Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

2,341 profile views

MIG's Achievements

Advanced Member

Advanced Member (3/6)



  1. Greetings all👋! I hope everyone's well and you've all been behaving!? Would anyone care to cast their 👀s over this bit of scum pleeze? Issue is, apparently "no links found", 'cept, I can find 8 - 4 are enclosed in brackets (), not sure about them, 4 are standard, from my objs, they're the ones that've confuzzed moi, why didn't SC "detect"? Yes Master, I know urls are secondary to source, but, but, but..... https://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z6563176953zf21fc4b02078997bd0dcfb215b0fa333z VT tells me urls resolve to = netops@singlehop.com, source = = singlehop.net Anyone care to share their wisdom please? I remain, a grateful G🦗H🙏
  2. Hey @HeatherReid43 When I parse I get the same as you ( I think) https://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z6560834333zcdffbb65e17c13c1feb6ff3d7dd203c9z , but no Tad confused by: [Reports regarding this spam, have already been sent]? On a lighter note, $2,500,000.00 USD, on an ATM card no less! 2,5mil, that'd keep the family fed for a week or two😉. And Mrs.Murakami Yukie has covered 1/2 the 🌐, working so hard getting the 🤑 to you, sigh, why are we so unappreciative? Cheers! G🦗H
  3. Thanks Petzl, you've posted CERT before, I'd lost it. It's a bloody good resource! 🙏🏻G🦗H
  4. RobiBue! Вы не доверяете "Я ВПРАВО! Я ВПРАВО! Я ВПРАВО! Я ВПРАВО, ВПРАВО, ВПРАВО, ВПРАВО? получить тебя за стеной, за ГУЛАГ, стат! В шоке! G🦗H is 🙏🏼🙏🏻 🙏🏾 🙏🏿 🙏🏽 🙏🏼 🙏🏿4 a mass intervention.
  5. NordVPN 🤐🙄☹️ G🦗H read "internet privacy vs internet piracy"🙃
  6. Hey Nickjonson, Could you provide some more specific, detailed information so we can answer address the questions please? Re: "we might get rid of the real users", (imo) there's always a "risk" however, it's not common... Have you had this happen, can you clarify please? Do you have any Spamcop tracking urls please? Please let us know? Cheers! G🦗H
  7. Hello Jelmer, Yep, noted the emphasis on "when I have time"🙂. The "essay" is a good read, even tho I'm disappointed it will be good to know if the solution works, let us know, when you have time😉 Cheers! G🦗H
  8. Hello Tesseract, Thanks! (G🦗H did have the same thought), however, it's always fun to have new toys to play with even if they're the same toys! Parsing the 1st spam/tracking URL, without hosts, https://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z6558422807zd2525b6f74678b5e8a4df150cb699739z Parsing the 1st spam/tracking URL, without hosts: https://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z6558423020z31cbae589deaec37fb6972c626c7c239z May I ask, have you contacted SCA, Richard? Some folks are reporting SCA are fixing, account HOST configuration issue, on a case by case basis. Please let us know? Cheers G🦗H
  9. Thank you Lisati, I did wonder about posting, but, thought I seek opinion/s from others with more knowledge & that's exactly what's happend🤩 Appreciate your input! Cheers! G🦗H
  10. SpamCop is using spamcop@mailservices.yahoo.com for Other tools give: network-abuse@cc.yahoo-inc.com https://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z6558287967z6f3031f13bb6ba6fc5afe9ad57bd5526z
  11. G🦗H loves perl(s). Does that mean it will be able to be incorporated into SC Parser Jelmer? Cheers! G🦗H
  12. May we have a/some tracking URLs please Tesseract? Cheers, G🦗H
  13. Hello Gabrielt, I'll side-step all of LKing_Master's considered advice & just share a couple of things. 1. I took your original: https://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z6557766050z3c1f36e50c5140df21e4fdbf0d568a5cz - Wednesday at 10:33 PM parsed it thru a SC account without any MAILHOSTS configured, result: https://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z6558104666zfcc84ec0d118545d96b9b4b48e77879ez 2. Mailhost configuration problem, identified internal IP as source. No source IP address found, cannot proceed. Nothing to do >> The errors in your parsed spam: Hank, one of our friends, had this very issue: http://forum.spamcop.net/topic/37788-resolvednbspmailhost-configuration-problem-identified-internal-ip-as-source/ We all took to it with our usual zeal, however, in the end, Hank contacted Richard, SC Admin, result: SOLVED by Spamcop staff. Problem found and fixed. Here is the explanation: ========== a.local-delivery was in the mailhosts, but b.local-delivery wasn't. At one time that would have been ignored as a local hop, but some of the coding for IPv6 screwed things up so even versions numbers of some things look like IP addresses. -- Richard ============ If you haven't done this & think it's possible solution please let us know if you get a happy result? Thanks & cheers! G🦗H
  14. 1. Until MS fix the "hundred thousand servers, the fix is measured in years, not weeks or months", we (spamfighters) must continue to manually remove the 1st receive header. 2. Correct. 3. No, I don't they (MS) manually pass to the right ISP/Host owner, in fact, in my experience, MS simply engage in "hot potato-mind-numbing" converstions with statements like "not our responsibility"🤬 This is completely contrary to Richards statement "All is not lost though, as Hotmail's parsing engines when they receive the report does pass through the report to the right party. It also helps Hotmail block new spam from that source". I've never experienced this result from MS, not saying Richard is wrong, simply saying, my experience with MS, on this specific subject, has never resulted in MS being proactive with the actions Richard describes. 4. Agreed, however, MS don't have a good track record when it comes to "fixing" their products. G🦗H
  • Create New...