ...

I do not think it is infected either but I do know someones newsletter is sending email(spam) to people who did not request it.

40993[/snapback]

If that is the IP address, it is NOT currently listed but:

Report History:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submitted: Monday, March 06, 2006 3:30:19 AM -0500:

9 of 34: Cutting to the Quick in Tassie, Cole inquiry grows, Howard's passage...

1680465384 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: spamcop[at]imaphost.com

1680465383 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: postmaster#netspeed.com.au[at]devnull.spamcop.net

1680465382 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: support[at]connect.com.au

1680465381 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: abuse[at]connect.com.au

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submitted: Friday, March 03, 2006 3:22:18 AM -0500:

How to unsubscribe from Crikey

1677285422 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: spamcop[at]imaphost.com

1677285419 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: postmaster#netspeed.com.au[at]devnull.spamcop.net

1677285411 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: support[at]connect.com.au

1677285401 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: abuse[at]connect.com.au

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submitted: Thursday, March 02, 2006 3:13:13 AM -0500:

{spam 02.9} Head's up on today's Crikey

1676139441 ( http://www.crikey.com.au/articles/2006/02/23-15... ) To: hugo[at]imagineering.net.au

1676139432 ( http://www.crikey.com.au/articles/2006/02/23-15... ) To: matthew[at]imagineering.net.au

1676139428 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: spamcop[at]imaphost.com

1676139426 ( http://subs.fasfind.com/crikey/index.cfm?gid=4&... ) To: postmaster#netspeed.com.au[at]devnull.spamcop.net

1676139425 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: postmaster#netspeed.com.au[at]devnull.spamcop.net

1676139424 ( http://subs.fasfind.com/crikey/index.cfm?gid=4&... ) To: support[at]connect.com.au

1676139423 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: support[at]connect.com.au

1676139421 ( http://subs.fasfind.com/crikey/index.cfm?gid=4&... ) To: abuse[at]connect.com.au

1676139419 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: abuse[at]connect.com.au

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submitted: Thursday, March 02, 2006 3:11:20 AM -0500:

8 of 35: The Howard Decade: the stats, the psephology, the economic myths plu...

1676138408 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: spamcop[at]imaphost.com

1676138404 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: postmaster#netspeed.com.au[at]devnull.spamcop.net

1676138395 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: support[at]connect.com.au

1676138369 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: abuse[at]connect.com.au

1676138363 ( 203.221.207.17 ) To: relays[at]admin.spamcop.net

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submitted: Wednesday, March 01, 2006 5:46:17 PM -0500:

{spam 02.8} Edentiti goes live with Australia Post

1675878811 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: spamcop[at]imaphost.com

1675878793 ( http://www.edentiti.com ) To: postmaster#netspeed.com.au[at]devnull.spamcop.net

1675878791 ( http://m.fasfind.com/edentiti ) To: postmaster#netspeed.com.au[at]devnull.spamcop.net

1675878789 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: postmaster#netspeed.com.au[at]devnull.spamcop.net

1675878786 ( http://www.edentiti.com ) To: support[at]connect.com.au

1675878785 ( http://m.fasfind.com/edentiti ) To: support[at]connect.com.au

1675878784 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: support[at]connect.com.au

1675878782 ( http://www.edentiti.com ) To: abuse[at]connect.com.au

1675878781 ( http://m.fasfind.com/edentiti ) To: abuse[at]connect.com.au

1675878780 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: abuse[at]connect.com.au

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submitted: Wednesday, March 01, 2006 2:45:34 AM -0500:

{spam 02.0} 9 of 34: Preselection sleaze, updated AWB timeline, Howard's bott...

1675154572 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: spamcop[at]imaphost.com

1675154557 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: postmaster#netspeed.com.au[at]devnull.spamcop.net

1675154520 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: support[at]connect.com.au

1675154463 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: abuse[at]connect.com.au

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submitted: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 3:02:21 AM -0500:

{spam 01.7} 8 of 34: Howard's SIEV memory, Flugge hears no evil, recipe of th...

1674030927 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: spamcop[at]imaphost.com

1674030923 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: postmaster#netspeed.com.au[at]devnull.spamcop.net

1674030920 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: support[at]connect.com.au

1674030913 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: abuse[at]connect.com.au

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submitted: Monday, February 27, 2006 2:37:45 AM -0500:

{spam 02.1} 7 of 33: Cossie wedges like a girl, concern over Howard hagiograp...

1672893203 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: spamcop[at]imaphost.com

1672893201 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: postmaster#netspeed.com.au[at]devnull.spamcop.net

1672893144 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: support[at]connect.com.au

1672893118 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: abuse[at]connect.com.au

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submitted: Friday, February 24, 2006 2:48:22 AM -0500:

{spam 02.2} 9 of 34: Justice minister turns a blind eye, Costello joins the M...

1669736479 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: spamcop[at]imaphost.com

1669736478 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: postmaster#netspeed.com.au[at]devnull.spamcop.net

1669736472 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: support[at]connect.com.au

1669736471 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: abuse[at]connect.com.au

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submitted: Friday, February 24, 2006 2:45:59 AM -0500:

{spam 03.2} 9 of 34 (and today's editorial): Justice minister turns a blind e...

1669735328 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: spamcop[at]imaphost.com

1669735326 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: postmaster#netspeed.com.au[at]devnull.spamcop.net

1669735321 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: support[at]connect.com.au

1669735314 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: abuse[at]connect.com.au

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've finally received one spam report from last week - amazingly the email that was reported as spam was an email we sent to all subscribers to a free newsletter (we also have a bunch of paid subscribers to this news service) explaining how to unsubscribe and assuring them that we would gladly unsubscribe anyone who did not wish to continue to receive the newsletter. This email says to just reply to be unsubscribed to make it as simple as possible. It was sent as we thought possibly a previous spam report might have resulted from someone who had difficulty unsubscribing or who thought that we would not unsubscribe them.

So our reward for doing the right thing and taking extra steps to inform our subscribers (who had ALL opted in, there is absolutely no other way to get on that list) is to have our mailserver blocked again! You have no idea at all how frustrated and angry this system makes me.

203.31.48.230 - IP hosts 43 Total Domains ...

I do not think it is infected either but I do know someones newsletter is sending email(spam) to people who did not request it.

40993[/snapback]

This is ABSOLUTELY not correct. Any example you submit I GUARANTEE I can tell you the date and time the person subscribed. And they did subscribe. We NEVER opt people in to a list.

You just assume anyone reported is sending unsolicited email, and are not open at all to the idea that reports might result from mistakes (person forgot they subscribed) or as appears increasingly likely in this case a malicious intent.

If that is the IP address, it is NOT currently listed but:

Report History:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submitted: Monday, March 06, 2006 3:30:19 AM -0500:

9 of 34: Cutting to the Quick in Tassie, Cole inquiry grows, Howard's passage...

1680465384 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: spamcop[at]imaphost.com

1680465383 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: postmaster#netspeed.com.au[at]devnull.spamcop.net

1680465382 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: support[at]connect.com.au

1680465381 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: abuse[at]connect.com.au

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

<snip>

40995[/snapback]

All of these instances are copies of a very legitimate newsletter that my business is subcontracted to send out. I can tell from the subject line it is the free version. As I said above, 100% of subscribers have opted in and have a working unsubscribe. Crikey.com.au is Australia's biggest independent source of news on media and politics, with several thousand paying subscribers. It is published by professionals and they do not spam anyone.

If we could determine the person who made these reports they would be unsubscribed very fast indeed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are they "confirmed" opt in?

No one should have to unsubscribe from something they never subscribed to.

How did you subcontract? You subcontracted someone to use your server? To send your newsletter?

Evidently there are a bunch of reports from people who don't believe they subscribed.

Something is missing here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If that is the IP address, it is NOT currently listed but:

Report History:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submitted: Monday, March 06, 2006 3:30:19 AM -0500:

9 of 34: Cutting to the Quick in Tassie, Cole inquiry grows, Howard's passage...

1680465384 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: spamcop[at]imaphost.com

1680465383 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: postmaster#netspeed.com.au[at]devnull.spamcop.net

1680465382 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: support[at]connect.com.au

1680465381 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: abuse[at]connect.com.au

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submitted: Friday, March 03, 2006 3:22:18 AM -0500:

How to unsubscribe from Crikey

1677285422 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: spamcop[at]imaphost.com

1677285419 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: postmaster#netspeed.com.au[at]devnull.spamcop.net

1677285411 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: support[at]connect.com.au

1677285401 ( 203.31.48.230 ) To: abuse[at]connect.com.au

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

40995[/snapback]

Hi, I'd really, really like to know how you got the list above, because we've been trying for a week and not had anything even remotely as detailed from spamcop. We are very keen to ensure that the person who is complaining is removed from this mailing list but to date we have not had any opportunity to do this.

Something is missing here.

40999[/snapback]

The thing that is "missing here" is an open mind. You just assume that we are spamming, despite all the evidence to the contrary. We have been 100% open and up front and I have stated very clearly that not only are we 100% opt in, but I am willing to provide confirmation details on ANY case you can quote that will confirm this. Yes, let me repeat that, ANY CASE. How can I have this confidence if we are a spammer?

We comply fully with the local anti-spam legislation which is much tougher than US regulations. 100% (not 99.9%, I do mean 100%) of subscribers have opted their own emails in. We send immediately a confirmation email so if someone has opted another person in that person is immediately aware and can unsubscribe.

I mentioned subcontract. My business is subcontracted by the owners of the newsletter to handle the subscriptions, including payments for paid subscribers, and to deliver the newsletter email. The newsletter proprietor creates the content and sends it out using our system. There's nothing suspicious there, much as you would like there to be!

You say "Evidently there are a bunch of reports from people who don't believe they subscribed." What you are missing, and this is the basic flaw with the entire spamcop system, is that people act irrationally. They subscribe, don't ask to unsubscribe and for irrational reasons report spam. People sometimes might maliciously report email as spam. I suspect this might be the case as we were recently told that ALL the reports against our mailserver came from the SAME PERSON. This person is effectively (not necessarily intentionally) costing us thousands of dollars by repeatedly reporting spam having NEVER contacted us, and as I said above having DEFINITELY opted to receive the newsletter in question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With mailing lists, I believe that it is becoming necessary to force all members to "resubscribe" on a regular basis or take of risk of eventually ending up on spam lists.

The simplest way of doing this is to send out a very short email requesting that member resubscribe. Example:

xxxx[at]xxx.com is currently subscribed to ?????. To continue your free subscription my must reply to this email or your name will be removed from our list.

We regret the need to require all member to resubscribe, but due to current spam lists which we tend to get on because some of our members forget that they had subscribed and report our mailings as spam, we are forced to require all members to resubscribe.

Note the above is only an example and suggestion.

Do NOT include it in a current version of your newsletter as such mailing may still be reportable as spam, but if sent by itself, it can not be reported.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We send immediately a confirmation email so if someone has opted another person in that person is immediately aware and can unsubscribe.

41001[/snapback]

Note: color was added to the quote to identify the problem area. This is possibly why your mailing are getting reported. The comfirmation should require the recipeint to reply to confirm the subscription. Unless they reply to the confirmation email, they should NEVER be added to a mailing list. Forcing anyone to unsubscribe becasuse someone else registered using their email address is NOT confirmed opt it. It is a trick used by spammers today to validate email addresses.

From your previous post, I am sure that you are NOT a spammer, but at the same time, based on you last post, you are also NOT running a mailing list in a currently acceptable fashion and could easily be the case of your problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
With mailing lists, I believe that it is becoming necessary to force all members to "resubscribe" on a regular basis or take of risk of eventually ending up on spam lists.

The simplest way of doing this is to send out a very short email requesting that member resubscribe.  Example:

xxxx[at]xxx.com is currently  subscribed to ?????. To continue your free subscription my must reply to this email or your name will be removed from our list.

We regret the need to require all member to resubscribe, but due to current spam lists which we tend to get on because some of our members forget that they had subscribed and report our mailings as spam, we are forced to require all members to resubscribe.

Note the above is only an example and suggestion.

Do NOT include it in a current version of your newsletter as such mailing may still be reportable as spam, but if sent by itself, it can not be reported.

41002[/snapback]

1. The newsletter operator would go out of business if this was required - the spammers would have won. We know through experience that this system, which we call "double opt in" results in very few subscribers. Instead we get a bunch of complaints "why aren't I getting my newsletter I subscribed to". You see this from the point of view of very technically able people but I'm afraid in practice the general public do not find easy that which you would like them to. They do NOT want to double opt in, they want a simple and reliable way to get an interesting and informative newsletter.

2. We did send a message to all subscribers telling them how to unsubscribe and making it clear that all unsubscribe requests would be honoured. This was a separate email as you suggest above. What happened? This email was reported as spam.

3. Our subscribers, when asked, do NOT request a double opt-in system. When we trialled it they complained.

4. Just because YOU think we should have a double opt-in system that means we have to does it? You are holier than us are you?

5. We comply with all laws and regulations, we deal promptly and positively with any complaints, we run our systems in a professional manner. But just one person decides to complain (without contacting us) and without trial, with very limited recourse, with the assumption of "guilt" we have a penalty applied to us. Repeatedly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you would like some additional feed back, please post as sample copy of your confirmed opt it procedures. We would be happy to try to provide suggestions that might help solve your current problem.

It is a real shame that spammers have created these kinds of problems for people like you, but unfortunately it is the same type of problem caused by terrorist who have now forced all travelers to undergo greater travel restrictions. If you have travelled by plane in the last few years you will know what I am talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi, I'd really, really like to know how you got the list above, because we've been trying for a week and not had anything even remotely as detailed from spamcop. We are very keen to ensure that the person who is complaining is removed from this mailing list but to date we have not had any opportunity to do this.

41000[/snapback]

I very much doubt if Crikey is a deliberate spammer

Crikey do not have a confirmed opt-in for their paper which means anyone who has a grudge can just put in an mail address and get their IP blacklisted

You need to learn about "double Opt-in"

This is the ONLY way to add people to a mailing list

Double Opt-In: (sometimes referred to as ‘Confirmed Opt-In’): The Recipient affirmatively requests to add his/her email address to a mailing list. The Recipient receives a confirmation email and the Recipient confirms his/her request by replying or visiting a provided URL.

What you are doing is this which is not good enough in today's world

Opt-In with Verification: The Recipient affirmatively requests to add his/her email address to a mailing list. The Recipient receives a verification email notifying him/her of the subscription and providing clear unsubscribe instructions.

Your Link for Unsubscribing Auto-Ack is wrong as well? You have how to subscribe but not unsubscribe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
100% (not 99.9%, I do mean 100%) of subscribers have opted their own emails in. We send immediately a confirmation email so if someone has opted another person in that person is immediately aware and can unsubscribe.

41001[/snapback]

That person should never have to unsubscribe because they never requested it to begin with. It is spam.

I mentioned subcontract. My business is subcontracted by the owners of the newsletter to handle the subscriptions, including payments for paid subscribers, and to deliver the newsletter email. The newsletter proprietor creates the content and sends it out using our system. There's nothing suspicious there, much as you would like there to be!

41001[/snapback]

I don't care one way or another. You are the one getting blocked. I just pointed out the problem.

You say "Evidently there are a bunch of reports from people who don't believe they subscribed." What you are missing, and this is the basic flaw with the entire spamcop system, is that people act irrationally. They subscribe, don't ask to unsubscribe and for irrational reasons report spam. People sometimes might maliciously report email as spam. I suspect this might be the case as we were recently told that ALL the reports against our mailserver came from the SAME PERSON.

41001[/snapback]

The way you described it above, people can subscribe others and you expect the person who did not subscribe to unsubscribe. Who's irrational?

This person is effectively (not necessarily intentionally) costing us thousands of dollars by repeatedly reporting spam having NEVER contacted us, and as I said above having DEFINITELY opted to receive the newsletter in question.

41001[/snapback]

No, as you said above someone else could have subscribed them.

I suggest you learn what the real meaning of confirmed opt-in really is.

I am not saying you are a spammer, I am saying you should take another look at your subscription process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From your previous post, I am sure that you are NOT a spammer, but at the same time, based on you last post, you are also NOT running a mailing list in a currently acceptable fashion and could easily be the case of your problems.

41003[/snapback]

Hi dbiel, Could you please confirm that you are telling me that spamcop is mandating double opt in otherwise known as 'confirmed opt in' as the only "acceptable fashion" to run a mailing list.

I suggest you learn what the real meaning of confirmed opt-in really is.

I am not saying you are a spammer, I am saying you should take another look at your subscription process.

41007[/snapback]

Anyone with a grudge against us can subscribe, confirm the email address, and report us as spam. So if we had a double opt in system spamcop would STILL be the mediator in enabling this attack against our business.

[edit] This is the problem with a business that is run by unaccountable vigilantes. Just like I might sympathise with the goals of vigilantes hunting for criminals I do not like spam or spammers. However, vigilantism is rightly considered by most societies as incredibly harmful and I think on the internet anti-spam vigilantes are just as harmful.]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2. We did send a message to all subscribers telling them how to unsubscribe and making it clear that all unsubscribe requests would be honoured. This was a separate email as you suggest above. What happened? This email was reported as spam.

41004[/snapback]

I am glad that we have got to the point that we all understand the problem.

Regarding point 2 listed above, I believe that you are slightly in error.

What more likely happens is the the confirmation email is ignored and discarded. Then the emails start coming. At this point they are reported as spam.

The user who receives your confirmation email and did not subscribe has no way of knowing that you are not a spammer. As such they follow the standard practice of NOT replying.

I am sorry that you feel that "double opt it" does not work for you. Unfortunately the result will be that you will continue to appear of various spam lists. SpamCop is one of the easiest to get on to, but it is also the easiest to get off. Some of the other lists that you will eventually find yourself on are much harder if not impossible to get off of.

To your statement "The spammers have won" To an extent I will agree with you, they have won, they have made my life more difficult and they have definitely caused problems for you.

Unfortunately there is no easy fix.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am glad that we have got to the point that we all understand the problem.

Regarding point 2 listed above, I believe that you are slightly in error.

What more likely happens is the the confirmation email is ignored and discarded. Then the emails start coming.  At this point they are reported as spam.

The user who receives your confirmation email and did not subscribe has no way of knowing that you are not a spammer.  As such they follow the standard practice of NOT replying.

No, this is not correct. The confirmation email WAS REPORTED BY spam AND IS ON THE LIST QUOTED ABOVE.

Unfortunately there is no easy fix.

41010[/snapback]

No, I disagree strongly, there IS an easy fix. All spamcop has to do is to enable legitimate businesses such as mine a way to get off your black list in a timely and efficient manner. That is, take proper and reasonable steps to enable us to communicate with you and to get the information which would enable us to take the appropriate action - whether this is fixing a security problem, unsubscribing a person who prefers complaining to spamcop to requesting unsubscription, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is attacking your business. If you are going to run a business then you must run it properly and if you do not use a confirmed opt-in process you cannot be sure the email addresses you receive are actually from the people the addresses belong to. otherwise you are using an opt-out system and it will get you listed in every blocklist on the internet.

If this/these person(s) never requested your newsletter then they have every right to report it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyone with a grudge against us can subscribe, confirm the email address, and report us as spam. So if we had a double opt in system spamcop would STILL be the mediator in enabling this attack against our business.

[edit] This is the problem with a business that is run by unaccountable vigilantes. Just like I might sympathise with the goals of vigilantes hunting for criminals I do not like spam or spammers. However, vigilantism is rightly considered by most societies as incredibly harmful and I think on the internet anti-spam vigilantes are just as harmful.]

41009[/snapback]

Your Link for Unsubscribing Auto-Ack is wrong as well? You have how to subscribe but not unsubscribe

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  

×