Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'bug'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Discussions & Observations
    • Announcements
    • Start Here - before you make your first Post
    • How to use .... Instructions, Tutorials
    • Going to make your first post here?
    • SpamCop Reporting Help
    • SpamCop Blocklist Help
    • SpamCop Email System & Accounts
    • Mailhost Configuration of your Reporting Account
    • New Feature Request
    • SpamCop Lounge
    • Geek/Tech Things
    • Suggested Tools and Applications
    • Testing
    • FAQ Under Construction

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Found 4 results

  1. https://www.spamcop.net/anonsignup.shtml The captcha is broken and should be fixed. Thank you.
  2. Occasionally I will get an email where the body is not parsed/ignored and I got another today that I did some poking around, and I found that if the Return-Path header exists and is empty (`Return-Path: <>`), the body is ignored. Removing or populating it resolve the issue.
  3. Spammers are tracking back who reports them by including the emails that get back to them via spamcop reports in the subject and body, example: encoded and segmented subject: https://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z6641797254z619187ae372c6cec5509fadaf926d2baz segmented body: https://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z6641801254z40077f70be652e542cfe9e7deb51e5faz My email is still visible. Note the first example is targeted at me directly for reporting them subject "You make compliant on Spamcorp my.visible.email erville?..." with a confusing body that pieces together a personalized message:
  4. I've been getting more spam that is tailored to circumvent SpamCop. The latest one has two 'exploits' ... one is a limitation of SC (that shouldn't exist); the other is a new 'bug'. Three key areas that impede SC reporting: Bug: eMail subject line that causes the email body to not be processed. How / do you want me to report this? (As it has header info; I don't want to post it in a public forum) It's been raised before, and I'll raise it again: The hard limitation of links needs to be re-though and re-designed. This same message as #1; they had over 900 lines of "https://products.office.com/en-us/products..." which were obviously intended to circumvent SC reporting. Suggested fix (for each item .. If number exceed): Remove duplicates; as duplicate email's checked and are not set; not counting duplicates would be a big first step. Remove known URL's that a) don't accept reports or b) known "red herring" URL's (microsoft.com as an example) If max is still exceed .. report only the first "n" - or - allow me to choose which "n" should be reported; with them all disabled Rethink the max char limited. Another circumvention technique is to add a substantial amount of html / formatting / white space at the top of the body. When SC truncates (at max chars); the URL's are below that line; and they don't get reported. Suggested fix: Pre-process email to ignore/strip/remove non-visible HTML/white space before truncate and/or search for URL's before truncate. I realize that a great deal of this is "the way it's always been". The spammers are getting around that; and SC needs to be updated to handle the new tactics.
  • Create New...