SpamCop Listing - is it just another headache?

[Farelf]

No. ...

Pity, that was one really elegant way to avoid the immediate hassle of the blocklist as applied to "your" server.

...Comment t'expliquer? ...

Well, you can complain (we're just users, most are not going to be awfully receptive) or you can seek help &/ information . It doesn't really work well to do both at once.

[Wazoo]

Nadia, I'm from South Africa and also do not agree with SpamCop's way of operating. The mere fact that any person with internet access can create a login on their web site and start submitting reports for spam makes the hair on my neck stand up.

????? What in the world is this supposed to mean?

What can be done.... not much, but give it time, more and more internet users and ISP's will soon realise that they are actually loosing more revenue from legit email being blocked by SpamCop

Geeze .. what in the hell is it going to take for you to get a grip on this .. SpamCop.net CAN NOT block your frigging e-mail. Only an ISP that chooses to use the BL data in a blocking fashion can block any e-mail. And yet again, even SpamCop.net recommends against using thier BL in such a fashion.

due to incorrect listings, than what they would have saved from a few spam messages being filtered.

Please define "incorrect" // after actually reading the explanation of how an IP address gets listed as depicted in "What is on the List?" .. found here via the SpamCop FAQ ....

I have already planted a seed of doubt with two ISP's after I have proofed to them that clients of theirs are loosing legit e-mail and business because of SpamCop. They are both launching a full investigation.

What the hell needs an "investigation" ...???? It rather sounds as if someone needs an "education" ....

Yes, this is the Lounge .. set up to handle rants .. but again, ignorance is not taken well .... ignoring facts and continuing the rant is also seen as pretty damn stupid.

[dra007]

Not to mention that insisting on stupidity puts one in the same category as spammers. Stupidity aside, most unsolicited mail nowdays is criminal in nature and content and is sent by criminals who attempt to defraud and scam the recipients of money and identity information. Passivity in response to and ignorance of the problem makes one if not an accomplice to the crime, deserving of contempt and ridicule.

[Farelf]

...

prehaps - never heard of this word

therer - another word invented by you?...

These (and those that followed) appear to be perfectly excellent words, simply requiring definition and promulgation. First draft:

prehaps - consequence of exceeding the speed of light

therer - a little further away than herer

mibile - specialized cell 'phone for the curmudgeonly

eamil - to differentiate from "email" which means enamel in the Romance languages

mcahines - well known Irish male prostitute of the 19th century

Wecome - Yougo

yopu - you too

providor - Spanish for "provider"

doinf - sound of a pogoist in one of those inflatable castle thingys

yopumight - a bit like Forza Italia

ypour - ill-fated French colony in India

[nadia]

Hello Wazoo! Thank you for amazing speech

Actually, that's a pretty silly question, especially while you are spouting off about the U.S. Constitution.

...spouting off about the "silly" freedom of people?

Hello Wazoo, how are you?

Everything's all right?

SpamCop FAQ

off-site link removedWe are in control!«

Just another silly joke...

Whatever pretext you advance, technical explanations do not restore repressed rights of free people in a free world, or the free part of it. I know ...."great" words. They just describe what's on.

SpamCop.net does not block your e-mail.

SPAMCOP's "product" does. You'd certainly not wanna tell me, the SPAMCOP crew are irresponsibles.

Answers, descriptions, and definitions exist already.

The faith in "perfect" technology.

off-site link removed ..... they sunk.

Note: SpamCop.net does not block your e-mail.

That's it! E-mail is not blocked, it is just bouncing. The same result, but I feel so much better now

Forbid all you want.

Not all I want, just what's inacceptable.

[Wazoo]

Getting ready for some Admin action here ...

You chose to bring up the Constitution and "freedom" ... yet ... you have issues with an ISP using his/her freedom to block unwanted e-mail coming into his/her system. As I stated, you can send all the e-mail you want, but this does not mean that it has to be recieved/read by anyone else. "Freedom" exists at both ends of that traffic flow. Thus the "silly" part of your ranting.

SPAMCOP's "product" does. You'd certainly not wanna tell me, the SPAMCOP crew are irresponsibles.

??? Once again, please explain how a list of identified IP addresses sitting on a computer in California can all by itself reach around the world and intercept, block, reject your e-mail? Considuering that the list if IP addresses is just sitting there, not having a clue as to just when you're going to write an e-mail on your computer, send it via some other computer, with the target address being some other computer somewhere else in the world, addressed to 'someone' else ....???? The word impossible comes to mind.

On the other hand, that other computer just might be using that list of IP addresses to recognisr that a particular e-mail servber is sending out way too much spam .. so when your e-mail arrives, no whitelist for the addressed person is available, so your e-mail gets blocked along with all the other spam. Once again, it was that receiving ISP that chose to use their freedom in making decisions about how to run their e-mail server.

From the top, the SpamCopDNSBL was put into place for the benefit os SpamCop,net e-mail account holders (and the list is used in a Tagging fashion there, no e-mail gets "blocked") ... This same list has been made available for use by others .. and it is this "use by others" that has you in a situation.

Again, please do some research and apply the actual / real facts to your situation.

This spouting off in ignorance is simply a waste of time.

Not all I want, just what's inacceptable

As stated a number of times already .. your complaint seems to be with the receiving ISP and the way they configured their e-mail servers. Bitchng about that here is really a waste of everyone's time and energy. You obviously need to talk to "them" and explain your "repressed freedom" problem.

[StevenUnderwood]

SPAMCOP's "product" does.

SpamCop does not HAVE a product. As described before, the ISP is using a list of IP addresses spamcop is providing. SpamCop's members have reported spam from those IP addresses.

That's it! E-mail is not blocked, it is just bouncing. The same result

SpamCop can not block or bounce your email because spamcop NEVER TOUCHES your email. Only the SERVER sending and the SERVER receiving touch the message. The RECEIVING SERVER is bouncing the email. The SENDING SERVER is listed because it spams.

Not all I want, just what's inacceptable.

If your messages are not reaching you, contact your mail provider and tell them it is not acceptible.

They are using a list provided free to the internet of IP's where spam has been reported from. This is likely a cost saving issue as well as a customer convienience issue. My companies total bandwidth charges dropped ~70% after implementing a blocklist strategy.

[Derek T]

Bring me my fool, I am in need of entertainment.

prehaps - never heard of this word

therer - another word invented by you?

Just for fun, a few more from you...

There is a difference between a typo and sheer bloody ignorance.

[nadia]

Nadia, I'm from South Africa and also do not agree with SpamCop's way of operating. The mere fact that any person with internet access can create a login on their web site and start submitting reports for spam makes the hair on my neck stand up.

What can be done.... not much, but give it time, more and more internet users and ISP's will soon realise that they are actually loosing more revenue from legit email being blocked by SpamCop due to incorrect listings, than what they would have saved from a few spam messages being filtered.

I have already planted a seed of doubt with two ISP's after I have proofed to them that clients of theirs are loosing legit e-mail and business because of SpamCop. They are both launching a full investigation.

Hi Chris! I see the reactions of some specialits here. Do they live in their "own world", isolated from the rest of mankid? They talk about ISP, IPs and much more technical details. I talk about the repressive consequences for individuals. My apoligies... My old fashioned ideas... silly Nadia talking about "silly" freedom... what a fool...

Thank you

[StevenUnderwood]

I talk about the repressive consequences for individuals.

I think we are talking the same ideas, just trying to get across to you it is consequences from your ISP's choice to use the SpamCop BL in blocking mode.

[Miss Betsy]

My old fashioned ideas... silly Nadia talking about "silly" freedom... what a fool...

I, too, like the freedom of being able to say, "No, you are not going to waste my time scrolling through dozens (hundreds, thousands) of spam email. If you want to communicate with me, use a responsible, competent internet service provider that knows how to keep spammers from using their network." If the offline package carrier you used to send me a package also insisted on delivering several greasy, bug infested packages at the same time, I wouldn't accept your package either. In fact, I might consider it an insult that you would be so cheap as to use a carrier that was so irresponsible and incompetent to communicate with me.

You are absolutely free to be ignorant and to choose any internet service provider you want to. Fortunately, I can also choose an internet service provider who is interested in the quality of the internet.

Miss Betsy

[nadia]

SpamCop does not HAVE a product.

What do they sell?

As described before, the ISP is using a list of IP addresses spamcop is providing.

This is exactly what I mean: this is the source of repression.

SpamCop's members have reported spam from those IP addresses.

SpamCop can not block or bounce your email because spamcop NEVER TOUCHES your email.

Their reports/database - their product makes repression possible. No SPAMCOP - no repression.

And again alot of technicals

Only the SERVER sending and the SERVER receiving touch the message. The RECEIVING SERVER is bouncing the email. The SENDING SERVER is listed because it spams.

If your messages are not reaching you, contact your mail provider and tell them it is not acceptible.

They are using a list provided free to the internet of IP's where spam has been reported from. This is likely a cost saving issue as well as a customer convienience issue. My companies total bandwidth charges dropped ~70% after implementing a blocklist strategy.

Fine - the result remains. What's about customers - not spamers - using such hosts? No one can now if the IPS he uses is "listed". BUT they are repressed, and you loose customers.

Please tell me when you.. compa.... reach.... 100%...you... then... blocklist....

Hello? Derek? HELLOOOO!

[StevenUnderwood]

What do they sell?

The spamcop blocklist side of the spamcop name does not sell anything. They charge the people who would like faster reporting times and more tracking of their reported spam.

Their reports/database - their product makes repression possible. No SPAMCOP - no repression.

Wrong. Do you know there are thousands of blocklists in use around the world right now? SpamCop is the only one causing you problems at the moment. You should find out from your mail provider how they choose what to block. If it does not meet your expectations, tell them. If spamcop went away, there would be other blocklists to do the same thhing.

No one can now if the IPS he uses is "listed".

There is a lookup page to see if an IP address is listed. No IP is permanently on spamcop's list. Only while the spamming is on-going. Other lists are not so forgiving.

Once again, you need to contact your mail provider to complain about their use of the spamcop list. It is them you should be expending your energy on. Many people find the information spamcop provides for free to be invaluable to keeping spam out of their servers. Many would likely pay to use the list if it were required. I know my company would.

[nadia]

I think we are talking the same ideas, just trying to get across to you it is consequences from your ISP's choice to use the SpamCop BL in blocking mode.

And ISP is my choice. I don't know what ISP is listed or not. No ISP spams, a minority of their users do so. Collective repression for an innocent majority cannot be the goal.

[Wazoo]

nadia quit being silly a number of posts back.

This os a waste of time for all concerned .. pity the poor souls that Google their way here in the future ....

nadia is getting suspended from posting for a while .. in hopes that some time will be spent reading what has already been posted here, maybe even taking the time to figure out how things actually work.

This is "me" exercising my "freedom" to prevent the continued waste of time of the oher volunteers here trying to re-explain things that have already been explained dozens of times. Much the same fashion as the ISP involved that chose to block the incoming spam to his/her serber and protect his/her users from that spew.

[Wazoo]

and yet another possible cartooney????

If you like, delete my messages, my user-ID in this board. Repressing is your level. You'll get the bill. Funny? Wait and see

[dra007]

very funny, now that you wasted our time I really hope you continue being blocked so I can keep laughing...

[Miss Betsy]

And ISP is my choice. I don't know what ISP is listed or not. No ISP spams, a minority of their users do so. Collective repression for an innocent majority cannot be the goal.

There are no 'innocents' - there are only 'ignorants' - just because the 'innocent' majority do not know how to inspect restaurant kitchens or elevators or automobiles doesn't mean that they can't read inspection stickers by those who do.

An internet email user is a consumer. Consumers need to be aware of what they are buying - the limitations and usage rules as well as the price. Those who don't know that there are ways to control the 'sending' of spam are like consumers who don't know how to get their exhausts or headlights fixed so that they don't pollute or endanger other drivers. Fortunately, individuals can control what happens to their inbox by choosing a responsible, competent internet email service provider. They don't need laws to protect them from those who are ignorant or incompetent or careless with their email usage.

You have no right to demand that I accept email from you. If you don't like the way your internet email provider is providing with service, change or complain. If you complain, then you are part of the problem - the waste of millions of people's time dealing with spam.

Miss betsy

[chrisfourie]

This is "me" exercising my "freedom" to prevent the continued waste of time of the oher volunteers here trying to re-explain things that have already been explained dozens of times. Much the same fashion as the ISP involved that chose to block the incoming spam to his/her serber and protect his/her users from that spew.

Wazoo, I have a question, perhaps its more of a concern.

When a submission is made i.e. "Add fuel to your account" and the correct Message Headers and Email body is provided, is further validation performed to ensure that the message is actually spam and not just a malicious submission by someone you have been in contact with?

Your comments would be appreciated

[Wazoo]

When a submission is made i.e. "Add fuel to your account" and the correct Message Headers and Email body is provided, is further validation performed to ensure that the message is actually spam and not just a malicious submission by someone you have been in contact with?

As phrased, your question is confusing, as you seem to mixing up a bunch of items, and I don't know why ....

"add fuel to your account" refers to signing up (and paying for) a type of Reporting Account.

Your question of "further validation" has been asked many times before. My standard response .... start by looking at Section 8 - SpamCop's System & Active Staff User Guide ... then follow the (graphic)link at the top-right of this page and take a look at the stats of the Reporting System .... current bit of data showing at my look just now .. Max spam - 23.2 messages per second ..... There are three paid staff shown on the first referenced page and they receive 800-1800 e-mails a day .... you should recognize some other names on that list, simply other users of the SpamCop.net system/tool-set, volunteering time and knowledge here ... What you will find missing is anyone that has the job of trying to "further validate" 23.2 messages a second.

As you apparently have not yet taken the time to visit the SpamCop FAQ, you have not yet read or even noticed the section under Reporting identified with the following entry Titles;

Rules - everybody read! (recent changes made ... you may need to re-look)

-----> On what type of email should I (not) use SpamCop?

-----> Material changes to spam

-----> What if I break the rule(s)?

Why was my authorization revoked?

And what you are really asking about are the last two items, resulting in fines against a paid-account, suspension or banning of other types of accounts. The recipient of a SpamCop.net Report has a number of options available within that report, to include challenging the complaint.

This is getting very old and boring .. the FAQ was created so that these Frequently Asked Questions don't have to manually answered over and over .. once again, please take the time to research the reality of things rather than this continued exercise of wasting everyone else's time and energy.

[Miss Betsy]

Wazoo, I have a question, perhaps its more of a concern.

When a submission is made i.e. "Add fuel to your account" and the correct Message Headers and Email body is provided, is further validation performed to ensure that the message is actually spam and not just a malicious submission by someone you have been in contact with?

Your comments would be appreciated

'Add fuel to your account' is not a submission. 'Add fuel...' is becoming a 'paid' reporter.

You can 'submit' spam to the spamcop parser for finding out what the source IP address is. Once that is done, you send a report to that source IP address abuse desk. You can also send reports to other possibly interested parties such as the spamvertised sites. It is your call on where the reports go.

Once the report gets to the abuse desk, it is the job of the abuse desk of that IP address to decide if the report is accurate or not. If the abuse desk decides it is accurate, then they can decide to act on it in whatever way their policies dictate.

Malicious submissions are rare, don't make much impact on the blocklist or the abuse desk, are easily detected, and result in suspension of reporting privileges. You have no reason to be concerned about spamcop. You might have reason to be concerned about other areas of your life.

Miss Betsy

[dra007]

You have no reason to be concerned about spamcop. You might have reason to be concerned about other areas of your life.

...such as spammers working hand in hand with hackers to hijack your PC and/or steal your identity and credit card information... not to mention the occasional lightening striking too close for comfort, much more likely occurances than a mallicious report having an impact on your ongoing activities..

[Telarin]

One thing to note, even if someone DOES send a malicious report and it doesn't get challenged by a non-responsive abuse desk, it is very unlikely to result in the reported server being listed. The reason is that it takes numerous reports from multiple reporters to even consider listing a server.

Spamtraps carry substantially more weight than manual reports, however, there is no real way to trick a spamtrap into reporting the wrong server, as they work directly with the headers of the email they receive without ever going through a human that could alter them.

[chrisfourie]

I have been shot down in flames previously for the topic "SpamCop Listing - is it just another headache?" and hopefully I can get some positive feedback (from SpamCop employees) this time.

I "unfortunately" still need some clarification on what the long-term benefits for ISP's and their users are when using the SCBL for filtering email.

If I understand it correctly, when spam is reported and a IP # gets listed on the SCBL, that number is automatically removed from the list after a few hours if no further reports are submitted!

What I need to clarify is:

What stops an ISP who "owns" a few IP numbers from using a different IP number when the first one gets listed, and when the second number gets listed as well, they use a third, and before they run out of IP numbers the first one is automatically cleared and they can start from the beginning again?

In the end (and hopefully I'm not going to cause another wave of attacks from members) all the effort, time, additional bandwidth and email from SpamCop members will have very little (or no) impact on Spammers.

I am willing to bet 5:1 that the spam will come back in even higher quantities!

dra007, you hit the nail on the head!

....it seems the spam comes in waves, like nausea...

Don't you think spammers using different IP numbers when they get listed can possibly be the cause for spam arriving in waves?

Hopefully all is not lost!!!

"Threats to the Digital Economy"

Here is a link to a very interesting (and informative) document (PDF) with regards to spam, and Virus statistics:

The Progress & Freedom Foundation

Chris

[GraemeL]

If I understand it correctly, when spam is reported and a IP # gets listed on the SCBL, that number is automatically removed from the list after a few hours if no further reports are submitted!

What I need to clarify is:

What stops an ISP who "owns" a few IP numbers from using a different IP number when the first one gets listed, and when the second number gets listed as well, they use a third, and before they run out of IP numbers the first one is automatically cleared and they can start from the beginning again?

As far as the SpamCop system goes, nothing stops a spammer with a friendly ISP from rotating IP addresses to avoid blocks. SpamCop is set up to list addresses that are actively spamming.

However, SpamCop is not the only game in town and anti-spam systems rarely use only one blocklist to defend their users. If a spammer starts rotating IPs with the help of his ISP, he's likely to quickly end up with a range block from SpamHaus which is a whole new world of hurt for the spammer/ISP. As of July 2006, SpamHaus was protecting over 600,000,000 email accounts worldwide. These include tier-1 ISPs, very large corporations and governments. Getting listed by SpamHaus would be a major headache for any ISP.