turetzsr

...Actually, no, everyone here has the same connections with SpamCop staff that I have -- you can just send an e-mail to deputies[at]admin.spamcop.net and a SpamCop deputy will (hopefully) let the relevant folks know.

...Great work, Steve! I suspect you may have happened upon an all-too-rare abuse admin team with a sufficiently low volume of complaints that they actually have a knowledgeable human reading their abuse complaint e-mails. If you tried that with Yahoo, for example, you would have been much more frustrated. <g>

Hi, Steve, ...That's three of us! ...That's not advised -- see SpamCop FAQ (to which links may be found near the top left of each SpamCop Forum page) articles labeled "-------> Material changes to spam - Updated!" and "-----> What if I break the rule(s)?" Steve (Farelf) did it only to illustrate his point, then canceled it so he would not violate the rules.

...Latest update: Scheduled Service Outage - Thursday May 10, 2012.

...Steven, while I share your frustration and agree with your point, I think it may be misplaced to direct it at techie. IIUC, techie is making a suggestion about how to code for IPv6 in general, not how specifically to do it in SpamCop and has made no public judgment about whether the time it has taken is appropriate. On the other hand, techie's "The wrong way is to simply add a check for IPv6, and puke if found, which is what currently happens, as of the update in March 2011" comment seems to assume something that isn't true -- that the current code was intended to address IPv6, which (IIUC) it was not!

...That's a very good question and one to which I'm sure everyone here wishes she or he knew the answer, so that we all could have taken that step and it would have been done long ago! My naive guess is that SpamCop is working hard to get it right, rather than just throwing out some solution that doesn't work and that it's harder to get it right than anyone thought.

...It appears to me that the offending entry isReceived: from localhost ([::1]:53899 helo=mjail0.freenet.de) by mjail0.freenet.de with esmtpa (ID suburbium[at]orenda-dryadis.de) (Exim 4.76 #1) id 1Rv7Uw-0007Qb-W1; Wed, 08 Feb 2012 14:23:46 +0100 When I remove that line and submit it to the parser, I do not get the error message about IPv6.

Hi, Salamandir, ...Not just your rant. But, sure, we can name it after you. <big g>

...See See Don D'Minion's reply in SpamCop article "spam with no originating IP." ...Not that I'm aware. We are prohibited from making "material" changes to spam and IIUC the changes that would be required (removing or changing IP Header lines) violate that policy. I'm afraid you'll just have to ignore those for now.

...Perhaps I don't understand your question but I believe the answer is that the mail is backed up and can be restored on the server side. I think that's what the very first sentence of SpamCop Forum Topic "****Please read **** Email system update #8" is saying. The big problems here seem to be that (1) the e-mail admin(s) didn't seem to be certain that the restore would be complete and (2) it took so longer to recover it. ...That's three questions. <g> I believe that some options to the first and last are given in the first post in this Topic 79280[/snapback] in the two links labeled "HERE."

...Why? It appears to me that we're in perfect agreement. My message was that if your risk-aversion to lost e-mail justifies the cost, do it yourself; your conclusion was: Looks like perfect agreement to me! <g>

...Well, consider: CES no doubt thought that its current data security policy was sufficient to avoid disaster. Nevertheless, they don't yet know, several days after the failure. And I doubt such misplaced confidence amongst e-mail service providers is limited to CES. Do you really think you should trust any service provider's (not just e-mail, for that matter) ability to keep your valuable data/ e-mails safe? ...Well, there's a trade-off here. You can spend as much time and money on your own data/ e-mail security as you feel appropriate for the value of that data/ e-mail. What is the cost to you of lost e-mails? What is your assessment of the probability of valuable lost e-mails? The answer to those questions (and perhaps others that don't occur to me off-the-cuff) help determine the answer to yours. It's kind of like life insurance.

Hi, kurly, ...You may wish to review kmolloy's post. ...Not sure it would be much better but you may wish to contribute your idea (to provide a better error message) to the "New Feature Request" SpamCop Forum.

...Amen to that! Modesty (for example, her sig: "an almost new internet user") and cheery helpfulness were the hallmarks of her posts here.

...Thanks, mrmaxx!

...Tough luck -- their server, their rules (provided they publicize that in advance, so potential customers who don't want that to be done won't subscribe). Besides, I didn't suggest scanning *all* running applications, just for the presence of an (any) active firewall and an (any) antivirus product. And if it's impossible because the customer is behind a firewall, then there's no need to scan -- the customer is doing what is needed to limit access by malware, assuming the firewall is properly configured, something the provider presumably can't tell.

...Got me, but my employer is able to do it, so there must be some way to scan a user's running applications before allowing her/him to connect to the network!

...Thanks for posting! It's good to see participation from the e-mail providers. ...Has RR considered doing what my employer does, which is to refuse access to anyone who does not have corporate-sanctioned active prophylactics (for example, virus detection and personal firewall)? I would think this would greatly reduce the amount of spam running through your system, since much (most?) spam these days is coming from "trojanned" PCs, as evidenced by the large number of spam "from" dynamic IP addresses.

...My favorite (although I've not always had luck with it) is White Pages. I've also used 411 but it looks so similar to me that I'm guessing that both use the same database.

...ROTFL! Actually reduced my BP by making me laugh (even if I didn't quite agree with the specific sentiments -- they're STILL funny!). <big g>

That's a relief...I think. Peace, DT ...But a big disappointment to me! <g> ...Is everyone I respect around here (like DavidT and StevenUnderwood) a socialist or democrat? <mock frown) <g>

...IIUC, I think the following from post #1 in this "thread" answers your question, does it not?

Hi, Derek, ...There is a link to this from the FAQ, now (unless someone has since removed the link I placed in the FAQ).

Only the SpamCop Deputies have access to detailed information about e-mail hitting spam traps. Please send an e-mail to the Deputies at address deputies[at]admin.spamcop.net and provide sufficient information to allow them to determine that you are a server admin responsible for the listed IP.

Hi, Steve! ...Your idea seems to be very popular! There are Hi, Steve! ...Your idea seems to be [b'>very[/b] popular! There are many hits in the results of a search on key words '"address book" whitelist'.