By what authority does SpamCop blacklist my mail?

[disgruntled]

My business e-mail address has been "spamcopped" ... again. I don't know and I don't care about the reasons why; I know I'm wholly innocent. I also know I'm losing business.

By what authority is my mail address being blacklisted?

And where's the help for the *innocent victims* of the SpamCop system? No meaningful help here whatsoever! No compensation programme, poorly-written "explanations" of what's-what, obtuse communication channels.

Stop spam by all means, but please also spare a thought for the collateral damage caused by the "cure".

[StevenUnderwood]

I don't know and I don't care about the reasons why; I know I'm wholly innocent.

First of all you are going to be labeled cartoony because of the way you came in here... Many will add you to persona blocklists because of it.

If you are running your own server, you are not innocent because there is spam comong from your server.

If you are using a shared server, you are not innocent because you are supporting the people who are supporting the spammers.

Provide more information (the IP address of the server you believe is listed) to prove me wrong.

[disgruntled]

First of all you are going to be labeled cartoony because of the way you came in here... Many will add you to persona blocklists because of it.

Trust me, I'll get over it.

Trust me also, I'm innocent.

Now back to the question: By what authority does SpamCop cost me my livelihood? I don't recall being asked if I'd mind.

You have no right to send ANY message to my server.

Agreed.

Similarly, YOU don't have a right to deny me the RECEIPT of a mail that has been sent to me in good faith. Or rather, you SHOULDN'T have a right....

First, there is no legal recourse to shut spamcop down.

And yet ... SpamCop is soliciting donations for a legal fund. Sounds like not every agrees with your sentiment.

Second shutting down spamcop will NOT guarantee you can send email. There are thousands of blocklists available on the internet and possibly a million more private ones in use around the world. Spamcop is more aggressive in listing, but also more lienient as it delists automatically. Other lists you will never get off of.

Duly noted. Interestingly, however, Spamcop's is the only list causing me problems. It's curious that 'thousands' of blocklists could be so wrong about me, don't you think? Logically, this suggests that Spamcop's inclusion algorithm is somewhat flawed. On that point alone, the lawyers would have a foothold I believe.

[Miss Betsy]

Trust me, I'll get over it.

Trust me also, I'm innocent.

Now back to the question: By what authority does SpamCop cost me my livelihood? I don't recall being asked if I'd mind.

Well, I would mind if you appeared at my door trying to bring a package that was all shiny and new, but in order to receive it, I had to also accept several dirty, greasy packages crawling with bugs. And that's essentially what you are asking your customers to do when you email them from a server that is also sending spam.

There are areas of the city where cab drivers and pizza delivery drivers will not go. They don't believe a caller who says, "Hey, I am a good guy."

If your business was offline, you would be frustrated and disgruntled if your phone number was blocked because someone broke in and used it for obscene calls. However, you wouldn't blame the phone company for providing blocking services. You'd be mad at the culprit and, perhaps, at your security service.

If you really are not sending unsolicited email, then the chances are that someone has 'broken in' to a computer and is using it to send spam.

There are telephones and faxes and even other email services that you can use temporarily while your service tracks down the culprit.

It is well established rule of law that I don't have to let anyone in or talk to anyone on the phone or receive letters from anyone I choose not to. And I don't have to receive email from anyone who wants to send it to me unless I choose to.

Miss Betsy

[disgruntled]

Well, I would mind if you appeared at my door trying to bring a package that was all shiny and new, but in order to receive it, I had to also accept several dirty, greasy packages crawling with bugs. And that's essentially what you are asking your customers to do when you email them from a server that is also sending spam.

No, I'm not. My contacts are receiving nothing (except a very delayed note about the blacklisting). No legitimate mail, no spam purporting to be from me either.

To make matters worse, I was only informed about my banned outgoing messages some hours after the event.

There are ... even other email services that you can use temporarily while your service tracks down the culprit.

Unfortunately, people visiting my website for the first cannot mind-read, so therefore cannot deduce what these other addresses are.

It is well established rule of law that I don't have to let anyone in or talk to anyone on the phone or receive letters from anyone I choose not to. And I don't have to receive email from anyone who wants to send it to me unless I choose to.

Agreed. That's beside the point. The point is, I am being denied the receipt of legitimate mail being sent to me. And I ask the question again -- on what authority?

[Farelf]

... By what authority is my mail address being blacklisted?...

...Now back to the question: By what authority does SpamCop cost me my livelihood? ...

...The point is, I am being denied the receipt of legitimate mail being sent to me. And I ask the question again -- on what authority?

Interesting change of emphasis.

1. SpamCop is no way associated with blacklisting your email address.

2. How do you infer SpamCop has caused you harm?

3. SpamCop is supposedly preventing you from both sending and receiving?

You are making unfounded assumptions, how SpamCop actually works is openly and exhaustively covered in the FAQs. The only "authority" in play is the right of server owners/administrators to elect to decline to carry certain messages. These people may elect to use the SCBL and they may elect to use it in ways not recommended by SC.

Sympathy for your plight - anyone would agree it is infuriating, frustrating and insupportable.

[baronessp]

By what authority is my mail address being blacklisted?

And where's the help for the *innocent victims* of the SpamCop system? No meaningful help here whatsoever! No compensation programme, poorly-written "explanations" of what's-what, obtuse communication channels.

I would also like the answers to those questions please!!!!

[dbiel]

Similarly, YOU don't have a right to deny me the RECEIPT of a mail that has been sent to me in good faith. Or rather, you SHOULDN'T have a right....

It appears that you have absolutely no understanding of how email works.

The only ones that can prevent you from receiving email sent to you is A) Yourself: your ISP

If you are not receving email set to you then you need to contact your ISP and find out why and how you can white list the mail that you do want to receive, or maybe just whitelist all mail including spam or none of your mail get blocked.

What do we know about you:

1) you like to be known as disgruntled

2) you claim to have a business that uses email

3) you claim that you email is being blocked

3) you have created 5 posts to date in two separate topics complaining about being blocked but have failed to provide any information that could be used to answer you questions.

4) all 5 of your posts came from the following IP address 82.27.234.80

5) what do we know about that address:

The host name for 82.27.234.80 is client-82-27-234-80.brnt.adsl.virgin.net

That address is part of a Dynamic/Residential IP range

6) 82.27.234.80 is listed on 3 out of 297 separate lists (FIVETENSRC NJABLDYNA TQM-DYNAMIC)

7) Senderbase indicates that 82.27.234.80 has not been use to send any mail

8) 82.27.234.80 is NOT listed on the SpamCopBL

If you are going to use email for buisiness then you had better take some time and learn how email actually works and the various problems and complications related to its use.

If you do not wish to provide any information about your email server ie its IP Address

Your email Domain name (the part that comes after the [at] sign)

A copy of the error message that claims that you mail is being blocked by SpamCop

Then this topic is going to be moved to the Lounge and you can continue your ranting, but you will never get any help here without first providing the information needed to identify the problem.

[StevenUnderwood]

Now back to the question: By what authority does SpamCop cost me my livelihood? I don't recall being asked if I'd mind.

Spamcop doesn't.

If you are not receiving emails you expect, your ISP does.

If you are unable to get your messages out, the ISP of your target does.

Similarly, YOU don't have a right to deny me the RECEIPT of a mail that has been sent to me in good faith. Or rather, you SHOULDN'T have a right....

If that is your problem, you need to speak with YOUR ISP as they are the only ones with the ability to block the message.

And yet ... SpamCop is soliciting donations for a legal fund. Sounds like not every agrees with your sentiment.

OK, wrong wording...they can be (and have been) sued several times... each time the courts have found spamcop not legally responsible.

Duly noted. Interestingly, however, Spamcop's is the only list causing me problems. It's curious that 'thousands' of blocklists could be so wrong about me, don't you think? Logically, this suggests that Spamcop's inclusion algorithm is somewhat flawed. On that point alone, the lawyers would have a foothold I believe.

As I stated, spamcop is aggressive because it's goal is to catch spam runs IN PROGRESS. That is also why spamcop strongly suggests NOT using it to block messages, but rather to tag them. However, it is up to the ISP how they will use any information.

All spamcop is doing is saying that it's users have seen spam coming from a server. The ISP that is blocking is the one saying, if there is spam comong from that server, I don't want any message from that server.

The point is, I am being denied the receipt of legitimate mail being sent to me. And I ask the question again -- on what authority?

Your ISP's

[disgruntled]

dbiel, you're getting yourself somewhat confused. Will you kindly go back and actually READ what I wrote?

I asked ONE question. The answer to this question is all I'm interested in here.

Under whose authority does Spamcop operate? Who gives it its apparent legitimacy?

[subtext: If Spamcop is building its lists in an unprofessional way (as I and many others believe, it would seem, having Googled on the matter), where are the "Police" I can report the matter to?]

All spamcop is doing is saying that it's users have seen spam coming from a server.

I do understand that -- but this is the essential problem with Spamcop's listing methodology. The baby gets thrown out with the bathwater. The granularity needs to be finer, so that innocents like me aren't hindered. If that's not technically possible, Spamcop should simply stop.

[Farelf]

... Under whose authority does Spamcop operate? Who gives it its apparent legitimacy?

I answered that above - not to your satsfaction perhaps because you are assuming you have SpamCop dead to rights - you are of course entitled to your opinion, we are just inviting you to narrow the gap between your knowledge and that opinion.

[disgruntled]

Farelf, I repeated my question for the benefit of dbiel, who appeared not to have seen it.

As I suspected, SpamCop operates without authority from anyone. The quality of its operation is not assured by any competent, independent external body.

It shows.

And it's wholly unacceptable.

If you are going to use email for buisiness then you had better take some time and learn how email actually works and the various problems and complications related to its use.

I don't have "various problems and complication" related to my use of e-mail. As a matter of fact, I find it all quite easy. Is it difficult for you then? Perhaps you're not as clued up as you think you are.

As I've recorded elsewhere on this forum, in a number of years with my present e-mail provider, the ONLY issue I've ever had is being erroneously placed on SpamCop's list.

SpamCop is my only problem.

[Wazoo]

First action .. moving this bit of lunacy to the Lounge area as it seems to nothing but "Rant" material.

Second action ... repeat what has been said already .. try the SpamCop FAQ to get an understanding of just what is being "Ranted" about ... then perhaps try a "better" question ....

Third action ... commence to the head-shaking action of trying to guess where some people actually "come from" ....

[Farelf]

... As I suspected, SpamCop operates without authority from anyone. The quality of its operation is not assured by any competent, independent external body. ...

All true - but it doesn't do what you thought it did and in particular it doesn't do it to you. Indirectly? A whole new stew. G'wan, admit it - you're learning.

[disgruntled]

First action .. moving this bit of lunacy to the Lounge area as it seems to nothing but "Rant" material.

Second action ... repeat what has been said already .. try the SpamCop FAQ to get an understanding of just what is being "Ranted" about ... then perhaps try a "better" question ....

Third action ... commence to the head-shaking action of trying to guess where some people actually "come from" ....

LOL! That third action is EXACTLY what some of the self-proclaimed experts here need to do.

Blowing raspberries at someone's legitimate concerns and real-world issues isn't going to make the problem go away.

[dbiel]

dbiel, you're getting yourself somewhat confused. Will you kindly go back and actually READ what I wrote?

I asked ONE question. The answer to this question is all I'm interested in here.

Under whose authority does Spamcop operate? Who gives it its apparent legitimacy?

Sorry, I was under the mistaken assumption that you were interested in fixing you problem with your Email as related to SpamCop.

So to answer your single question more directly (those others have already answered) SpamCop operates under its own authority.

SpamCop simply publishs a list of IP address known to it as being a current source of spam.

It is no different that if they published a book on the subject.

People are free to use it just like a book.

They are free to use it anyway they choose.

The recommended way is to use it to filter out spam, not outright block it.

But the choice is theirs.

No one is forced to use the SpamCop list. They chose to use it because they find that it works well for them.

People are tired of getting spam and are looking for ways to stop it.

SpamCop works. Is it perfect - NO. It never claimed to be perfect.

No sender of email has a guaranteed right of delivery.

The recipient has the right to accept or refuse any email they so chose and they have NO responsiblily to explain why or to even acknowledge that the mail is being rejected.

It is their choice to accept or reject.

If you don't like SpamCop - tough luck.

If your recipient does not like SpamCop, all they have to do is stop using SpamCop

Remember that the ISP is the actual reciepeint of all mail sent through them.

They act like a mail courier one hires to pickup their mail from the postoffice, sort it out and delivery only the good mail.

If one thinks the mail courier is discarding good mail they have two choices, 1) try to work the the courier to do a better job or 2) find a new courier.

Just to keep everything link together, this is the link to the closed topic by disgruntled on the same subject http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=6569

[Wazoo]

I would also like the answers to those questions please!!!!

Absurd .. the Topic/Discussion I split this lunacy out of had all of this stuff addressed. Yet again, try following the provided SpamCop FAQ links at the top of this very page, do some reading, then try again with a "better" question.

LOL! That third action is EXACTLY what some of the self-proclaimed experts here need to do.

Blowing raspberries at someone's legitimate concerns and real-world issues isn't going to make the problem go away.

Sorry, but the "Rant" is continuing. Headed for a "Closed" status. You have jumped into an existing Topic/Discussion, apparently read none of the existing posts within that conversation ... then started another "new" Topic, yet continuing the "Rant", making absurd and unqualified remarks apparently based your flawed understanding of how any of this actually works ... you've been asked for some details, yet you've chosen to ignore those requests .... you've had references and links offered that attempt to explain various items, scenarios, and facts, yet you've chosen to ignore any and all of that data .... some folks tried analogies to try to help your understanding, yet you want to somehow change that type of 'help' into some kind of argument ....

Let's drop the "kid-glove" approach and try some simple facts.

You want any kind of "help" ???? ..... provide some details.

Your repeated question is already answered in the SpamCop FAQ (among other places) .. follow this damned link if you do nothing else at all .... Who appointed you the "cop" of the internet? Where do you get off?

If you actually want a clue, then What is the SpamCop Blocking List (SCBL)? is required reading.

Blowing raspberries ...???? I offered up my reasons for moving this non-help tirade out of the "Help" Forum .... you could have solved this issue at any time by getting down to the real facts, providing data, answering questions posted, following your own advice and "actually reading responses/answers provided" ... on and on ....

Even your accusations of "non-help" are easily blown away by the countless other Topics/Discussion in place where many folks have received help, pointers, clues, etc ..... early this morning I, myself, spent over two hours, made three phone calls, sent several e-mails while trying to help some folks contact their son, as their ISP appears to be a bit of a lost cause ... this was my time, my dime, my effort, still as a "volunteer" ... where the he** do you come up with "no help available anywhere?" ....

Bottom line, take and get a clue .. if you actually want some help, please start acting like that ....

[Merlyn]

My business e-mail address has been "spamcopped" ... again. I don't know and I don't care about the reasons why; I know I'm wholly innocent. I also know I'm losing business.

You say you are innocent and so does almost every criminal in prison

By what authority is my mail address being blacklisted?

No authority is needed.

And where's the help for the *innocent victims* of the SpamCop system? No meaningful help here whatsoever! No compensation programme, poorly-written "explanations" of what's-what, obtuse communication channels.

See answer 1 above

Stop spam by all means, but please also spare a thought for the collateral damage caused by the "cure".

Why do you "think" you are collateral damage? You offer nothing! No IP - No server name, nothing!

[Farelf]

Flippyneck, as Skizz was wont to exclaim, if disgruntled is actually a virgin.net user note that they are listed all over the shop - just a few

http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?action=checkblo...ip=86.27.62.216

http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?action=checkblo...p=82.27.245.100

http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?action=checkblo...ip=86.27.63.252

http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?action=checkblo...p=82.27.233.226

http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?action=checkblo...p;ip=82.3.75.37

http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?action=checkblo...ip=86.31.188.77

And there are many examples of previously active servers apparently pulled off the line. Perhaps their solution to listing is to simply push up a replacement. That would be fine if the listed ones were pulled off to fix vulnerabilites and returned to service but they would most likely be on top of it by now if that was the case. Looks more like the old hide the queen lurk. Looking at the circumstantial evidence on the competency of this internet provider (competency to enforce its own Acceptable Use Policy/Terms of Service in the face of advice and complaints of their breach) the words come to mind, "The quality of its operation is not assured by any competent, independent external body. It shows." Now where have I heard that before?

[agsteele]

Under whose authority does Spamcop operate? Who gives it its apparent legitimacy?

Arriving late in a threadmcan sometimes give a wider view of the discussion.

I note that disgruntled has asked his question several times AND, elsewhere, clarified that it is not his sending of Emails that is the problem but people sending to him are having their Emails bounced back.

So to restate, what I think I read elsewhere...

The authority for the use of the blocklist is entirely disgruntled's own ISP. They have chosen to use the blocklist to either filter or block incoming mail TO disgruntled from the person(s) who are trying to rech him/her.

Similarly, if disgruntled's mail destimed for another person is also being blocked then the authority for that action is at the recipient ISP.

Andrew

[Miss Betsy]

I do understand that -- but this is the essential problem with Spamcop's listing methodology. The baby gets thrown out with the bathwater. The granularity needs to be finer, so that innocents like me aren't hindered. If that's not technically possible, Spamcop should simply stop.

Because of a few people who use bad checks, everyone now has to present a picture ID. I am entirely innocent of writing checks without having the money to cover them. Why should I have to present a picture ID? Or take off my sandals in the airport?

And, in the case of spam, there are no 'innocents' on the internet. There are only people who are ignorant.

And re 'authority' - what gives you the authority to do business on the internet? spamcop has just as much authority to publish a list of IP addresses that are spam sources as you have to do whatever it is you do. No one has to buy from you. No one has to use the spamcop blocklist.

If Andrew has read the scenario correctly, then you haven't done the first step which would correct your problem and that is 'contact your ISP' - If you had, they should have told you that they were using the spamcop list and you could have vented your rage on them. (the same is true if your emails are being rejected by others - if you had contacted your ISP, you could have vented your rage on them). And the solution is the same for both scenarios - use another ISP if you don't like ISPs who use blocklists. You will still have to contend with other people who choose to use blocklists - spamcop's and other blocklists - because it is the way that ISPs control unwanted email which not only causes customers problems, but increases their costs.

The funny thing is that many people use the spamcop blocklist to tag incoming email as spam so that they do receive all their legitimate email for exactly the reasons that you state. They use spamcop because it is accurate and timely and because known customers can be whitelisted. The only problem is finding the legitimate email in the 'tagged as spam' folder. Manual inspection is a lot less accurate than any blocklist. The increase in the cost of bandwidth is just a part of doing business.

In fact, that's the bottom line. Dealing with spam and blocklists is part of doing business on the internet.

Miss Betsy

[StevenUnderwood]

Under whose authority does Spamcop operate? Who gives it its apparent legitimacy?

Spamcop (the blocklist) operates under the authority of IronPort Systems, Inc., it's owner.

SpamCop v 1.582 Copyright © 1998-2005, IronPort Systems, Inc.

The legitimacy comes from the millions of administrators who use it and find it does as advertized, lists spam sources DURING an attack and releases them when reports stop coming in. While spamcop suggests against it, I know many administrators who use ONLY bl.spamcop.net and have never had a complaint about it.

Your story has changed a couple of times (or maybe you are experiencing both sides of problems using spamcop, sending and receiving) but as stated many times here, ONLY the receiving ISP can block email for any reason, including being listed on bl.spamcop.net. If you have a problem that you want resolved, that is where you need to direct your efforts. Spamcop is simply a list of IP addresses that have had enough reports against them to become listed for a short amount of time.

If you can provide an IP address you believe is listed, we can usually provide the proof you seem to think does not exist, or we can direct you where to get that proof (deputies[at]spamcop.net). You will usually get quicker answers here, however.

Pulled from the closed thread:

I will also repeat that I have NEVER, in four years, had a single problem with non-delivery of email (save for the recent SpamCop-related trauma). That is no lie. If your experience of e-mail services in the US is such that you can't actually rely on them, then I guess that's your loss. But your assumption that it's a universal problem is wrong.

I have not either, but that does not change the fact that email is NOT a guaranteed delivery medium. There is no way in the current SMTP protocol to guarantee the preson you are directing your message to will get it, see it, or read it and there is no provision that guarantees that you will be notified if those things either happen or don't. There are dozens of single point failure points on any messages journey where you will not know the recipient did not get your message. The only fool proof method is to talk to the person (and even then, they may lie to you).

[dbiel]

ONLY the receiving ISP can block email for any reason, including being listed on bl.spamcop.net.

Minor correction.

The sending ISP (SMTP server) can also filter or block outgoing mail (if they so chose) Some people have posted complaints about this.

This changes nothing regarding the previous conversations. The problem still rests between the sender and the receipient and their ISPs who chose to accept or block mail based on their own set of standards which may include using blocking lists. But they are the ones that remain in full control. SpamCop has NO control over what they do.

[turetzsr]

<snip>

I note that disgruntled has asked his question several times AND, elsewhere, clarified that it is not his sending of Emails that is the problem but people sending to him are having their Emails bounced back.

<snip>

Hi, Andrew,

...While what you say is true for disgruntled's posts after his first one, I do not see that explanation as consistent with his original post:

My business e-mail address has been "spamcopped" ... again. I don't know and I don't care about the reasons why; I know I'm wholly innocent. I also know I'm losing business.

By what authority is my mail address being blacklisted?

<snip>

(Emphasis [italics] introduced by me).

...To clarify/repeat for the uninitiated: SpamCop does not block e-mail addresses. It lists spam sources by IP address.

[Farelf]

...While what you say is true for disgruntled's posts after his first one, I do not see that explanation as consistent with his original post ...

Yes, I sought to clarify that in http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?...ost&p=44359 but evidently it slipped beneath disgruntled's notice. The response stream too rich maybe, combined with preconceptions not easily set aside. Repeating your point to keep it at the forefront:

...To clarify/repeat for the uninitiated: SpamCop does not block e-mail addresses. It lists spam sources by IP address.