Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Craig

  1. Hallelujah and THANKS for the help in fixing this.

    What djdevine says goes for me too though. There are times when some kind of notice is vital, really. Please do not leave us hanging again, thanks.

    Thanks for fixing this.

    However, a series of notifications certainly was in order for a service outage of this magnitude. So, in the future, can you please:

    1) post announcements as soon as you are aware, or are made aware, of a problem?

    2) post updates on at least an hourly basis thereafter?

    I'd certainly appreciate a reply.


  2. Hey, Wazoo - Sorry to hear of the family foo, truly sorry. Nice to see that you're still helping here. Been an age since I logged in to these forums. Thanks for your help. Thanks for helping even in the midst of your personal issues.

    My attempts to login via webmail also failed with the error reported by others avoe. I managed to view and download mail via IMAP through TBird locally. Looks like no incoming since 10:26am PST. Mail's piling up on the outside accounts normally auto-popped by SpamCop. I don't know what's happening to the mail I've got dot forwarded direct to SpamCop from other accounts. Bouncing, I assume. This many hours of delay, I'm sure respondents have started getting failure messages. At least, I hope they are. At least I've retrieved the important mail previous to 10:26am PST. Thanks again for your help.

  3. Hmmm. In my SC webmail configurations, "When deleting messages, move them to your Trash folder instead of marking them as deleted?" has been selected since forever. Sometimes though deleted (or quick reported in the Held folder) messages do appear as struck out. This does not happen often. I have not noticed a Purge Deleted control. I'll look next time.

    I figure that the rare occasion of marked deleted (strikeout) instead of actual moving to Trash might be some IMAP glitch between the webmail and the actual mail server. Just guessing.

    anyway, even if I can't get the marked deleted messages to go away, after awhile they seem to do so on their own, iirc..

    Main thing is, I think, is do not let folder contents get up into the thousands.

  4. Well taken, Betsey.

    Yep, I agree that the way the various topics are parsed out between the different newsgroups works good. I could see retaining both the NG's for deeper tech exchange, and this web forum system for non-tech answer questors - but, yep, clearly identified and layed out entry points at the spamcop.net website would be one way of making the segregation work better. Frankly, I'd prefer to see the link to the entry point appear when one selects Help on the Spamcop Webmail pages. Even if it's built into the webmail help popups in a repeating footer it would be good. That would retain the webmail context sensitive help, while also providing the forums/ng access from all points.

    One can dream!

  5. OK! I said I'd report back here on this, and now I am.

    For two separate SpamCop Webmail accounts, I reset or recreated multiple filters with custom filter names. The filters have both single and multiple criteria. One of the multiple criteria filters has 13 separate OR criteria.

    The custom filter names have not changed back to "Converted IMP Filter", as occured previously. The new/renamed filter creation was performed a week or more ago.

    So, looks like no problem.

    That is all!

    thanks again for the feedback.

  6. Ah, I'm getting it now. Thanks for the illumination. I guess next time I'm in need of SpamCop Web Mail help, or SpamCop web based spam reporting, I'll come here, and/or if it's a partiuclarly complex problem I'll consider firing up the nntp client and look over in news land too.

    Since usenet got so deluged with spam I've hardly been there at all. But the SC newsgroups have been particularly free of it, (of course!) :), so it's not a problem there.

  7. I'm a bit apprehensive in making this topic response, so please bear with me and know that I intend to be constructive.

    I'm green here, but no sprout otherwise. I've got too many years of experience on flat nonthreaded conferencing systems like this. As well, I operate as host for nine private web based online conferences for a nonprofit. I'm as clueless as the next person, but at least I can say I've been 'here' before.

    So, anyway, what I'm finding here on this system is that it is very unclear as to what kind of questions and user contributions are actually welcome here. I came here because the most obvious links to help from the SC webmail system led me here. Nothing bopped me over the head on the way in to let me know that if I want technical advice with some depth, I should go back to the newsgroups. In fact, iirc, all I saw was text saying that these forums are where help and mutual support will be offered. It's only after reading various topic responses here that I now understand that not only do the newsgroups remain alive, but in fact they seem to be where we the users are supposed to go for technical discussion of depth. How deep that depth is, and where the line is, is unclear to me. (Given my own attempts at helping here, I now don't know if I've been helpful, or what.) I don't know if my technical questions have been out of place, and should have been placed on the newsgroups. It would be nice to have a single point of contact, but I can swing with whatever, as long as I know what whatever is.

    Beyond that, it's not clear to me now, at all, where the line lies here between too shallow and too deep, in the two forums, SpamCop Help and SpamCop Email. The description of the Lounge indicates that not for SpamCop tech stuff, like spamcop.social. But, it seems that the Lounge if full of spamcop tech topics. Have I got that wrong?

    I know it is tough to build a conferencing system like this. And I want to make it clear that this has been quite helpful to me so far. You folks have spent time helping me and others solve spamcop problems, and you deserve all the thanks.

    I hope this isn't too disjointed. I'm coming down off some hours of boring system work, the kind that requires concentration and isn't very fun. So, slackage please.

    That's all!

  8. Thanks for the responses, guys.

    JeffG Posted on Feb 21 2004, 09:45 AM: 

    Have you tried creating named filters with just one criterion?

    Are the "Converted IMP Filter"s functionally equivalent to the filters you created?


    I belive I had one single-criteria filter that got auto-renamed back when the system conversion was done, but I don't recall if when i subsequently renamed it back whether the name held or not. The filters were working, and performing as originally created, so I seldom looked at them.

    jefft Posted on Feb 21 2004, 03:31 PM  

    I don't see how it's possible that this is happening over and over. I'm wondering if you're not actually getting them renamed in the first place. <snip>

    It is possible that I user-errored and clicked "Return to Filter List" instead of "Save" from the Filter Rule editing dialog. But, given my usual user behaviors, not too likeley, as I would normally automatically verify the save by checking the results listing, in this case the Existing Rules page.

    Hmmm, I'm looking at the Existing Rules page now in another browser session window. It's possible that I exited the Existing Rules page by clicking the Mail or Options icons instead of the Apply Filters button. I'm skeptical though, since, again, my normal user behavior is to check these things more than once. Yeah, superstitious user actions I think they are called...


    I guess my only suggestion is to try deleting the filters and starting over or something like that.

    I just renamed the first filter on the list, clicked Save, Apply Filters, logged out, closed all browser session windows, and logged back in. My first filter custom name is still there. So, I'll let it stand for a few days, check, and report back.

    I can live without custom name multiple criteria filters. But, I'm curious. So, if the first custom name holds, in a few days I'll try creating one or more multi-criteria filters with custom names, and see if they hold.

    I'll report back.

    Again thanks for the input, fellows.

  9. Ah, a response! :D

    Yep, these are the filters we can configure on the SpamCop Webmail. I see that I neglected to say clearly that the filters are getting renamed by the system, from the original names I give them.

    For example, I created a filter named something like Virus Bounces, and added a few OR criteria for things like Subject contains "VIRUS" or "DAEMON". Criteria like that. Then, some time later I return to SpamCop webmail and the filters are separated into separate filters for each criteria, and the filters are all renamed as "Converted IMP Filter"

    Perhaps this is clearer. Thanks for noting the lack :)

  10. Most of the recent virus/worms forge everything, so the actual sending account isn't available. Figuring out what the right abuse address is for a given IP is also not easy.  Spamcop has a complicated (and much debated) method for doing it, involving lookups to several places, and it still sometimes gets it wrong, so there is a database of manual overrides maintained by people.  That's not something you could build into an antivirus package.


    That's what I was afraid of. Someone way upstream posted somethign about SMTP timeouts, because the server/AV package would have to hold the connection open while doing the rDNS lookup on top of it. I'm just throwing out wishful suggestions, being ignorant of real mail/server admin technique.

    Unless the particular virus is known to leave the actual sending account in the header, the best option is just to dump the email silently.  A better option would be not to accept the email in the first place.

    I like that last one, just to not accept the mail, but I guess the same ID and timeout problems exist..

  11. Well, thanks for your response, Wazoo. I appreciate your time to make it.

    Unfortunately, the friend's email address is on our little company domain, so even if its propagation onto bunches of filthy spammer address CD's is the problem, it would be a headache for him to change it. If, in fact, the volume of spam is just too much for the spamcop solution, then changing it will have to happen. I don't want that unless it's the only way though, as I like spamcop and want to support them. (I love reporting spam, heh)

    As it is, his initial major mbox cluster%![at]! did happen after he was offline for something over two weeks, I believe. So, I don't think the Held Mail spam and In box virus bounce numbers up in five figures is all that unusual for that length of time. Especially since the time offline happened to happen just as SoBig hit last summer.

    I mean, anyway, can these numbers be so unusual? And if they are not, it would be nice if we could more easily just nuk'em. That's all. Now that we've got his boxes cleaned out, he's having no problem dealing with it. So, maybe it's ok, for him. It may not be for others in the situation he was in though.

  12. I, too, would also like to be able to see the IP address of the poster.

    Call me stupid....

    But why would the average reader ever need the poster's IP address (question mark) (this keyboard in this cafe sucks)

    On other systems, when I've seen IP addresses auto posted next to the posters forum userid, I figured it to be a gesture toward non-anonymity.

  13. ...How will you determine the "'anti-virus' sender?"  The reason I ask is that if you bounce it to the "From" address, you could be sending it to some hapless e-mail user whose address was forged.

    Well, perhaps the server doing the bouncing should bounce the message to the actual sending mail account as revealed in the full virus-laden message headers instead of just grabbing the From header value, or, if that is munged, the abuse address at the actual sending mail account IP address.

    This question as to what qualifies as spam always seems to devolve to the question as what qualifies as unsolicited and bulk. A bounce going to an actual sender and/or the admin address at their mail account host, is sent in response to the original message. So, while the original sender may not have explicitly requested a reply, it the bounce is a response to their message, not the message initiating the stream. So, calling properly addressed bounce messages spam seems a bit precious to me.

    I expect that the real issue is that many mail server admins don't know how to configure them to bounce to the real originator, or even if that is possible.

  14. Spamcop personnel, how many? Oh, I have no idea. What, five people maybe? Why do you ask? Is there some implication I'm missing here? I'm not blaming JeffG for anything? Why, does it appear that I am? I know he's a volunteer, and give him appreciation for that.

    With all the filtering and blocking settings offered, can you explain the problem of "thousands of messages" ..??? or is it just because they got into trying to "protect" their e-mail addresses way too late in the game?

    What's your point? That the user is at fault for getting spammed? Or are you tryign to say somethign else? Look, I don't know what motivates you here, but I'm just looking for answers to solve problems, and trying to participate constructively. Here, go read this if you want a description of the problem with clearing stuffed spamcop mailboxes:

    Folder Level Delete Malfing???, Emptying from Folder Navigator No Worky

    Which started from an earlier topic, here:

    Selecting and deleting multple held emails

    If after reading those you are still confused as to the meaning of my posting,, I'll be sorry, but I don't know what more I can do.

  15. I'm with Betsy. Travelling overseas for quite awhile, I didn't check the newsgroups for quite some time, and when I returned to home base and had a spamcop problem, I figured I'd go to the newsgroups the way I usually do, by launching my NNTP client by clicking on the Help links on the old spamcop home page. I was surprised when I arrived at this forum instead of the newsgroups. Now I see the newsgroup links buried below the fold on the home page, with not much in the way of clear headers indicating why one would go to them instead of here. It would be nice if some clearer headings and explanatory text could be provided on the home page. I had no idea that this web forum was only for newbie questions. It jsut looked like the newsgroups were being dumped.