Jump to content

louisd

Members
  • Posts

    59
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by louisd

  1. This morning I sent the following note to Grande Communications. Maybe they really do care?! ------------------------------ I noticed today that your company refuses reports from Spamcop about sites that you host that are being spamvertised. This seems very strange to me for a company that has "Where Values Count" as their trademark. Does this mean that you simply don't like spamcop reports, or that you don't care if you are hosting spamvertised websites? If it is the first of the options can you tell me how you prefer reporting to about sites that you host that are being spamvertised? Thank you. --Louis ---------------- I just received the following reply: Louis, Thank you for contacting us and bringing this issue to our attention. We have reenabled the setting at Spamcop that allows the sending of those reports to us. The setting has been corrected and we will research this to ensure that it does not happen again in the future. In the future, if this does happen, you are welcome to email us directly at abuse(at)grandecom.com to notify us of potential spam sites. Robert Duncan Grande Communications
  2. I'm not sure if this is the right forum for this, or if there's even a forum for this, but for about a year reports about Stockhouse have been routing to the spammer (ntp.net). Here is a tracking link that shows the parsing of such a spam: http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z934830210z89...34d788413aeb25z I reported this on the news groups many many months ago but the routing continues to notify the spammer rather than their upstream. If this isn't the right place, is there a right place or someone to e-mail? Thanks. --Louis
  3. Is it dictionary-able? Just a first name and initial? I get about 30 e-mail a day to a gmail account that's never been used but it just a first name and initial.
  4. Here's the decoded tracking URL: http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z749971192zba...be59f19ebcf5e0z
  5. Congratulations, you've managed to get yourself added to a number of personal blocklists based on your cartoony threat. Had you spent any time reading the FAQs you would have seen that SpamCop blocks nothing. SpamCop simply publishes a list of IP addresses that service providers are free to use as they wish. In fact, SpamCop recommends that the list NOT be used for blocking, but be used for filtering instead. Of course many ISPs, such as yours, are fed up with the costs of accepting over 50% of their mail that is spam, so instead they're simply blocking spammy IP addresses. Should you have any desire for assistance, rather than just ranting, please post the IP address in question and we can provide you some additional assistance for the blocking and I am POSITIVE that you will find that there is a legitimate reason for the blocking and perhaps will work to correct the problem. That would be a much more efficient use of your energy. --Louis
  6. Does anyone still review the routing news group? I posted a few weeks ago about some IPs that are routing right to the spammer (who has responded telling me to f-off) and suggested that they be changed to route mail to the upstream. Thus far no action and no replies. Is there a better place to make such suggestions? --Louis
  7. Level3 is a major backbone provider (www.level3.net). They use a private reporting address for spamcop reports and that's why you don't see the address and only see the Level3 reporting message.
  8. Don't know much other than to tell you the weblogs of my company's website (www.sciencelogic.com) show visits by faxo also. It's also being reported by lots of others. We've been getting hits from there since October. I first checked it back then and it was saying "Coming Soon" just as it is now. There are some really uninformative discussions at: http://www.gidforums.com/t-3788.html http://forums.seochat.com/archive/t-15665 --Louis
  9. Strange... From what I can find the MX records for conversant.net shows two mail servers: spool.conversant.net at 155.212.2.24 and filter.conversant.net at 155.212.2.33 and 155.212.2.34 These do show up in SenderBase 155.212.2.33 shows a 475% increase in mail in the last 24 hours 155.212.2.34 shows a 113% increase .24 shows a -100% None show up in the spamcop list or any other list for that matter. My uneducated guess would be that the mail program is returning an incorrect error message.
  10. You may be angry, but you're angry at the wrong people. Go shout at Earthlink and tell them to find a better way to block outgoing spam. It's not that hard to setup a reasonable message per hour rate that acceptable to the average user but too restrictive for spammers. That'll at least help prevent their SMTP servers from getting on the list. As far as zombie machines, well if you're trying to send mail from a dynamic IP you've got other problems as mentioned above.
  11. In addition to the bitter rant from the author of the software you'll find that they think it'll work with 10.3, but should not with 10.4 at: http://www.subsume.com/contemplate/assembl...segment=Demoted
  12. I don't really think that this is realisitic. A spammer probably spams hundreds of thousands or millions of accounts at the same run. Parsing out that list to try and determine what address is the spamtrap would just be plain crazy, even if the information online were real time.
  13. That really stinks. Even crappy mail.com addresses can forward to up to five locations. Looks like I'm going to have to do one of those and then do a double forward. Sucks that it'll cost me another $20/yr just to be able to do that. Hopefully the double forward won't mess the parser up.
  14. Is it possible to set-up my spamcop e-mail account to forward to more than 1 location? Can I just separate addresses by a ; or , or something similar? Anyone have any idea? I couldn't find anything about this in the help file.
  15. This is this guy's second post in two days. Both saying essentially the same thing, both with similar replies from us helpful people and neither with any response or acknowledgement. I would just start ignoring this fool. FYI -- Other topic "my server is secure for 5 dayes now!!!! delist me!"
  16. Please kindly read the FAQs and figure out that the Spamcop BL is not a listing of open relays and has an automated delisting process, so your request is improper. You appear to be the victim of the SMTP/Auth hack. Sender base shows and increase of 309% of mail volume from yesterday. Someone is relaying through your server. Perhaps you should check your logs.
  17. Interesting thing is that Korea may finally be getting serious about spam. The webpage referenced above is run by KISA (Korean Internet Security Authority), a state-funded internet security organization in Korea. We'll see if this actually does anything to the spam originating there or to the spamvertised sites, but at very least it is encouraging. --Louis
  18. Looks like Merlyn is probably right. Senderbase shows a 1492% increase in mail sent in the last day. Someone is spewing from your server. Often what happens is the spew will stop now that the server is back on he BL and then as soon as it drops off, it'll start all over again. --Louis
  19. I think we should hire psychics to predict the IPs that spam will be coming from in the future so that we can put them on the BL BEFORE any spam actually starts being sent! Now THAT would be a useful list!
  20. Sorry to be harsh but it sounds to me that you need to reconsider the business that you are in. If you can't discern legitimate customers from scammers, you shouldn't be accepting any customers.
  21. I'm frankly stunned that it happened so quickly. I guess with MS putting the full push on spammers through lawsuits and the such, they didn't want to be seen as complete morons in telling people how to handle spam. --Louis
  22. Just did that... I'll see what happens.
  23. I'm fluent in Italian although haven't been involved in the technology field over there so I'll have to struggle through the technical mumbo jumbo (though it's usually just the English word). If it turns out the language in question is Italian I'll be glad to help out. --Louis
  24. I just got a reply too. Mine says: I wonder how long that'll be.
  25. OK, so it's AOL to AOL spam. Yes, I didn't uncheck the report to Spamcop, I did however insert notes something to the effect of "I'm unclear what's going on here and submitted this so that it could be checked over. I'll uncheck on future e-mails like this." I do quick report a number of e-mails though so I guess those will remain an issue. Shouldn't the popgate process insert a header line indicating the system it retrieved the mai lfrom so that the parse would track back to that originating system? --Louis
×
×
  • Create New...