Jump to content

kwikone

Members
  • Posts

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by kwikone

  1. If you check this report you will see that SC did not generate a spam report against the spamvertised website since there were too many links. And, if you check the links you will see that they are all the same except for the GET parameters passed (such as for a static page to a shopping cart). I would like to suggest that instead of not generating any report for the spamvertised website that it check for this type of scenario and see that it is only the GET parameter(s) that are different and generate a single report OR SC should generate the spamvertised website reports up to its internal limit (that causes the too many links error)
  2. Actually, if you went to Bonded Sender you can see that there is a sliding scale (as long as you are not a non-profit with > 1,000,000 messages per month in which case you would be treated as a commercial enterprise) of application fees, annual license fees, and bond. Kerry
  3. I recently (web) subitting the following report which had a spamvertised website, but SC did not catch this fact. I have not done my own full analysis, but I highly suspect that it is probably due to missing/misplaced HTML tags (maybe done on purpose by the spammer to foul up automated decoding/parsing/reporting tools) or extra tag parameters. I did take a look and the spammer has put a style parameter into the A tag which may actually be the cause of the parsing error. I really was not sure to whom I should report this parsing problem so I decided to post this problem here and hope that one of the moderators could kick it up to whomever should be notified (and let me know whoc it should go to
×
×
  • Create New...