Jump to content

A.J.Mechelynck

Membera
  • Content Count

    240
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by A.J.Mechelynck

  1. A.J.Mechelynck

    Is it worthwhile for me to report spam?

    The best mail providers store what they regard as spam at some place where you can still access it, rather than deleting it sight-unseen. In most cases it is a webmail (or maybe IMAP) folder distinct from your Inbox, and from which you can retrieve false positives; of course it requires additional action on the user's part. There may also be some way to mark false negatives (sometimes even after they've veen forwarded to your POP account), thus training a Bayesian engine (which will never be perfect, for spamhunting is a whack-a-mole chase, as dear Miss Betsy used to say, but they may get better and better for your purposes).
  2. spam from gmail to gmail cannot be reported: "No source IP address found, cannot proceed". See example at http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z5238498027z4...e91c744df9d4c8z
  3. A.J.Mechelynck

    Having issues with reporting today.

    At least when I woke up SC was back online; but, turetzsr, you seem to be gifted with foresight: apparently that post was made four minutes after you posted this one. :-)
  4. A.J.Mechelynck

    Having issues with reporting today.

    Looks like the site is down again, and (according to spamstats.png) has been for about one hour. All I get are browser timeouts or "Error 303" boiler plate telling me to wait first, and retry only after several minutes.
  5. A.J.Mechelynck

    Reporting problems today?

    Very few of mine too, but every time I get one it makes me feel that this spammer has found a way to thwart SpamCop and get impunity. Happy to know it will soon be fixed (and I hope that unexpected problems won't get it rolled back again).
  6. A.J.Mechelynck

    Reporting problems today?

    turetzsr: Neither did I know all the fine points, such as the fact that email subscribers (unlike paid reporters without a spamcop email) get unlimited full reporting. Thanks to Don and you, the matter is much clearer now.
  7. A.J.Mechelynck

    Reporting problems today?

    Well, it's a friendly gesture giving you faster reporting (no nag screen anymore) and additional features (such as the additional reporting address on the parse page with no need to go through the preferences), in return for your patience during the recent fsck-up and the time it took to fix it. As a commercial item its value is exactly what it would have cost you to get it, i.e., US $15. Maybe you wouldn't have purchased it on your own — I wouldn't; but now that I have it, and apparently it will last for several months, at the end of that time I may (or I may not) reverse my opinion and decide to refill my tank of fuel anyway. Everyone wins: we the users win by getting some goodie without paying for it, and Spamcop wins by a promotional gesture which doesn't cost them much, and may bring in more paying subscribers. P.S. And if you already were a paying subscriber, it extends your subscription by 15 dollars' worth (IIUC).
  8. A.J.Mechelynck

    Reporting problems today?

    I'm talking about the user-defined reporting address found near the bottom of the parsing page. It didn't exist when I was a "free" user. (I hadn't jumped through all the hoops turetzsr described.) And, turetzsr, I followed your instructions through the Preferences and found the option there. Discoverability: almost zero. I believed you (without experimental proof) when you said it is still there for free users.
  9. A.J.Mechelynck

    Reporting problems today?

    [at]turetzsr: Aha! Well, as you say, it's pretty well hidden. As a, well, let's say "fueled" user I see it plain as your face, right there on the reporting page.
  10. A.J.Mechelynck

    Reporting problems today?

    When I was a free user (until I got the "free grant" of $15 at the end of the recent problems, that is), I had no additional "user" reporting address. It was yes/no for the abuse addresses detected by SpamCop, and comment boxes (one for everyone plus one for each), period.
  11. A.J.Mechelynck

    Reporting problems today?

    Yes, me too, and yet I used to be a "free" user. Two obvious differences: no more nag screens, and an input field for a user-selected reporting address (for instance, I could send a copy of spam reports to myself. I don't think I will.) Also, the "front page" lists the remaining "Mbytes available". But of course you all saw this.
  12. A.J.Mechelynck

    Reporting problems today?

    [at]ArtmakersWorlds: Unrelated to SC, I think. Just a new spammer (or spammers) with new ways to spam, and the yahoo filters haven't yet caught up. Similarly, sometimes I get a spam message that makes it through the Gmail filters to their POP3 server, and when later I go to their webmail "spam" folder (to look for false positives) I find that more messages like the one that got through have been caught.
  13. A.J.Mechelynck

    Reporting problems today?

    Well, SC seems to be operational at the moment, but all my queued spam was more than 40 hours old, and all my not yet reported spam was more than 20 hours old. Of course I "cancelled" them all. Call me lucky, that I get so few spam these days, that I had nothing fresh to contribute to "Cisco's investigations" :-/
  14. A.J.Mechelynck

    Reporting problems today?

    There seems to be a steady periodicity to the spam stats, with a period of about 3 hours, or (if you prefer) a frequency of 8 cycles per day. I wonder what it means.
  15. A.J.Mechelynck

    Reporting problems today?

    To see the status (the amount of spam recently reported per unit of time) you can do any of the following: Click the white-and-green thumbnail near top-right of any forum page. Go to the URL linked by that thumbnail, for instance after bookmarking it in your browser. For the individual graphs, you can go directly to one of the daily, weekly, monthly or yearly stats, each of which can also be bookmarked. And for you Internet Explorer users, what I call "bookmarks" on my Mozilla (Firefox or SeaMonkey) browser, is also sometimes known elsewhere as "favourites". As for the expected time to resolve, it is: when the problem will be fixed, or in other words, no one knows yet. If you see a large upward spike on the daily graph linked above, or if your "Report Now" link starts working, it will mean that (for the time being) you can report spam.
  16. A.J.Mechelynck

    Reporting problems today?

    Maybe I shouldn't have said this: now I got a message from service[at] saying Note that the 24 hours in question aren't yet over, and that the "number of spams" is blank. I have replied, explaining how I thought I was reporting "in good faith". Let's see what happens.
  17. A.J.Mechelynck

    Reporting problems today?

    There is this forum thread. There have been posts in this thread by Don D'Minion "SpamCop Admin", who is an official, and by Steve T "turetzr", by "farelf" and by me who are maybe not officials but certainly long-standing SpamCop users. The problem has been brought to the knowledge of the people whose job it is to solve it, and they are working on it, but the solution is far from obvious or the problem would already be long solved. It is an intermittent problem: at times we get various kinds of errors (I get "Gateway Timeout", other people also get other messages), at other times we can report spam, including spam which got queued when we had a gateway timeout etc., so there's no need to submit the same spam more than once. The fact that the problem is intermittent makes it harder to solve. The problem seems to be due to some kind of attack against SpamCop, and giving too much info, or too technical info, to the public, might make the attack worse. My stand in the case is to continue reporting spam, to take a "Gateway Timeout" as meaning that the spam has been queued but cannot be processed at the moment, and to come back every few hours to see if I can report (or, as the case may be, cancel) some queued spam by clicking "Report now" in the SC frontpage. (No "Report Now" link when I'm logged-in means no queued spam.) As always, clicking the white-and-green thumbnail near top right of a forum page will show you graphics of how spam reporting is going, in four graphs, for the last 24 hours, 7 days, 1 month and 1 year respectively.
  18. A.J.Mechelynck

    Reporting problems today?

    Indeed. I'm on openSUSE Linux, and I've been having lots of Gateway Errors this week. Not solidly but almost.
  19. A.J.Mechelynck

    Reporting problems today?

    Thanks Don for keeping us updated, and let's hope their big rat or squirrel or hamster or whatever ;-) will fit into the cage and get things working. And yes, size may not be the problem, but big brass on the telephone can sometimes get things moving faster than someone just as qualified (but with a less well-known name) would.
  20. A.J.Mechelynck

    Reporting problems today?

    Yeah, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. I have just reported one spam message and cancelled another, both "normally". Notice the blank gaps on the activity graph (which you can reach by clicking the thumbnail near top right of forum pages).
  21. A.J.Mechelynck

    Reporting problems today?

    :-) Thank you Steve, I hope it will be nice when it comes around. Merci Steve, j'espère qu'elle sera bonne quand elle arrivera. Dank U Steve, ik hoop dat hij goed zal zijn als hij komt. Danke sehr Steve, ich hoffe, dass er, wenn er kommt, gut wird sein. And let us now see if I can trick that BBS software to display the word script. (Hint: Unicode zero-length characters were not made for nothing).
  22. A.J.Mechelynck

    Reporting problems today?

    Yayayay! The activity graph shows a rise some 1½ hours ago, and I've been able to parse all my queued spam. (Too old, so some were rejected as >2 days old and I cancelled the rest). Pourvu que ça dure! P.S. Happy Fourth of July!
  23. A.J.Mechelynck

    Reporting problems today?

    FWIW, I've been getting a "Gateway Timeout" on every submission for a couple of days. The "Report Now" link is present on my SC frontpage, showing that I've submitted something; but on closer inspection that link always points to the same URL (the same spam), even if I submit something additional. (BTW I'm on "free" reporting and I submit by using the web form, but not the one for Outlook/Eudora.) Past Reports → View recent reports shows my queued spams, with their submission dates, subjects, and "No reports filed". Some of them are dated today (i.e. after this "Gateway Timeout" bug started happening) so they are indeed spam filed but not yet reported. From where I stand (Belgacom Skynet of Belgium), www.spamcop.net resolves to 80.239.148.xxx (I've seen at least 171 and 144 as values of xxx on different tries); and I can get through except to the .../sc?id=... reporting pages. This is a new development for me: less than a week old, but solid. And yet spamstats.png seems to indicate that there is still some reporting going on. For other people, obviously. Quick reporting, maybe? Or just lucky users with a fast connection path? I suppose your "system guys" can debug this themselves, but (considering the problem is solid with me) if they want to contact me, I'm available.
  24. A.J.Mechelynck

    Hanging in nag screen

    When I click “Process spam†after pasting the full source of an email, I seem to get a hang in the nag screen. Going back to the SC home page shows that the spam has been accepted: “Unreported spam Saved: Report Now†link is present; but if I click it, it hangs again. What's happening? “Postponed scheduled upgrade†(as mentioned without new date below the main textarea on the home page) in progress? Or is it something else? N.B. From here, www.spamcop.net resolves to 80.239.148.171
  25. A.J.Mechelynck

    Hanging in nag screen

    Akamai (and therefore spamcop) resolves differently depending on where in the world you access it from: I'm in Belgium, and 80.239.148.171 is "in the Netherlands" but when I paste the raw dotted-quad into Spamcop, it finds abuse-spamcop[at]akamai.com as the reporting address. With nslookup I get the same result as you do, but remember that dotted-quad <=> symbolic address is often one-to-many. See this section of the wiki page about Akamai.
×