Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Noddy

Whole IP address has been blocked

Recommended Posts

I see that Spamcop has blocked an entire IP address that happens to be a proxy server that just about every customer of this particular ISP has to connect to.

It means that Companies I do business with can't receive my emails.

http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?action=blcheck&ip=203.81.162.12 is the link provided in the email I got sent back to me.

I have contacted my ISP but to the best of my knowledge they have done nothing about it. If it wasn't for the fact that I desperately need to send a few emails I wouldn't be posting here.

As far as I can make out from the link above Spamcop has blacklisted 1,000's of users because of some spam trap they have set. Has any spam actually been sent? Not that I really care, I just want my email delisted, I do not want to be included in a list with 100's of others who can't be bothered to run anti-virus software or update their PC's against security flaws.

For 3 days now my messages are getting returned.

Which machines from this IP address are responsible for this spam? I want to email the ISP and get them to stop this. If you won't give it to me, please email it to them:- helpdesk[at]bagan.net.mm and tell them that you have blacklisted them, at least let them sort the problem out!

For the love of God please sort this mess out!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see that Spamcop has blocked an entire IP address that happens to be a proxy server that just about every customer of this particular ISP has to connect to.

It means that Companies I do business with can't receive my emails.

http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?action=blcheck&ip=203.81.162.12 is the link provided in the email I got sent back to me.

I have contacted my ISP but to the best of my knowledge they have done nothing about it. If it wasn't for the fact that I desperately need to send a few emails I wouldn't be posting here.

As far as I can make out from the link above Spamcop has blacklisted 1,000's of users because of some spam trap they have set. Has any spam actually been sent? Not that I really care, I just want my email delisted, I do not want to be included in a list with 100's of others who can't be bothered to run anti-virus software or update their PC's against security flaws.

For 3 days now my messages are getting returned.

Which machines from this IP address are responsible for this spam? I want to email the ISP and get them to stop this. If you won't give it to me, please email it to them:- helpdesk[at]bagan.net.mm and tell them that you have blacklisted them, at least let them sort the problem out!

For the love of God please sort this mess out!

Welcome to the forum. Thank you for providing the rejection message and for doing some research before posting - that is always appreciated.

First off, SpamCop blocks ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Can not, never has and never will.

Second, you can still send as much email as you like. SOME recipients will choose not to receive it while your ISP's outgoing server is listed. Their server, their rules: but note that SpamCop does not recommend using its list to reject mail. You could contact (using a throw-away Yahoo, Hotmail or Gmail address) the ISP of your client who is doing the blocking and ask for your email address to be white-listed.

Third, a 'whole IP addrress' is the only only non-forgeable thing in the email headers so that's what SpamCop lists: IPs that are currently sending spam. The IP you use is set to delist in 7 hours.

In the meantime you can always use Yahoo/Gmail/Hotmail to get your messages through.

You should contact your ISP and ask them why they are allowing their servers to send unsolicited mail and thus denying you the service that you are paying for.

EDIT: you might also ask them to account for a doubling of traffic through that server, which usually indicates a hi-jacked IP.

Edited by Derek T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
First off, SpamCop blocks ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Can not, never has and never will.

Derek, appreciate the reply but my "non-tech" head is having a few problems getting around this! :blush:

The emails that I had in response indicate that Spamcop was the reason they were blocked, I have pasted below one of them (I have edited out actual email addresses for privacy reasons):-

Hi. This is the qmail-send program at mxout.bagan.net.mm.

I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses. This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.

<xxxx[at]xxxxxxx.com>:

216.157.145.29 does not like recipient.

Remote host said: 451 Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?203.81.162.12

Giving up on 216.157.145.29.

I'm not going to try again; this message has been in the queue too long.

--- Below this line is a copy of the message.

Return-Path: <xxxxxx[at]xxxxxx.net>

Received: (qmail 49211 invoked from network); 20 May 2006 10:05:03 -0000

Received: from send.bagan.net.mm (HELO GHT-POP3) (203.81.71.100)

by mxout.bagan.net.mm with SMTP; 20 May 2006 10:05:03 -0000

Received: from "mymachinename" ([192.168.5.28])

by GHT-POP3 (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k4K6rs8m026964

for <xxxxx[at]xxxxx.com>; Sat, 20 May 2006 13:24:00 +0630

Reply-To: <xxxxx[at]xxxxx.net>

From: <xxxxx[at]xxxxxx.net>

To: "Name of person I'm sending to" <xxxx[at]xxxxx.com>

Subject: RE: Glycerine Recovery

Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 16:37:56 +0630

Organization: xxxxxxxxxxx

MIME-Version: 1.0

Message-ID: <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAAkFHvJ+1Dq0W/SFRYiMjKNsKAAAAQAAAAVGlqRM9HGEGab2yvgPMVeAEAAAAA[at]xxxxxx.net>

X-Priority: 3 (Normal)

X-MSMail-Priority: Normal

X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626

Content-Type: multipart/signed;

protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature";

micalg=SHA1;

boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000B_01C67C2B.BEFBD190"

In-Reply-To: <005101c67bef$bd868df0$010aa8c0[at]mmnt>

X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869

Importance: Normal

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

Second, you can still send as much email as you like. SOME recipients will choose not to receive it while your ISP's outgoing server is listed. Their server, their rules: but note that SpamCop does not recommend using its list to reject mail. You could contact (using a throw-away Yahoo, Hotmail or Gmail address) the ISP of your client who is doing the blocking and ask for your email address to be white-listed.

Third, a 'whole IP addrress' is the only only non-forgeable thing in the email headers so that's what SpamCop lists: IPs that are currently sending spam. The IP you use is set to delist in 7 hours.

In the meantime you can always use Yahoo/Gmail/Hotmail to get your messages through.

You should contact your ISP and ask them why they are allowing their servers to send unsolicited mail and thus denying you the service that you are paying for.

Unfortunately all online "web based" email is banned here. The Censor likes to read everything if you catch my drift!

I would dearly love to contact my ISP (in fact I already have) and get them to do something, but I know damned well that unless I give them the details of the problem my email to them will just get deleted, you know what these tech people are like, unless you send them an email in gobbledegook they just ignore you!

Question: If Spamcop has detected spam email sent to a "spam trap" is this a good enough reason for them to ban an entire IP address? Why don't they just ban the individual email address?

I'm confused as to why you would write "You could contact (using a throw-away Yahoo, Hotmail or Gmail address) the ISP of your client who is doing the blocking and ask for your email address to be white-listed." Why don't spamcop just blacklist the offending email address(es), why the entire IP address of an ISP?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rejection message says it all. It is the recipient that is doing the blocking because the IP is listed by SpamCop.

Email addresses are too easily and too often forged. The 'sender' field in every spam is forged. The only non-forgeable data in the heaers is the IP address, so that's what SpamCop lists.

Blaclisting is done by IP, whitelisting by email address: thatt's the way it is, sorry but spammers have spoiled for everyone. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The rejection message says it all. It is the recipient that is doing the blocking because the IP is listed by SpamCop.

Email addresses are too easily and too often forged. The 'sender' field in every spam is forged. The only non-forgeable data in the heaers is the IP address, so that's what SpamCop lists.

Blaclisting is done by IP, whitelisting by email address: thatt's the way it is, sorry but spammers have spoiled for everyone. :(

So that's it? I am now totally buggered because someone else has sent spam?

How much spam has actually been sent from this IP address and how can I find out who it is? Presumably there is no way of finding out who is responsible as the information is so easily forged?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The spamcop that is referred to in the message is the spamcop blocklist. It is one of many blocklists used by server admins to prevent spam from entering their systems or to tag it as spam so that it can be directed to a special spam folder (the main difference between blocking it or tagging it is that when it is blocked you know that your message was not received. If your message was tagged, it all depends on how carefully the recipient screens his spam for legitimate email whether it simply gets deleted with your or the recipient's knowledge that it is legitimate.)

The blocklists can only tell the IP address where an email comes from. Ideally when the server admin of that IP address gets the spamcop report, s/he then cancels the offending email address. Unfortunately, some server admins are either lazy, incompetent, or irresponsible and allow the spam to continue unchecked.

After the spamcop report is sent, the IP address is added to the spamcop blocklist according to a complicated algorithym. That blocklist is published for those server admins who want to use it. There are hundreds of blocklists plus private ones. Spamcop is one of the more aggressive, but on the other hand it is automatic so that once the spam stops, the IP address is no longer listed. Other blocklists require various requests.

The fact that the email went to a spam trap (which is an email address that has never been used to send or receive email and can only be 'found' by a spammer trick to get email addresses) probably means that someone has a computer that has been infected by a trojan and the spammer is sending email unbeknownst to the computer owner or that the ISP is behind the times and is still using after acceptance undelivery notices. Most ISPs are careful about actually giving an email address to a spammer these days.

Since I am also non-technically fluent, so I appreciate your confusion. However, it is not hard to understand the basics of how email works and why your email was blocked. If you have further questions, just ask.

Miss Betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So that's it? I am now totally buggered because someone else has sent spam?

How much spam has actually been sent from this IP address and how can I find out who it is? Presumably there is no way of finding out who is responsible as the information is so easily forged?

You, as an end-user, can not ask what hit the spamtrap. The Admin at your ISP can email deputies[at]spamcop.net and ask for further details. Because Spamtraps are secret addresses that have NEVER sent mail and therefore can never has solicited any, their identity has to be potected. To anwer your question, the amount of spam is compared with the total traffic before listing (this is all automated). Spamtrap hits are 'weighted' because they should NEVER receive mail.

Listing due to (only) spamtrap hits often indicates misdirected bounces, q.v. in the FAQ, and can be easily avoided by stopping all post-facto 'bounces' (over-quota, no-such-user, out-of-office etc.). Again this is something only your ISP can do.

So basically, yes. if you can't use a free email provider (not necessarily by web-mail) and you can't change ISP then for the next seven hours you are 'buggered' in sending email to ISPs who reject on the basis of a block-list (which SpmCop does NOT recommend!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Betsy,

This begs the obvious question:-

Ok, so you decide to block an entire IP address, where do I submit my email address so that when you distribute your non-discriminating list I can ensure I am not on it or exempted (i.e. whitelisted)?

You, as an end-user, can not ask what hit the spamtrap. The Admin at your ISP can email deputies[at]spamcop.net and ask for further details.

Can you email these details to karl[at]bagan.net.mm and tell them that they have a problem then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This begs the obvious question:-

Ok, so you decide to block an entire IP address, where do I submit my email address so that when you distribute your non-discriminating list I can ensure I am not on it or exempted (i.e. whitelisted)?

Can you email these details to helpdesk[at]bagan.net.mm and tell them that they have a problem then?

'We' block nothing, this is a peer-to-peer help forum. SpamCop blocks nothing, it merely lists spammy IPs, what people do with that info is up to them. No we can not email the info to your ISP, we are not their customers: you are!

EDIT; Oh and nobody decides anything - it's all automated, spam comes from IP, IP is automatically listed. spam stops coming from IP, IP is automatically de-listed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you don't send them a list that tells them to block an entire IP address then?

Whether they should or shouldn't use the list to block seems to be irrelevant. If you send them a list which effectively blocks a whole group of people because one of them is sending spam (or "out of office" replies!!!), shouldn't you also allow individuals who don't spam the opportunity to have themselves attached to that list as "legitimate"?

If I'm understanding Spamcop's product well enough, unlike my anti-spam software that requires verification before an email gets through (and still allows me to block them even if they do verify their address), Spamcop just blocks huge chunks of users indiscriminately?

Edited by Noddy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you don't send them a list that tells them to block an entire IP address then?

Whether they should or shouldn't use the list to block seems to be irrelevant. If you send them a list which effectively blocks a whole group of people because one of them is sending spam (or "out of office" replies!!!), shouldn't you also allow individuals who don't spam the opportunity to have themselves attached to that list as "legitimate"?

If I'm understanding Spamcop's product well enough, unlike my anti-spam software that requires verification before an email gets through (and still allows me to block them even if they do verify their address), Spamcop just blocks huge chunks of users indiscrimately?

Nobody sends anybody a list, SpamCop makes the list available (publicly) to admins (at no charge). I don't think you ARE understanding SpamCop's 'product' correctly.

Your 'anti-spam software' sounds like challenge-response' (CR) which in itself is abusive and part of the problem. See 'challenge-response' and why it such a BAD idea in the FAQ. Actually, half an hour spent reading the FAQ would answer most, if not all, of your questions. If you then have further questions 'we' would be happy to answer them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nobody sends anybody a list, SpamCop makes the list available (publicly) to admins (at no charge). I don't think you ARE understanding SpamCop's 'product' correctly.

I'm trying to! I need to understand it so I can phone the companies up that I deal with and tell them to do something about it. I wondering if I shouldn't just tell them to scrap Spamcop full stop at the moment!

But here I am trying to sort out Spamcop's mess and I'm being told that I can't even get my email address whitelisted so YOUR customers get the email they are expecting. You (Spamcop) do maintain these lists right? You do surely appreciate that you have a vested interest in making sure they are accurate right?

Your 'anti-spam software' sounds like challenge-response' (CR) which in itself is abusive and part of the problem. See 'challenge-response' and why it such a BAD idea in the FAQ. Actually, half an hour spent reading the FAQ would answer most, if not all, of your questions. If you then have further questions 'we' would be happy to answer them.

You've gotta laugh at this email that this website sent to me then:-

"Noddy,

This email has been sent from http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php.

You have received this email because this email address

was used during registration for our forums.

If you did not register at our forums, please disregard this email. You do not need to unsubscribe or take any further action.

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

Activation Instructions

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

Thank you for registering.

We require that you "validate" your registration to ensure that the email address you entered was correct. This protects against unwanted spam and malicious abuse.

To activate your account, simply click on the following link"

If it didn't work Derek, you guys wouldn't use it now, would you? :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What you want to know is what to tell your ISP is causing the spamcop listing.

Since the spam was sent only to spam traps, no one but the deputies know what is causing the problem exactly. The reason for this is that when the information was publically known, the spammers used it to evade being on the blocklist.

The most common reasons for being on the spamcop blocklist due to spam trap hits only is that the ISP is allowing Out of Office replies or is accepting email and then sending an email to the forged return path as undeliverable.

What you need to tell your ISP is that he is on the spamcop blocklist because of spam trap hits and that he needs to contact spamcop (you can give him the rejection message which has a link to the spamcop blocklist) to correct the problem and give you reliable email.

While you are communicating with your ISP, you can open a hotmail account and use it temporarily to contact your customers via email. I don't know who your 'Censor' is that prevents you from using web email, but if you are trying to do business on the internet, I would disable that. If you can't disable that, then you do have a problem, but it is not connected with spamcop.

The reason that email addresses cannot be whitelisted by the spamcop blocklist (aside from philosophical reasons) is that only the ISP knows what email addresses are on his server and only he can contact tell which one is the one causing the listing from his logs. The ISP using spamcop to block the email could whitelist it, but usually won't because it isn't his problem and it is not as easy for him to do - especially if he has hundreds of customers who all have different criteria (or maybe he can't do it - I am not sure). If he whitelists the IP address, then his customers get the spam. The email system on the internet from ISP to ISP doesn't see email addresses. It only sees IP addresses. The email addresses are seen internally by the ISP (in your example the server admin knows your email address because you registered it. The Challenge Response comment is about a system where people need to register their email address with the receiving ISP before their email can be received. The problem with that is that spammers forge addresses so if your address is forged, you get lots and lots of requests for verification from places you never heard of.)

Blocklists are the natural way to control spam on the internet without changing the freedom of the internet. It is only the *sending* end that can control spam. If senders like you demanded reliable service, then the lazy, incompetent, irresponsible ISPs would lose business and not bother anyone.

Miss Betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If your "anti-spam software" is blindly pumping out CR to From addresses (that may be forged and include spamtrap addresses), don't be surprised if your own software has caused this listing. Your ISP will not be happy with you when they find out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If your "anti-spam software" is blindly pumping out CR to From addresses (that may be forged and include spamtrap addresses), don't be surprised if your own software has caused this listing. Your ISP will not be happy with you when they find out.

Anything that makes it past some software called Spamassasin provided by my domain hosting provider gets zapped by my CR anti spam software. I don't use it irresponsibly, it's just that Spamassasin lets so much through. And no, I'm not breaking any T&C's with my ISP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Appreciate the reply Betsy.

I have emailed the ISP with the link, hopefully they will contact one of these so called deputies.

The "Censor" in my case is the government here, all online webmail is blocked (as well as numerous other websites), they want to be able to read everything that comes in and goes out (which means they see all my CR responses ;) ).

Unfortunately it would appear that my "freedom of the internet" has been challenged by a system that lets us all down by failing to discriminate between legitimate users and the unscrupulous. It would appear that it's time for Spamcop to have a good look at its "philosphical" position if this is the aim they are trying to achieve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If your "anti-spam software" is blindly pumping out CR to From addresses (that may be forged and include spamtrap addresses), don't be surprised if your own software has caused this listing. Your ISP will not be happy with you when they find out.

I've been thinking about what you wrote.

OK, so let's say my CR anti-spam software did send a challenge to one of these "spam traps". To follow this logically, that would mean that the original email had forged an email address that belongs to one of these spam traps right? So when the spam trap receives my challenge email, it sets off a very loud klaxon to alert all spamcop deputies that a crime has been committed :P The deputies go to investigate, they see that the email the spam trap has received is a challenge from me, they know its not spam right? Spamcop wouldn't set up such a system unless it could recognise the difference between a spam email and a legitimate one would they? To suggest that they would do such a thing beggars belief, they're in the anti spam business!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There has been entirely too much quoting and not enough snipping in this discussion. Unlike newsgroups, the entire previous post is still visible in the same Topic view .... if replying to "a point" please snip the quoted text to just the point one is replying to .... the snapback icon provides a quick click reference / link back to the original post if more context is needed by the reader ....

I have emailed the ISP with the link, hopefully they will contact one of these so called deputies.

Per the Forum FAQ, links at the top of this very screen;

Section 8 - SpamCop's System & Active Staff User Guide

The Deputies are the less-than-a-handful of paid staff members. They are the only folks with current access to the database in which to look up data in reference to spamtrap hits .. data which was removed from public view as it was seen that spammers were using to game the system.

The "Censor" in my case is the government here, all online webmail is blocked (as well as numerous other websites), they want to be able to read everything that comes in and goes out (which means they see all my CR responses ;) ).

Unfortunately it would appear that my "freedom of the internet" has been challenged by a system that lets us all down by failing to discriminate between legitimate users and the unscrupulous. It would appear that it's time for Spamcop to have a good look at its "philosphical" position if this is the aim they are trying to achieve.

A bery confusing set of circumstances, arrangements, and results in this bit of diatribe. That yout government bans webmail (?) .. allegedly deletes your outgoing e-mail ... but you complain that a single ISP (thus far desvribed) has put a filter into place that rejects e-mail from your ISP's e-mail server ... (and as explained dozens of times within just this discussion, not a thing to do with "your e-mail address") .. you bring up some thoughts of "your internet freedom" ...???? very odd .... why not apply that thought of "Internet freedom" to the receiving ISP invoking his/her "Internet freedom" in making a decisio about what he/she will allow on his/her servers? There are BLs available that simply block based on country of origin, others becasue the IP address is contolled by a certain company, etc. etc. etc. The SpamCopDNSBL is dynamic, both in the listing and delisting of IP addresses .... others are hand-built / maintained, somrimes containing data based on data years old ... on and on ....

And speaking of IP addresses, where did you come up with the concept of a "whole IP address" ... as compared to the only obvious extenion .. a "partial IP address" ..????

As far as whitelisting "your e-mail address" .. data provided this far would indicate that you seem to want to talk to the people that control the e-mail server sitting at the origination point of yhe message you provided "216.157.145.29 does not like recipient" .....

05/21/06 16:28:18 IP block 216.157.145.29

Trying 216.157.145.29 at ARIN

Trying 216.157.145 at ARIN

OrgName: Vortech Inc.

OrgID: VTC1

Address: 106 S. Semoran Blvd.

City: Orlando

StateProv: FL

PostalCode: 32807

Country: US

NetRange: 216.157.128.0 - 216.157.159.255

CIDR: 216.157.128.0/19

NetName: VORTECH-BLK-1

NetHandle: NET-216-157-128-0-1

Parent: NET-216-0-0-0-0

NetType: Direct Allocation

NameServer: DNS.ANONYMOUS-SERVERS.COM

NameServer: DNS2.ANONYMOUS-SERVERS.COM

(man, that's a real comforting set of server names)

RTechHandle: BAP16-ARIN

RTechName: Pugh, Brad Alan

RTechPhone: +1-407-323-5634

RTechEmail: support[at]vortechhosting.com

see if they will whitelist your incoming stuff ....

Yet again, there is nothing available at SpamCo.net that has the capability of "blocking your e-mail" .... any blocking action woukld occur at the receiving ISP, and that would be a decision they made, physical actions taken to modify code for their e-mail app to use BL data, add in the "error-message" based on results/returns from a BL look-up ... on and on .... you can send all the e-mail you want, but due to the "freedom of the Internet" ... no one "has" to receive it .....

The fact that you have yet to spend the time to even look at the SpamCop FAQ here cannot be overlooked ... that you are still focusing on "your e-mail address" rather than SpamCop Blocking List Service - What is on the list? is beyond silly after all this time and effort spent by so many folks trying to educate you and answer your original query.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A very confusing set of circumstances, arrangements, and results in this bit of diatribe.

Diatribe? Confusing? Let me help:- http://www.opennetinitiative.net/studies/burma/

Hence the quotation marks when I was referring to my "freedom of the internet". Get it?

The whole point of my "diatribe" is that is doesn't have anything to do with my email address!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I wish it did!

And speaking of IP addresses, where did you come up with the concept of a "whole IP address" ... as compared to the only obvious extenion .. a "partial IP address" ..????

My limited understanding was where I came up with it. I'm man enough to admit that.

As far as whitelisting "your e-mail address" .. data provided this far would indicate that you seem to want to talk to the people that control the e-mail server sitting at the origination point of the message you provided "216.157.145.29 does not like recipient" .....

see if they will whitelist your incoming stuff ....

I really didn't understand that (I'm being serious!). Are you suggesting that I contact vortechhosting.com to get my email address whitelisted?

Yet again, there is nothing available at SpamCo.net that has the capability of "blocking your e-mail" .... .... you can send all the e-mail you want, but due to the "freedom of the Internet" ... no one "has" to receive it .....

I think I've covered this above, at least one of the companies using the list is aware of their error.

Changing the subject and going a little off topic, I note on Spamhaus' website that the worst offenders are in the US and that some of the ISP's (I think one was MCI) are notorious for spam. Presumably Spamcop blacklists the entire ISP?

Moderator Edit: Much unneeded quoted material timmed.

Edited by Wazoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The deputies go to investigate, they see that the email the spam trap has received is a challenge from me, they know its not spam right?

Wrong for a number of reasons:

If you send *anything* to a spamtrap, it is by definition spam. Spamtraps never send mail, request information, or subscribe to mailing lists.

CR sent to an innocent third party (ie. the owner of the address didn't trigger it) *IS* spam.

"Challenge/response spam filtering"

http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/329.html#CR

"1.3 Challenge-Response systems make matters worse"

http://pm-lib.sourceforge.net/README.html#4

As far as I am aware, the deputies do not investigate individual spamtrap hits unless an issue has been raised or as part of a random system audit. SCBL operation is described here: http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/297.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Either way, you're holding the person who sent the challenge as responsible for the spam when it should be apparent that they were duped into sending a challenge. Don't shoot the messenger!

I think you need to decide what side of the fence you are on with such a debate (not you personally). What I'm getting at is that here on these forums we have the world of spam according to spamcop. On one hand as you read through their FAQ's you come across references to UBE or UCE which I suspect most would argue is spam. Then you have the Spamcop FAQ telling people not to use autoresponders and the like because they don't like them. 100's of companies use them, just because they don't fit into the Spamcop scheme of things doesn't necessarily mean they should be outlawed.

The black list idea on its own is flawed, think about it, if it was so good and worked so flawlessly you wouldn't have people in Spamcops forums asking themselves "why do I bother?". I would also agree that CR anti-spam software is not the ideal soloution either. But I would argue that the two in tandem offer me what I want. OK, my domain name provider uses something called spamassasin which is probably crap (I really haven't delved into it to be honest) and lets too much crap through, most of it from the US from what I can see. It's all the usual viagra rubbish etc. To catch the remaining spam I use the CR software. I get what I want. Selfish? Shoot me!

This perplexed me:- "Selfish: This is the problem we are mainly concerned with. By using challenge/response filtering, you are asking innumerable third parties to receive your challenge emails just so that a relatively few legitimate ones get through to the intended recipient". Well surely that is less "selfish" than, we'll just carpet block 100's of users because one of them may have a trojan on their machine, as happened (is happening) to me.

We can't go and re-invent the internet just to suit Spamcop. Here's an idea:-

Spamcop allows individuals to whitelist themselves using a CR system like this website does (automatic). Individuals remain on the whitelist despite the indiscriminate blocking lists until they are reported by a spamcop user. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Diatribe? Confusing? Let me help:- http://www.opennetinitiative.net/studies/burma/

Hence the quotation marks when I was referring to my "freedom of the internet". Get it?

Not really. I fail to see the connection at all. (and this is after reading the entire document provided, and a couple of others linked to from that page ....) Your article deals with 'repression' and 'censorship' of the Interent and access thereof ... so one can only conjecture that you are now trying to get this Forum added to the list of blocked web-sites?

The whole point of my "diatribe" is that is doesn't have anything to do with my email address!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I wish it did!

Glad you finally decided to agree with that fact.

I really didn't understand that (I'm being serious!). Are you suggesting that I contact vortechhosting.com to get my email address whitelisted?

You're the one that is trying to connect with someone there .... the questions include .. can they whitelist just an address? will they whitelist an IP address? Is this capabaility available to that ISP's users?

I think I've covered this above, at least one of the companies using the list is aware of their error.

Whatever ....

Changing the subject and going a little off topic, I note on Spamhaus' website that the worst offenders are in the US and that some of the ISP's (I think one was MCI) are notorious for spam. Presumably Spamcop blacklists the entire ISP?

Geeze .... try the damn FAQs referenced a number of times already ... there are other BLs that would "block an entire ISP" .. the SpamCopDNSBL does not do this ...

I took the time to follow, read, and research your "helpful" links .. how about returning the favour?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Either way, you're holding the person who sent the challenge as responsible for the spam when it should be apparent that they were duped into sending a challenge. Don't shoot the messenger!

Duped? Hey! If you send it, you're responsible for it.

What I'm getting at is that here on these forums we have the world of spam according to spamcop.

Gee, I wonder if that might be becaus this is a support Forum for the SpamCop.net toolset? Naw, too much of a coincidence ......

On one hand as you read through their FAQ's you come across references to UBE or UCE which I suspect most would argue is spam. Then you have the Spamcop FAQ telling people not to use autoresponders and the like because they don't like them. 100's of companies use them, just because they don't fit into the Spamcop scheme of things doesn't necessarily mean they should be outlawed.

You've mentioned Spamhaus already. Note that there is a listing there about "autoresponders, misdirected bounces, etc. etc. etc. This is not "just" a SpamCop.net concept .... Yet another repeat .. there are thousands of other BLs out there ....

The black list idea on its own is flawed, think about it, if it was so good and worked so flawlessly you wouldn't have people in Spamcops forums asking themselves "why do I bother?".

The real reason is exemplified by yourself ... users that have no idea of the actual mechanics of how "the net" works.

OK, my domain name provider uses something called spamassasin which is probably crap

Probably .. the fact that it's installed on e-mail servers around the world, installed on personal systems around the worled, used in conjunction with serveral third-party e-mail filtering applications installed on systems around the world is probably just a fluke of nature ....

(I really haven't delved into it to be honest)

Why does this seem to be a recurring theme in your postings?

carpet block 100's of users because one of them may have a trojan on their machine, as happened (is happening) to me.

Really? Problem identified, resolved .... or are you still just pulling things out of the air?

Spamcop allows individuals to whitelist themselves

And just how does someone at SpamCop.net reach out and "manage" some ISP's server out there somewhere in the world? Once again, you have demonstrated the comlete lack of knowledge on how "the net" .. SpamCop.net .. the SpamCopDNSBL ... etc., etc., etc. actually works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really. I fail to see the connection at all. (and this is after reading the entire document provided, and a couple of others linked to from that page ....) Your article deals with 'repression' and 'censorship' of the Interent and access thereof ... so one can only conjecture that you are now trying to get this Forum added to the list of blocked web-sites?

Oh dear! The link was to show you that the government here does ban webmail, you saw that right? You asked the question. The idea behind the link was to clarify that, your post appeared to suggest you were surprised (which I can understand). The quotation marks were there to serve a double purpose, one was that there is no freedom here (i.e. irony), the other was to question in a cheeky way (but by no means disrespectful way) Miss Betsy's reply to me. Hence my "Get it?" at the end.

Glad you finally decided to agree with that fact.

You know damned well that I'm not agreeing with it.

You're the one that is trying to connect with someone there .... the questions include .. can they whitelist just an address? will they whitelist an IP address? Is this capabaility available to that ISP's users?

Thank you!

Geeze .... try the damn FAQs referenced a number of times already ... there are other BLs that would "block an entire ISP" .. the SpamCopDNSBL does not do this ...

I took the time to follow, read, and research your "helpful" links .. how about returning the favour?

Oh come on! I freely admitted it was off topic, if you're so bothered by it you should have ignored it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh come on! I freely admitted it was off topic, if you're so bothered by it you should have ignored it.

???? I learn by applying facts that I know, researching those that I don't ....

After all the time and energy spent by quite a number of other SpamCop.net users, most attempting to re-explain the FAQ data, you're still making statements that clearly indicate that you've not grasped what's actually going on .... this "discussion" is getting to the point that the concept of "help" does't seem appropriate ... it may be getting close to the decision point of moving this to the Lounge as a "bit of rant" and (possibly?) closing it to additional postings.

You've asked for explanations and help, all that and more has been offered, now you're trying to turn this into something to justify your philisophical ideas .... not quite a "Help" scenario ....

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  

×