Farelf

Hi mrmaxx. I suspect anything, touched by Outlook and submitted by mail, will be er ... suspect but I think you will have to ask a deputy. The door was certainly 'left open' for add-ons/add-ins but AFAIK there has been no confirmation of specifics. Unless anyone comes up with a better idea, I suggest that you ask. I can certainly confirm that the headers - as seen in the two reports you gave links for - are, character-by-character from the text of the "View entire message" pages pasted into Excel, precisely the same except the Outlook case has two extra (non-critical) lines: X-Vipre-Scanned: 0007FA8A00150D0007FBD7-TDI Bcc: Deputies address is deputies[at]admin.spamcop.net If SpamSource 4 is confirmed as an 'authorised' add-on to Outlook 2007 for mailed submissions, it would be appreciated if you could pass the word on with a further post 'here' . Or if it's not .

Deputy Richard responded Richard goes on to say work is underway, as an immediate response to the forwarded Outlook problem, to recognize future submissions and cut them from the stream (with explanation to reporters).

From http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=10241 (O/P brantgurga) Added emphasis. As a result of a fairly lengthy and intense investigation of Outlook 2003 and 2007: Outlook does *not* include full and accurate headers when you forward spams as attachments. It reorders the Received headers, which makes them untrustworthy, as well as deleting/not forwarding other headers including X-headers, which is of less importance but which may loose some valuable information needed by ISPs/hosting companies. The result of the 'scrambled" or reordered Received headers means that SpamCop does not reliably know where the injection point of the spam is. Outlook is reordering the headers, not SpamCop. Thusly, if you are running Outlook you *may not* forward your spams as an attachment for processing. You can copy/paste or look into running mailwasher or some other 3rd party add-in/add-on but you must stop forwarding as an attachment. I want to thank the SC users who cheerfully gave of their time ito help in tracking this down. Ellen SpamCop wazoo/mods -- if you would propagate this info to the wiki or other areas as necessary it would be appreciated.

˙˙lɐɔıɹoɥʇǝɹ ɟo ʇɹos ¿ʇɐɔ ǝɥʇ pǝllıʞ ʎʇısoıɹnɔ www.revfad.com/flip.html

lɯ�‡ɥ�™dıl�Ÿ/ɯo�”�™pɐ�Ÿ�Œǝɹ�™ʍʍʍ//:d�‡�‡ɥ - dıl�Ÿ �ƒuı�‡sǝ�‡ Well, sort of cool. But of course it doesn't stand up to the quick edits. lɯʇɥ˙dılɟ/ɯoɔ˙pɐɟʌǝɹ˙ʍʍʍ//:dʇʇɥ - dılɟ ƃuıʇsǝʇ

Hi Brad, your query has drawn no response so far so to get something happening ... Merged with this lengthy topic - have you skimmed through it already? Have you looked at http://www.greylisting.org/forums/index.php ? As far as I can see your query is not specifically covered here or in the greylisting forum (I've not looked that closely) - though I would be surprised if the general discussion of the way it all works doesn't answer you. Hopefully an actual user can step in and point you in the right direction if it continues to elude you. Let's know how you're getting on, either way.

ЅРАМ TM ЅPAM TM SРAM TM SPАM TM SPAМ TM Takes uncommon effort, not a risk (and will fall apart on quick edit, etc.). 0405, 0420, etc.

Exactly right, I didn't anticipate a response - just seemed to have some interesting possibilities if left. Or it might be desirable to change the behavior. Nothing worth any sort of priority of itself. But raised partly because such things sometimes lead elsewhere, to more worthy things. [sorry myself for not jumping in more quickly with assurances - a server or two seems to have briefly gone offline here with a local thunder storm. Send her down Hughie! Rain, that is, you can hold off on the St Barbara's dear old dad stuff.]

Test 58880[/snapback] i. img fetched (only) when not logged in. When logged, opens link in new page

I would be inclined to the charitable view. Total volumes are trending up, it is true - http://www.spamcop.net/spamgraph.shtml?spamyear but at the same time it is my impression that the "lacking dns" proportion is steadily increasing thus for RRs and other assignments of this world to drop through the rankings either requires some serious effort (in the way Comcast has seemingly applied itself) or a shifting of the blame - but http://www.senderbase.org/senderbase_queries/main shows both RR and Comcast are 'way up there in the rankings of total mail. So to drop off the radar in spam rankings has to be a valid achievement, I would think. Am I missing something?

Well, thank you. If only there were more ... but even one is a bonus!

That's fantastic Don. Well done! This could be the thin edge of the wedge to convince others too ...

As Will (Telarin) said, it seems like your friend has changed his address. sbcglobal.net is one which rejects unknown users (many don't). The "other side" of testing by sending to another sbcglobal address is to test sending to the same address from another location. This actually seems pointless as the reason for rejection seems clear but, if you want to do it, you could use http://hexillion.com/asp/samples/ValidateEmail.asp which connects to the network under query from the/a hexillion server (instead of from yours). Unless your friend's address is accepted on that test, you have your independent confirmation of the cause.

Who/what is Stukachkov and what did he, she, it or they do to you?

Test of APEWS multi-moderation option There is no connection between SpamCop.net and APEWS. However, because the APEWS FAQ was apparently misunderstood, the following data is provided; ______________________________________________________________________________ Considering the current behavior and management of the APEWS blacklist, we can only agree with the advice given at Al Iverson's DNS RESOURCE - - read it at: What to do if you are listed on APEWS ________________________________________________________________________________ [APEWS] removed from topic title - it works fine

Hi Chris (we have to stop meeting this way). Theoretically ACMA is the controlling body - I can't see anything there offhand - try the good folk at AMTA-Code to protect consumers from SMS spam who seem to think it is covered - it will take a 'phone call (quel surprise) I would guess. Could be worse - remember when consumers had to pay to receive unsolicited SMS? Anyway, if you find anything you might like to update here for the benefit of other Aussies bedeviled by the demon tellingbone.

The "edited by" (attribution) line - muggins (me) having lost track of moderator functions associated therewith. Ah well, I was hired for my big mouth, not technical mastery.

Testing too. again and again

Test topics appear to be treated pretty much like "How to use" pages. Just taking the "top" pages of various forums currently (by linear correlation) - TEST Views 1272 + 151 per reply HOW TO USE - Forum, Reporting Views 1735 + 374 per reply Contrast with HELP - Reporting, BL, Mail, Mailhosts Views 72 + 33 per reply LOUNGE Views 25 per reply Fairly obviously the length of time any given topic spends on the forum's "front page" has a lot to do with it. (Some correlations are "weak" - they do not account for much of the variance - but all are assured by high confidence levels - the least of which indicates 1/34,543 probability of chance attribution). [it's a test to see if various characters are altered in quick edit `~ [at] #$%^&*-_=+"<>?/\|]

Well, 400 ain't 1,000 but as Will says, a largish chunk thereof - suggest you contact JT to clear the way JIC. If you haven't his mail address, use the contact form - http://mail.spamcop.net/contact.php Q1 draws nigh ...

Yes, 10 is the limit - add one more and kapow

I believe it was StevenUnderwood who once alerted me to this being 90 days, rather than a specific number of reports/pages. Which certainly holds true for the date of posting your result initially, in comparison to the earliest date found. What a relief, all of us in the office can put our shoes and socks back on now.

To explain: just looking at what happens to links when a post is moved. This was where it was moved "to". The link to the previous location then went to the top of the old topic. But then I am, as often confessed, a consistent liar.

Test post ignore

The views on fairly well all the test topics are way out of proportion to the contents - grounds for endless conjecture.