Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
craigd

unable to get blacklist reports - driving us mad

Recommended Posts

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

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.

41011[/snapback]

Legitimate businesses do not send newsletters to people who did not request them.

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.

41011[/snapback]

You mean to help you listwash.

What part of:

no one should have to unsubscribe to something they did not subscribe to

Are you having a problem with?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

41008[/snapback]

I am not authorized to speak for SpamCop, but I would agree with the statement and it does seem to be supported in varrious places in the SpamCop FAQs but turning away from SpamCop for a minute you may want to look at the following site that basicly says the same thing Principles of Best Practice - Mailing List & Autoresponder Hosting Services: taken from BestPrac.Org (Incorporating Network Security Management and Ethical Email Marketing.)

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

41011[/snapback]

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

The previous was also copied from a prior post.

If the subject title is an indication of the content of the email, then you are correct, that message should never have been reported, but any other emails received would be considered reportable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All Crikey have to do is fix the unsubscribe on their email (although double opt-in is best choice)

They need to send those who wish to unsubscribe HERE

Share this post


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

41013[/snapback]

This is the link for paid subscribers - several thousand people pay $100 per year to get this newsletter, in case you think we're sending junk. They rarely unsubscribe but do have a clear and well advertised mechanism to do so.

The correct link for free subscribers is perfectly well working:

http://www.crikey.com.au/articles/2005/03/007-0001-8942.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All Crikey have to do is fix the unsubscribe on their email (although double opt-in is best choice)

They need to send those who wish to unsubscribe HERE

41018[/snapback]

No, no, no - can't you just imagine for one second we are professionals here?

Every email sent has TWO completely simple and clear ways to unsubscribe in it. In addition the same page you link to is the link where the person subscribed and can unsubscribe any time. There IS a perfectly working unsubscribe process.

Legitimate businesses do not send newsletters to people who did not request them.

Correct, and we DO NOT DO THIS. You find me ONE, just ONE person who did not subscribe and I will send you $US100 of my personal money. Just because it is theoretically possible to happen doesn't mean it has happened.

You mean to help you listwash.

So now you're treating me as a spammer again? I can't win with you, can I? If I offer to remove people that don't want to get the newsletter then I'm a spammer listwashing, couldn't possibly be a reasonable person who is perfectly happy to unsubscribe those who no longer (repeat no longer) wish to receive our emails.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, no, no - can't you just imagine for one second we are professionals here?

Every email sent has TWO completely simple and clear ways to unsubscribe in it. In addition the same page you link to is the link where the person subscribed and can unsubscribe any time. There IS a perfectly working unsubscribe process.

41021[/snapback]

Crikey Auto-Ack did not send me one

you want to see

You are subscribed at the address petzl[at]spamcop.net

Should you wish to no longer receive the Crikey Free Trial please go to http://www.crikey.com.au/subscribe.html and take your email off the list.

If this email is a mystery to you and you did not make a request to join the Crikey Free Trial go to http://www.crikey.com.au/subscribe.html and take your email off the list.

This must be your off day :blink:

Full email here

http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z891891904z8f14fdeb6515a0d1aec77ea7ef1d5403z;action=display

Edited by petzl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crikey Auto-Ack  did not send me one

you want to see

You are subscribed at the address petzl[at]spamcop.net

Should you wish to no longer receive the Crikey Free Trial please go to http://www.crikey.com.au/subscribe.html and take your email off the list.

If this email is a mystery to you and you did not make a request to join the Crikey Free Trial go to http://www.crikey.com.au/subscribe.html and take your email off the list.

This must be your off day :blink:

41023[/snapback]

Hi Petzl, thank you for pointing out this error.

I am very embarrassed and you are correct. The folk at crikey changed their website on us (we don't host this site) and either didn't tell us or we didn't pay attention. Either way, our senior developer is fixing this right now.

This is a good example of how the spamcop service can help. If only the dialog could be more constructive. Also, it took several days for us to realise that posting on the forum was the only way to get a prompt reply to our questions.

[edit] I should mention that I remain convinced that this mistake is NOT the cause of the spam reports which have come from ONE person repeatedly over the last week.[/edit]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can also confirm petzl prior post as I also received the same email and neither link provides for any method to unsubscribe.

Your unsubscribe link is buried under your free trial link. You have to search to find it. The link you posted previously does work, but it is not the link you send with your confirmation email. Both petzl and myself have tested that.

It is no wonder you have been listed.

Edit: one problem with the forum is that replies post while you are still writing your, so this post would seem out of order following your previous reply, so it may be disregarded.

What email address(s) have you used to try to contact SpamCop?

Edited by dbiel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is no wonder you have been listed.

41025[/snapback]

So now that we found one mistake it is now OK that one person can repeatedly black list us, including reporting our email on how to unsubscribe!

Great system!

What email address(s) have you used to try to contact SpamCop?

41025[/snapback]

deputies at admin dot spamcop dot net

We did get replies, but very slow. I'm sure Richard is very overworked and doing his best, which is why the system needs to work better. Within an hour on the forum I had a list of complaints which we had not seen after 4 days of waiting for emails (admittedly including a weekend).

The fact that we're on a different time zone would not help, although for this emergency we are checking email about 18 hours a day.

I don't want to harrass persons who report spam. But it is totally rediculous that we can't remove the complainant from our distribution list and so he/she continues to complain. There must be a way to solve this problem. Unfortunately I am left with the impression that most here do not consider there to BE any problem, the fact that I complain on the forum just makes a good opportunity to evangelise double opt in, rather than indicating any problem. Unfortunately I did find an error we had made, so now I am sure nobody here will pay the slightest bit of attention to our problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So now that we found one mistake it is now OK that one person can repeatedly black list us, including reporting our email on how to unsubscribe!

Great system!

41026[/snapback]

note: no person can not cause a listing. There have been multiple reports.

But the bigger on going problem is the subscription process. Allowing unconfirmed signup make you very vulnerable to getting listed.

When the next mail comes I will check to see if it has a valid unsubscribe address and I will test it at that time and will post the results.

One thing to keep in mind is that so far in this thread you have not received a single official reply. We are just users trying to help other users. Have you tried any of the contacts listed in my signature?

Edit: it seems that I am always at least one post behind.

Your previous post actually answers this post that follows.

Edited by dbiel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
note: no person can not cause a listing.  There have been multiple reports.

41028[/snapback]

Hi Dbiel, Thank you very much for taking the time to help me, I do genuinely appreciate that. I may be wrong but I understand from the spamcop deputy's email that while several complaints had been made, they were all by the same person. It would make a lot of sense to count this as one complaint rather than counting it as many complaints. Especially as we can't find and therefore remove the person who is complaining.

You may be interested to know that 99% of the cost to us of operating our email service is due to spam filters. That is, the cost of paying our staff to deal with complaints from subscribers who do not receive our email due to spam filters of various sorts is about 100 times greater than the total of all other costs of running these servers/mailing lists/email services. This is the 'hidden cost' of spam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your next task is to get an abuse[at] address at present all (and only) abuse reports for 203.31.48.230 are going to abuse[at]connect.com.au which would have the info you require

Set your abuse address by going here

http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/343.html

You may need to contact "connect.com" to fulfill this request

Edited by petzl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your next task is to get an abuse[at] address at present all (and only) abuse reports for 203.31.48.230 are going to abuse[at]connect.com.au which would have the info you require

Set your abuse address by going here

http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/343.html

You may need to contact "connect.com" to fulfill this request

41032[/snapback]

Hi Petzl, Thanks for the suggestion. I have done this, but will this mean black listing notifications from spamcop will go to that address? If so I will be very keen to do it.

At present connect.com.au who own the IP range are supposed to forward any messages regarding my IP address but in practice this hasn't been happening. This goes right back to my initial question beginning this topic, which is how can I get spamcop to contact a working email address with any notifications on my mailserver. I do very much hope that your suggestion will solve this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Petzl, Thanks for the suggestion. I have done this, but will this mean black listing notifications from spamcop will go to that address? If so I will be very keen to do it.

At present connect.com.au who own the IP range are supposed to forward any messages regarding my IP address but in practice this hasn't been happening. This goes right back to my initial question beginning this topic, which is how can I get spamcop to contact a working email address with any notifications on my mailserver. I do very much hope that your suggestion will solve this.

41033[/snapback]

Connect.com.au may be acting in what they see as Australian legal requirements? However if you can register your IP with abuse.net SpamCop will also send a report to that address

See if you can include your abuse[at] address here

http://www.abuse.net/addnew.html

I believe for SpamCop reports of your webspace only, you can request abuse reports here

http://mailsc.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/94.html

This is outside my field as I am only a financial SpamCop member not admin

Spamcop Admin should be able to assist you in getting a copy of IP addresses you administer

Be aware tough that Australian Goverment take anti-spam action serious and if you fall into their category of being a spammer you may find it expensive as well as serve time in prison

http://www.acma.gov.au/ACMAINTER.2097430:STANDARD:pc=PC_2008 Pay to check out this website to be sure

Edited by petzl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.spamcop.net/sc?action=rcache;ip=203.31.48.230

Tracking details

"whois 203.31.48.230[at]whois.apnic.net" (Getting contact from whois.apnic.net mirror)

Display data:

bm231-ap = admin[at]netspeed.com.au

whois.apnic.net 203.31.48.230 = admin[at]netspeed.com.au

whois: 203.31.48.0 - 203.31.48.255 = admin[at]netspeed.com.au

Routing details for 203.31.48.230

Using abuse net on admin[at]netspeed.com.au

abuse net netspeed.com.au = support[at]connect.com.au, postmaster[at]netspeed.com.au, abuse[at]connect.com.au

Using best contacts support[at]connect.com.au postmaster[at]netspeed.com.au abuse[at]connect.com.au

postmaster[at]netspeed.com.au bounces (99 sent : 99 bounces)

Using postmaster#netspeed.com.au[at]devnull.spamcop.net for statistical tracking.

As there is only a single IP address being discussed, I'm doubting that a routing change to the reports will be made ... but that's just my guess.

Due to abuse by spammers in the past, the ISP Control Center report screen is all that's "publically" available these days.

That said, e-mail kicked upstream requesting input here to clear up / explain / amplify the alleged "one person got the IP listed" scenario .... this does not jive with the data provided 'here' at What is the SpamCop Blocking List (SCBL)? and / or net/fom-serve/cache/297.html"]What is on the list? also linked to in the SpamCop FAQ[/b] lnks offered at the top of every page in this Forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Connect.com.au may be acting in what they see as Australian legal requirements? However if you can register your IP with abuse.net SpamCop will also send a report to that address

See if you can include your abuse[at] address here

http://www.abuse.net/addnew.html

I believe for SpamCop reports of your webspace only, you can request abuse reports here

http://mailsc.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/94.html

This is outside my field as I am only a financial SpamCop member not admin

Spamcop Admin should be able to assist you in getting a copy of IP addresses you administer

Be aware tough that Australian Goverment take anti-spam action serious and if you fall into their category of being a spammer you may find it expensive as well as serve time in prison

http://www.acma.gov.au/ACMAINTER.2097430:STANDARD:pc=PC_2008 Pay to check out this website to be sure

41034[/snapback]

Thanks. I have asked spamcop by email several times to direct emails regarding this IP address to us, but have not had any success. I guess this is just "too hard".

I am familiar with Australian legislation and am 100% sure that we comply in every respect. I might add that nowhere in the legislation is double opt-in even mentioned let alone required. Spamcop requirements are MUCH tougher than our legislation, and I do not think the spamcop approach is reasonable!

http://www.spamcop.net/sc?action=rcache;ip=203.31.48.230

Tracking details

"whois 203.31.48.230[at]whois.apnic.net" (Getting contact from whois.apnic.net mirror)

Display data:

bm231-ap = admin[at]netspeed.com.au

whois.apnic.net 203.31.48.230 = admin[at]netspeed.com.au

whois: 203.31.48.0 - 203.31.48.255 = admin[at]netspeed.com.au

Routing details for 203.31.48.230

Using abuse net on admin[at]netspeed.com.au

abuse net netspeed.com.au = support[at]connect.com.au, postmaster[at]netspeed.com.au, abuse[at]connect.com.au

Using best contacts support[at]connect.com.au postmaster[at]netspeed.com.au abuse[at]connect.com.au

postmaster[at]netspeed.com.au bounces (99 sent : 99 bounces)

Using postmaster#netspeed.com.au[at]devnull.spamcop.net for statistical tracking.

As there is only a single IP address being discussed, I'm doubting that a routing change to the reports will be made ... but that's just my guess.

Due to abuse by spammers in the past, the ISP Control Center report screen is all that's "publically" available these days.

That said, e-mail kicked upstream requesting input here to clear up / explain / amplify the alleged "one person got the IP listed" scenario .... this does not jive with the data provided 'here' at What is the SpamCop Blocking List (SCBL)? and / or net/fom-serve/cache/297.html"]What is on the list? also linked to in the SpamCop FAQ[/b] lnks offered at the top of every page in this Forum.

41035[/snapback]

A proper whois on our domain will show valid contact emails. I'm not sure exactly what the report above is showing, certainly not the whois record for our domain.

Yes, I'm not surprised that I won't get anywhere asking to get alerts sent to us, we're only the domain owners after all, we just rent the IP address. Again, 'too hard' I suppose.

Finally, here's what the spamcop representative said:

"While several people have reported mail from your server in the past, the recent reports have all been from a single user. I have written them and am awaiting a response with their explanation of why they are reporting the mail as spam."

I think that qualifies as a single user repeatedly blacklisting us over the past 4-5 days. Of course we have to wait for the complainant to respond to their email (why would they respond immediately?) and in the mean time if the person complains again no doubt we'll be blacklisted for another 24 hours. Can anyone reading this see how awful this appears from my point of view?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks. I have asked spamcop by email several times to direct emails regarding this IP address to us, but have not had any success. I guess this is just "too hard".

I am familiar with Australian legislation and am 100% sure that we comply in every respect. I might add that nowhere in the legislation is double opt-in even mentioned let alone required. Spamcop requirements are MUCH tougher than our legislation, and I do not think the spamcop approach is reasonable!

41037[/snapback]

You would not be the only person requesting this and your credentials I see are so far some what short

From my test of your email I would say you would be hard pressed to get a innocent finding

Double Opt-in may not be legal requirement but would keep you out of jail and or from being fined

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You would not be the only person requesting this and your credentials I see are so far some what short

From my test of your email I would say you would be hard pressed to get a innocent finding

Double Opt-in may not be  legal requirement but would keep you out of jail and or from being fined

41039[/snapback]

Nobody here is suggesting I am a spammer, but still I am treated as some sort of evil incarnate because I dare to suggest that double opt in is not a reasonable requirement.

Whatever, I will stop wasting my time trying to communicate to you people the problems you're causing me and other legitimate senders of email.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

41000[/snapback]

That information (Report History) is available at http://www.spamcop.net/mcgi?action=showhis...id;val=62640177 for any Paid SpamCop Reporter (minimum investment US$2 at http://www.spamcop.net/mcgi?action=paymenu after signing up for a free account at http://www.spamcop.net/anonsignup.shtml).

If you haven't already, please see , please see FAQ Entry: Am I Running Mailing Lists Responsibly?. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That information (Report History) is available at http://www.spamcop.net/mcgi?action=showhis...id;val=62640177 for any Paid SpamCop Reporter (minimum investment US$2 at http://www.spamcop.net/mcgi?action=paymenu after signing up for a free account at http://www.spamcop.net/anonsignup.shtml).

41049[/snapback]

Jeff, I am wondering if your statement is correct or not. The link appears to be to take me to an ISP account screen which opens automatically because of cookies I have in place, or am I mistaken? Will try to test for a different computer a little latter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jeff, I am wondering if your statement is correct or not.  The link appears to be to take me to an ISP account screen which opens automatically because of cookies I have in place, or am I mistaken?  Will try to test for a different computer a little latter.

41051[/snapback]

Sorry if I wasn't clear enough. To access that URL (if it's not accessible already), one would need to:
  • Log out of any ISP Account
  • Log in to a Reporting Account
  • Pay (if necessary)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Dbiel, Thank you very much for taking the time to help me, I do genuinely appreciate that. I may be wrong but I understand from the spamcop deputy's email that while several complaints had been made, they were all by the same person. It would make a lot of sense to count this as one complaint rather than counting it as many complaints. Especially as we can't find and therefore remove the person who is complaining.

41030[/snapback]

I have sent a request to the deputies to clarify this issue. It has always been my understanding (perhaps back to my usenet days) that it required 2 REPORTERS to list an IP address, but the actual FAQ (http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/297.html) states: The SCBL will not list an IP address with only one report filed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am familiar with Australian legislation and am 100% sure that we comply in every respect. I might add that nowhere in the legislation is double opt-in even mentioned let alone required. Spamcop requirements are MUCH tougher than our legislation, and I do not think the spamcop approach is reasonable!

Based on following the links to Australian requirements that are given you are 100% wrong.

http://www.acma.gov.au/ACMAINTER.65646:STA...8662:pc=PC_1968

"Consent: it must be sent with the recipient's consent. They may give express consent, or consent may be inferred from their conduct and 'existing business or other relationships' "

You described your business routine which was to send newsletters to any e-address that is pasted into a web page, no check being made that the recipient owner was consenting or that their consent could be inferred etc.

That check is what "confirmed opt-in" does and which your procedure doesn't.

Even a subscriber's honest error in entering a their own email address will put you in breach of the law because of the omitted confirmation.

If you confirm and keep the evidence then you will be able to prove that the controller of the e-address explictly consented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russel's Admonition: Always assume that there is a measurable chance that the entity you are dealing with is a spammer.

Sharp's Corollary: Spammers attempt to re-define "spamming" as that which they do not do.

Crissman's Corollary: A spammer, when caught, blames his victims.

Spinosa's Corollary: Spammers assume everybody is more stupid than themselves.

Rule #4: The natural course of a spamming business is to go bankrupt.

Next.............

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  

×