Jump to content

Using SpamCop with Mailwasher


gaby

Recommended Posts

Hello everybody

I am sending spam to spamcop via MailWasherPro. I simply check the "spamcop" column in front of the spam message, and Mailwasher processes it.

After a while, I receive an e-mail from spamcop, telling "spamcop is ready to process your spam", but also "Use links to finish spam reporting..."

Question 1 : does Mailwasher do all the job or do I have to do something else ?

Question 2 : If MW has done all the job, is there a mean to get rid of these answers from spamcop. One answer for each spam is plenty !

Does anybody use MailWasher and can help me ? :blink:

Gaby

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello everybody

19029[/snapback]

Hi, gaby!

<snip>After a while, I receive an e-mail from spamcop, telling "spamcop is ready to process your spam", but also "Use links to finish spam reporting..."

Question 1 : does Mailwasher do all the job or do I have to do something else ?

19029[/snapback]

...Are you asking if the message "Use links to finish spam reporting..." is something you can ignore? The answer is, no, not if you really want SpamCop to report the spam to the service provider abuse desks.

Question 2 : If MW has done all the job, is there a mean to get rid of these answers from spamcop. One answer for each spam is plenty !

19029[/snapback]

...MW has done the job of submitting the spam to the parser. However, if you wish SpamCop to send the reports then you must complete your job and review the proposed reporting.

Does anybody use MailWasher and can help me ?  :blink:

Gaby

19029[/snapback]

...No, I don't -- reporting without it seems sufficient for me! :) <g>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting in that I blew off responding to a number of newsgroup postings this morning, as they all seemed to need the nudge to come over "here" and some folks over there are getting rather tired of my continued reference to this Forum set-up as "the" answer. Nice to see that one of these posters found his/her way here on their own and has already received a good answer. Kudo's to all concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Steve

Thank you for answer.

What a job ! Should I complete the job, message by message, or can I process them all in one click ?

If every message is to be processed separately, it means I should now if this is really spam or if I was wrong when I first forwarded it. But I am quite unable to read what is in the message and header as presented by spamcop. Is there a user guide somewhere ?

Gaby

:unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Steve

19038[/snapback]

Hi, Gaby!

Thank you for answer.

19038[/snapback]

...My pleasure! :) <g>

What a job ! Should I complete the job, message by message, or can I process them all in one click ?

19038[/snapback]

...It's message-by-message. Tip: if that seems to require more time than you're willing to devote to spam reporting, then don't report all of them, only the ones for which you feel you have the time.

If every message is to be processed separately, it means I should now if this is really spam or if I was wrong when I first forwarded it. But I am quite unable to read what is in the message and header as presented by spamcop.

19038[/snapback]

...Nope. You should just check to see that the e-mail addresses to which SpamCop offers to send a report do not include your own ISP or e-mail provider (unless the spam actually did come from your ISP or e-mail provider). They web page you go to to confirm that you actually want SpamCop to send the reports has a link that allows you to view the ascii content of the spam.

Is there a user guide somewhere ?

Gaby

:unsure:

19038[/snapback]

...The FAQ might have some information that might help. See the "pinned" item on the forum main page.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Steve

Thank you for answer.

What a job ! Should I complete the job, message by message, or can I process them all in one click ?

If every message is to be processed separately, it means I should now if this is really spam or if I was wrong when I first forwarded it. But I am quite unable to read what is in the message and header as presented by spamcop. Is there a user guide somewhere ?

Gaby

:unsure:

19038[/snapback]

The answer is Yes, you need to process each spam individually.

The reason is to check the results generated by the parser to avoid incorrect submissions.

The parser is only a tool. It is not perfect and it does make mistakes.

As far as a users guide, the FAQ is probably the best that is availble at this time.

Start witht he section titled "SpamCop Parsing and Reporting Service"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While MailWasher is a fine program. For its "Pro" price one can get a FULL SpamCop email address and get FULL POWER & VERY accurate spam filtering backed up by SpamCop Email & VER® (Very Easy Reporting) from the fastest mail servers on this planet. SpamCop will reliably retrieve email from as many addresses as you have and only allow legitimate email to your inbox (at least this is my and most's case)

YES there is much much more! Aside from putting money SpamCops way you get every email virus filtered and can use without fear your email address. Sign up and effectively immunise yourself against Spammers (spammers only end up having email spam immediately bitbinned as they try)

Spammers effectively just end up in a sin bin (attack being the best defence) to be reported & blocked . That’s while they try to send spam, not days later :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, it's quite clear

Gaby :D

Hi, gaby!

...Are you asking if the message "Use links to finish spam reporting..." is something you can ignore?  The answer is, no, not if you really want SpamCop to report the spam to the service provider abuse desks.

...MW has done the job of submitting the spam to the parser.  However, if you wish SpamCop to send the reports then you must complete your job and review the proposed reporting.

...No, I don't -- reporting without it seems sufficient for me!  :) <g>

19032[/snapback]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds quite sensible. Il will seriously consider this solution

Thank you for advice

gaby :)

While MailWasher is a fine program. For its "Pro" price one can get a FULL SpamCop email address and get FULL POWER & VERY accurate spam filtering backed up by SpamCop Email & VER® (Very Easy Reporting) from the fastest mail servers on this planet. SpamCop will reliably retrieve email from as many addresses as you have and only allow legitimate email to your inbox (at least this is my and most's case)

YES there is much much more! Aside from putting money SpamCops way you get every email virus filtered and can use without fear your email address. Sign up and effectively immunise yourself against Spammers

Spammers effectively just end up in a sin bin to be reported & blocked. That’s while they try to send spam, not days later :D

19126[/snapback]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello everybody

This forum is quite useful to me. With a few messages exchanges, my view on spam fighting is changing a lot, thanks again to those who answered to me!

I think I will give up MailWasher and suscribe a spamcop mail account.

One problem though. Spamcop will not eliminate all spam (I receive also spam which is not recorded in its database). So I will still have to report.

As far as I know, there are 2 ways of reporting :

1) Pasting headers and body : I tried it, it was OK, but it is quite cumbersome.

2) Sending by e-mail to my spamcop reporting address. The spamcop help specifies that spam mail should be sent as attachment. But if I attach a spam to an empty message sent to spamcop, the answer is "SpamCop could not find your spam message in this email"

What is wrong (I am using Outlook) ?

In addition, is it possible to attach several spams to the same message ?

I progress, not easily though !

Gaby :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. The spamcop email system allows the user to use serveral blocklists, not just spamcop. It also has a spamassassin setting which can be adjusted to eliminate most of the spam getting through the system. I have my "slip-by" down to about 1-3 per day.

2. Outlook (full, not the Express version) is not a good tool for spam fighting because of the way it handled the headers of the message.

3. If you use a spamcopo email account to collect your messages, you could check the webmail account for any spam messages and report them from there before downloading your good messages to your local machine. That is how I do it and it works quite well. There is a thread here that explains how others use the service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

gaby .. duplicate post deleted. Remaining post merged into your existing Topic. As stated already within this Topic and in the other Topic you again asked the question, there is an existing FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) here that does answer the question you just asked. Mailwasher is a tool that allegedly works around the problems with Outlook reporting to the SpamCop parser. There are others, as seen in the FAQ. The bottom line is that Outlook was not designed for this type of environmant, so it's all patchwork and manipulation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is wrong (I am using Outlook) ?

19167[/snapback]

Basically, Gaby, you answered your own question there. As it says in the FAQ it is a "feature" of Outlook that it stores the message body in a non-standard way that the rest of the world can not understand. On impoting emails it messes them up in such a way that the spamcop parser has no chance of recontructing them because data has been lost. This is NOT Spamcop's fault!

So why do you use outlook? I'm told that it's a very good PIM and can be used accross networks to help groups of workers arrange convenient meeting times etc. Is it essential to your way of working that email be handled by Outlook? Do you use all its functionality or do you just use it as an email client because you installed Office and it 'took over'?

If the latter, I'd stongly suggest you stop using it altogether in favour of the free email client Thunderbird from www.mozilla.org - it's better, leaner. faster and safer.

(PS I wouldn't touch Outlook Express with a bargepole)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1.  The spamcop email system allows the user to use serveral blocklists, not just spamcop.  It also has a spamassassin setting which can be adjusted to eliminate most of the spam getting through the system.  I have my "slip-by" down to about 1-3 per day.

2.  Outlook (full, not the Express version) is not a good tool for spam fighting because of the way it handled the headers of the message.

3.  If you use a spamcopo email account to collect your messages, you could check the webmail account for any spam messages and report them from there before downloading your good messages to your local machine.  That is how I do it and it works quite well.  There is a thread here that explains how others use the service.

19170[/snapback]

If I understand correctly, the situation with Outlook is quite strange. It does not work for some guys (unfortunately I am one of those), and we know why (Outlook changes messages). But it does work for some other guys, and nobody seems to know why. There must be some critical option somewhere !

I am reluctant to give up with Outlook because I use it for other things than e-mails, and also I like the archiving feature.

So I will try the add-ins you suggested to me, and I will tell you if it works better.

See you later then !

Gaby;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I understand correctly, the situation with Outlook is quite strange. It does not work for some guys (unfortunately I am one of those), and we know why (Outlook changes messages). But it does work for some other guys, and nobody seems to know why. There must be some critical option somewhere !

Your "nobody seems to know why" isn't exactly true. The problem starts with the end-user's knowledge and experience. Then one moves to the design and intent of the Outlook product and the interaction of the end-user with this tool. So many things that can go wrong there. But, one also has to add in that if the Outlook tool on the end-user's system is also connected to an Exchamge type server, then the configuration of that server also comes into play. (Though not sure of the latest versions, in the past) Outlook could be installed in various forms, Corporate or Internet .. then there are the various additional tools, add-ins, extras, etc. that may or may not have been installed. Add to that whether any of the avaiable Service Packs have been installed. Add to that the scenario where some third-party tools have been installed. Add that perhaps the user had come across a great REG hack somewhere that changes a few things beyond what was expected.

Some people have written up utilities that work for them, but others aren't working with the same setup. The utility writer wrote around what he/she knew and why it doesn't work elsewhere is beyond him/her. Another person wrote a macro thing that works fine "there" but another user finds that macros aren't allowed to run on his/her system. Then we add in that Outlook 97 doesn't work the same as Outlook 2003 .. it looks pretty close but the internals are all different. If you'll note, it's hard to get folks to start out with the fact that they are using Outlook, but so many don't know of other versions, so that little extra factoid gets left out. And of course there are those folks that will try to apply the latest patches and security fixes to their copy of Outlook 97, thinking that the description of "Oulook 2003" simply means that it's the most recent patch .. then wondering why so much stuff no longer works at all ... or the "I use Windows XP, so I must have Outlook XP installed" whether it's true or not ...

So it's not that "nobody knows why" .. it's that I can't tell from here what you are using, how you are using it, what you are conneted to, how all of this stuff is configured, and just exactly what is different between your system and mine .....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<snip>

As far as I know, there are 2 ways of reporting :

1) Pasting headers and body : I tried it, it was OK, but it is quite cumbersome.

2) Sending by e-mail to my spamcop reporting address. The spamcop help specifies that spam mail should be sent as attachment. But if I attach a spam to an empty message sent to spamcop, the answer is "SpamCop could not find your spam message in this email"

What is wrong (I am using Outlook) ?

In addition, is it possible to attach several spams to the same message ?

<snip>

19167[/snapback]

...This may help: My reply in thread "Reporting spam".
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your "nobody seems to know why" isn't exactly true.  The problem starts with the end-user's knowledge and experience.  Then one moves to the design and intent of the Outlook product and the interaction of the end-user with this tool.  So many things that can go wrong there.  But, one also has to add in that if the Outlook tool on the end-user's system is also connected to an Exchamge type server, then the configuration of that server also comes into play.  (Though not sure of the latest versions, in the past) Outlook could be installed in various forms, Corporate or Internet .. then there are the various additional tools, add-ins, extras, etc. that may or may not have been installed.  Add to that whether any of the avaiable Service Packs have been installed.  Add to that the scenario where some third-party tools have been installed.  Add that perhaps the user had come across a great REG hack somewhere that changes a few things beyond what was expected.

Some people have written up utilities that work for them, but others aren't working with the same setup.  The utility writer wrote around what he/she knew and why it doesn't work elsewhere is beyond him/her.  Another person wrote a macro thing that works fine "there" but another user finds that macros aren't allowed to run on his/her system.  Then we add in that Outlook 97 doesn't work the same as Outlook 2003 .. it looks pretty close but the internals are all different.  If you'll note, it's hard to get folks to start out with the fact that they are using Outlook, but so many don't know of other versions, so that little extra factoid gets left out.  And of course there are those folks that will try to apply the latest patches and security fixes to their copy of Outlook 97, thinking that the description of "Oulook 2003" simply means that it's the most recent patch .. then wondering why so much stuff no longer works at all ... or the "I use Windows XP, so I must have Outlook XP installed" whether it's true or not ...

So it's not that "nobody knows why" .. it's that I can't tell from here what you are using, how you are using it, what you are conneted to, how all of this stuff is configured, and just exactly what is different between your system and mine .....

19176[/snapback]

Sorry wazoo,

Of course I am conscious of what's behind our (almost) user friendly interfaces. And of course it is beyond the capabilities of an individual to manage the type of problem I had. But I think spamcop should handle this problem of submiting easily from the most popular e-mail softwares.

Never mind, the OLSpamCop Reporter add-in seems to perform well, and with my brand new spamcop e-mail account which I pop without any problem I have very few spams who "slip in".

Thank you for comments

Gaby

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SpamCop will reliably retrieve email from as many addresses as you have

19126[/snapback]

That statement is true for the vast majority of people, but unfortunately does not scale correctly. SpamCop will reliably retrieve email from as many as ten POP3, MSN, MSN Hotmail, Yahoo!, and/or AOL accounts, and hopefully you can forward from the rest of your accounts.

Yes, I have lots of accounts. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...