Jump to content

A.J.Mechelynck

Membera
  • Content Count

    240
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by A.J.Mechelynck

  1. A.J.Mechelynck

    Extremely long "To:" line

    I've written to deputies[at] throwing myself at their mercy. Let's cross fingers, touch wood, and otherwise hope I won't get the ax.
  2. A.J.Mechelynck

    Extremely long "To:" line

    P.S. Apparently the rules have changed: Last time I checked, it was allowed to add a phony body to a bodiless spam, the FAQ even said so. And the sanctions have been escalated too: now I'm liable to be banned for a first-time honest mistake. Please don't.
  3. A.J.Mechelynck

    Extremely long "To:" line

    We-e-ell... If I'd done nothing, SC wouldn't have sent any reports, nor would that spam -- which undoubtedly was a spam -- have counted towards the SCBL. IOW: if changing that isn't allowed, then there is an "easy way out" for spammers to avoid SC altogether (both SC reports and SC blocking), viz., make sure that the headers are more than 50K long. So I tried to make the "minimum change" while letting the recipient of the reports know that there had been a change and where. I felt the case was somewhat analogous to the (allowed) one of adding "[no body in email]" after the headers + empty line of a bodiless spam. I guess I should have asked Ellen first, but it's only "on thinking back" that I thought maybe it wasn't that simple.
  4. A.J.Mechelynck

    Helping to stop misdirected bounces

    Hello, Miss Betsy! Yeah, that's what I do... when I don't forget: when reporting a "false bounce", I write "Misdirected bounce: see http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/329.html " (the shorter the better ) in the "user comments" box (yes, of the original report). Apparently it works (at least, they don't tell me I'm wrong), since the only two or three "human replies to reports" I got this year were to inform me that the spammer's account had been closed. And to avoid missing these "human replies" (they're so few and far between) (also to avoid reporting them as spam, which they aren't) I've made a mail filter just for them: Match all of the following: [ To ] [ contains ] [ [at]reports.spamcop.net ] [*]Perform these actions: [ Move Message To ] [ SC Reports on Local Folders ] [ Set Junk Status To ] [ Not Junk ]
  5. I have recently acquired an additional email address. So I try to configure its mailhosts. I got as far as "SpamCop has just sent you 5 test messages to antoine.mechelynck[at]gmail.com." After that, nothing, nichevo, niente, nada, zilch. It looks like Gmail is dropping those test emails on the floor as if they were spam. What should I do?
  6. About two years ago. Nowadays, Gmail offers some crude way of whitelisting (any mail "from" one of your "contacts" will never be treated as spam). It's from-line-based (not IP-address-based) and therefore spoofable, but their help mentions it as the whitelisting method. I've written them a support question saying that I'd rather have no spam filtering on my Gmail account because: I read my Google mail by POP This is not my only mail account I use Bayesian filters (built into my POP client, Mozilla Thunderbird), I train them myself, and they now perform quite well I found more non-spam than spam in my Gmail "spam" folder. I don't expect any positive action, but I guess it's all I can do.
  7. A.J.Mechelynck

    Gmail vs. Yahoo!

    Gmail now offers whitelisting: anything "from" one of your "contacts" will never be treated as spam. It's not IP-based but from-line-based (and therefore spoofable) but I found it listed in their help as being the way to avoid having the mail from "a particular somebody" always listed as spam. I'd rather have them do no filtering at all and leave it to my POP client (formerly I used SpamPal, which is Windows-only but works as a front-end for any mail client; now, on Linux, I use the Bayesian filters built into Thunderbird. Both are -AFAICT- excellent.)
  8. "Check your gmail spam folder" (I didn't know I had one: I read my gmail mail by POP using Thunderbird). Bingo! The ten test emails which SpamCop sent me before I went to sleep (in two waves, because I tried again when I didn't see any of the first five) were there, but as one "thread" so at first I thought there was only one of them. Also, of the 8 "threads" which were there, exactly two were "actually" spam on the face of them. Morality: the gmail spam filters are much too strict. I'd rather not have them. I wonder if there's any way to turn them off. (But that question is OT in a SC forum.)
  9. A.J.Mechelynck

    Is it really doing any good?

    I don't know, because, when I was on Windows and using spampal, I didn't use bayesian filters (neither the spampal plugin nor the T-bird built-in "junk" filters). What I used was public blacklists (not all those offered by spampal but SC and a couple of others based on fast response time, high number of positives, and no false positives), RegEx filtering (which I found quite effective in tagging e.g. penis-enlargement scams, mortgage scams, Nigerian scams, lottery scams, ...) and auto-whitelisting (i.e., whitelisting the people to whom I write). I guess I mustn't have a very exceptional incoming-mail "profile", except that I do receive legitimate mail from many parts of the world including Eastern Asia (in English, but possibly with a From-line and/or sig in CJK characters), mostly on the Vim editor's mutual-help mailing list; and occasionally a mail in Esperanto (which can be from anywhere) or in French. This "cosmopolitan" profile (in the original sense of the word, not that of fashion magazines ) means that I cannot afford to filter by country, even though spampal has the option to do it. IMHO, the bottom line is: if you found a spam filtering method which gives you very few false negatives and no false positives, stick with it. But I wouldn't advise "delete unseen" methods like those offered by some ISPs (including mine) because of the risk of losing a mail incorrectly labeled as spam without ever knowing it. IOW I disable my ISP's spam-filtering options and I set my "onboard filters" to tag and sort, not to kill.
  10. A.J.Mechelynck

    Is it really doing any good?

    Hello, Miss Betsy. Long time no see. For people using the Windows operating system (not me anymore) and getting their mail via POP3 or IMAP4 (not Webmail), there's a nice piece of software which can easily be installed in the pipeline between your mail client and the outside world. It is called "spampal" http://www.spampal.org/ ; it can detect spam by a variety of user-configurable methods, including public blocklists, one of which is (guess which?) the SpamCop one; it adds an X-SpamPal header to the mail you receive and (at your choice) it can also add **spam** in front of the subject of what it thinks is spam (Thunderbird can filter on the added header but Outlook Express needs the Subject tag). In my experience, that spam filter is very accurate (i.e., it has a low percentage of both false positives and false negatives), and can be made more so by setting options appropriate to the kind of mail you receive. And it gets better with time, since one of its user-settable options is to watch your outgoing mail and whitelist the people you write mail to.
  11. A.J.Mechelynck

    Spamcop Down?

    When I see this kind of failure, and it's not going away after a couple of tries, I wait several minutes (or hours) before the next spam submittal ;-) You can submit by email. I can't, because my braindead ISP blocks outgoing mails which have spam in them, even as attachments.
  12. A.J.Mechelynck

    Spamcop Down?

    The problem Paranoid2000 and I are seeing is on web submissions -- these don't generate email bounces. I wonder why the "spam Submitted" histogram is staying high, unlike "Reports Sent" which has been hugging the ground for about two hours by now?
  13. A.J.Mechelynck

    Spamcop Down?

    Yeah, me too. The usual "Welcome registered user" page appears when I browse to http://www.spamcop.net/ but if I try to submit spam I get that "Zero size object" message. Notice the sudden dip in "reports sent" in the daily statistics, as shown by clicking the "Reporting server status" histogram at top right on this forum page.
  14. A.J.Mechelynck

    [Resolved] SpamCop Down

    indeed. Well, "wait and see" then.
  15. A.J.Mechelynck

    [Resolved] SpamCop Down

    Uh-huh. I had guessed that much (my post was mainly so that other people should know they're not alone). Any idea what got broke or when SC will be up again? Don't answer if the answer is "no". I can still watch the stats histogram to see if it's still down.
  16. A.J.Mechelynck

    [Resolved] SpamCop Down

    SpamCop has been down for almost an hour as of this post: I cannot report spam, SC doesn't find my login, and according to statistics http://alpha.cesmail.net/graphics/spamstats.gif no spam has been processed since approx. 15h EDT (19h UTC)
  17. A.J.Mechelynck

    Slow response from SC

    I traced my problems to my ISP: Since (IIRC) May 2, any outgoing emails which "appear to contain spam", even in an attachment, are silently dropped into the bit bin. This means I cannot submit by email to SC anymore. Connections on port 25 are disabled, except to my own ISP's outgoing-mail servers. Therefore I cannot establish any connection with smtp.mail.yahoo.co.uk
  18. I have a spam here that I cannot report because it includes in its HTML part six references to various subdomains of thewatchguy4u.com (namely, <something>.thewatchguy4u.com, with <something> being one each of supportdesk, shipping, helpdesk, watch, support and customerservice). SC takes forever parsing it (apparently timing out repeatedly on DNS requests), says repeatedly that <something>.thewatchguy4u.com doesn't resolve, and finally (on the fifth URL) ends with the message: got sigalarm, taking too long to process, aborted. Perhaps you can wait a few minutes and reload? I had to cancel that spam using "Cancel all unreported spam" because its parse page never went as far as the Report/Cancel buttons. (I still have the original spam here). (Other, unrelated, spams parse OK.) Now the strange thing is that from where I sit (and using my own ISP's DNS servers), those same symbolic addresses do resolve (forwards but not backwards) to 219.254.32.69, which SC sees as being in the address space of hanaro.com. So... did Korean spammers discover a way to spam without being blocked, by using a domain name on which the DNS servers used by SC time out while some of those used elsewhere resolve it?
  19. A.J.Mechelynck

    Korean spammers better than SC's DNS servers?

    P.S. Tracking URL: http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z767417517za9...09ba6f5f603402z
  20. A.J.Mechelynck

    Confirmation codes do not match?

    Faithfully copying the headers and body of the "SpamCop account configuration email" into http://www.spamcop.net/mcgi?action=mhreturn results in the following: I'm old and blind but those sure do look the same to me... 21688[/snapback] I had the same error (with a different thrice-repeated code of course). Dragging the mouse over it showed an awful lot of spaces after the first of those three codes. Confirmation by email allowed (after a minute or two) the new host to appear on my "Mailhosts" page without further action by me. Long live Mozilla Thunderbird!
  21. A.J.Mechelynck

    Slow response from SC

    Following a tip in Yahoo's response, I tried a little experiment: C:\>telnet smtp.mail.yahoo.co.uk 25 Connecting to smtp.mail.yahoo.co.uk... Cannot establish connection with host, on port 25: Connection failed. IIUC, my ISP is blocking outgoing connections to third parties on the default SMTP port.
  22. A.J.Mechelynck

    Slow response from SC

    I tried it (Secure connection: No), but it didn't work (same symptoms: after a timeout, I get an error popup). I've sent Yahoo a support request about it, got an auto-reply, responded to it, let's see what their "humans" will say... Tanks anyway.
  23. A.J.Mechelynck

    Slow response from SC

    I am on Windows XP Home "Build 2600.xpsp_sp2_gdr.050301-1519 (Service Pack 2)". Using OE6 is problematic since it would try to read and delete my POP mail and I like to keep all my mail in one place. I'll try to subscribe to one of the SMTP servers you list. It shouldn't then be hard to configure Thunderbird for it. 27569[/snapback] I just subscribed as yahoo.co.uk]a_j_mechelynck[at]yahoo.co.uk. I can read email from there by POP but I haven't yet succeeded to send by SMTP. It needs SMTP authentication. Currently it is set to: Outgoing server: smtp.mail.yahoo.co.uk Port: 25 [x] Use name and password Name: a_j_mechelynck Use secure connection: (_)No (*)TLS if available (_)TLS (_)SSL If I don't succeed I might try Steve's suggestion to use OE6, possibly after a good night's sleep (it is 2:42 my time already).
  24. A.J.Mechelynck

    Slow response from SC

    Yes, except to do that I must already have started up OE6, and it is set to "read messages at startup" and "don't leave copy on server".
  25. A.J.Mechelynck

    Slow response from SC

    I am on Windows XP Home "Build 2600.xpsp_sp2_gdr.050301-1519 (Service Pack 2)". Using OE6 is problematic since it would try to read and delete my POP mail and I like to keep all my mail in one place. I'll try to subscribe to one of the SMTP servers you list. It shouldn't then be hard to configure Thunderbird for it.
×