lawisfiction Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 spamcop apprently doesnt really do what they claim ...I have been reporting the same address to spamcop for about 1 year and the same spammer keeps spamming me ..does anyone know what they actually do with the spam reports ? I bet most domains just hit the delete button and dont really give a rats butt about it any comments ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farelf Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 spamcop apprently doesnt really do what they claim ...I have been reporting the same address to spamcop for about 1 year and the same spammer keeps spamming me ..does anyone know what they actually do with the spam reports ? I bet most domains just hit the delete button and dont really give a rats butt about it any comments ? Moved to lounge as the most appropriate forum. Comments? I don't know what you imagine SpamCop claims to do but what is actually claimed (and done) is to maintain a blocking list of IP addresses based on spam submissions by reporters and by hits on spamtraps. The reports to the ISPs or others responsible for those IP addresses are a courtesy to help them keep their networks "clean" if that is their wish, there is no enforcement. The reports may be refused (in which case SC stops sending them). The reports may be abused (used to get back at reporters or to listwash - in which cases SC stops sending them). No single reporter can get an IP address on the blocking list - there are weighting factors applying to member reports to make sure of that - SC is looking mostly at bulk abusers. For these, and for any hitting the spamtraps, listing is quick. Listing doesn't stop anybody's spam, unless you use the SCbl or unless your ISP does so or unless the network responsible is a whitehat and reacts accordingly. Many/most spammers use a whole raft of IP addresses through illegal botnets or (legal) snowshoe operations to reduce the exposure of individual IP addresses. Usually with forged "From:" and "Reply-to:" addresses. SpamCop does what it does, you may have your adjust your strategy to get it to work the way you may think it does. There's a whole lot of information to be considered, available both here (forum) and at the spamcop.net official website. How does SpamCop reporting work? is the primer and a starting point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agsteele Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 spamcop apprently doesnt really do what they claim ...I have been reporting the same address to spamcop for about 1 year and the same spammer keeps spamming me ..does anyone know what they actually do with the spam reports ? I bet most domains just hit the delete button and dont really give a rats butt about it any comments ? There are many threads where similar questions have been asked. But, as I see it, there are three parts to your question... 1. SpamCop action: Your reports will contribute to the block-list. But it needs more than one SC reporter to submit reports about a piece of spam. If the spammer is using multiple IP addresses then it also requires each IP address to have more than one report from a user. Remember it isn't the spammer that is reported and listed but the abused IP address from where the spam originates. There is every evidence to suggest that the SCBL does this very well and that's what it claims to do. 2. Recipient action: Even if the recipient reports as you have faithfully done (thanks for doing that). It requires that he/she implements a means of filtering the spam based on the SCBL entry otherwise the spam will simply continue to reach the recipients mailbox for each IP from which it is sent. As a recipient you are free to use the SCBL but clearly SpamCop cannot be responsible for how you take advantage of the SCBL - or not. 3. SpamCop reports are sent to the responsible ISP for each IP address reported. Some ISPs are outstanding and tackle the matter quickly. (My ISP for example telephones their customers once they receive more than two SC reports and agrees an action plan to tackle the problem within a set time). Others ignore the problem. Sounds like your reports are reaching ISPs that aren't listening. But that isn't a failure of SpamCop but of the irresponsible ISP (bearing in mind that each piece of spam although from the same 'sender' may be coming through many different IP addresses. So my view is that SC does what it claims but we expect those actions to somehow have a response from ISPs that clearly SC cannot have any control over. There are many ways you can take advantage of the SCBL. If you're uncertain about those then I'm sure folk in these forums will happily give advice. Andrew [EDIT] I typed my response and then noticed that Farelf was typing at the same time. So there's some duplication for which I apologise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rconner Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 spamcop apprently doesnt really do what they claim ...I have been reporting the same address to spamcop for about 1 year and the same spammer keeps spamming me ..does anyone know what they actually do with the spam reports ? I bet most domains just hit the delete button and dont really give a rats butt about it any comments ? I assume that you expected that SpamCop was going to stop spammers from spamming you personally. You might want to check again as to whether this is what was claimed. Unfortunately, neither Spamcop, nor anyone else, can stop spammers from trying to spam you. It can, however, collect the evidence required to take resources away from spammers, to turn away their mailings, and to make things painful for those who choose to support them. If you'd like to take advantage of Spamcop's ability to accurately detect and detain spam sent to your inbox, then you might like to try an individual Spamcop e-mail account. This forum is largely a volunteer effort by fellow Spamcop users, but if you'd like to post some additional info about your particular problem address (such as a tracking link), we might be able to be of some help. -- rick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lawisfiction Posted June 24, 2010 Author Share Posted June 24, 2010 These reports to the following ISP have been reported over and over again for the past 1 year by me ... so why no blacklist ?? and what is spamcop[at]mailservices.yahoo.com & level3[at]admin.spamcop.net .. these I dont understand .. please explain 5030380142 ( http://559.lieexhubdgwe.in/ ) To: p.vasiliev[at]gpt.ru 5030380136 ( http://559.lieexhubdgwe.in/ ) To: pavel[at]pavel.su 5030380127 ( http://559.lieexhubdgwe.in/ ) To: pavel[at]gpt.ru 5030380126 ( http://559.lieexhubdgwe.in/ ) To: pavel[at]parkline.ru 5030380125 ( http://559.lieexhubdgwe.in/ ) To: panov[at]parkline.ru 5030380117 ( 98.136.183.45 ) To: spamcop[at]mailservices.yahoo.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agsteele Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 Well the first five reports you offer are all spamvertised URLs which, as you will know, isn't what SpamCop claims to have any significant ability to tackle. The ISP has been informed at the Email address concerned but they don't apparently want to take action. SC doesn't claim to take any other action in relation to spamvertised URLs. The final report has been sent to Yahoo! to arrive at a mailbox that Yahoo! appears to have created to receive SC reports. But that may mean they ignore them completely or take action. Clearly we cannot know. But as a result of your report, the IP 98.136.183.45 was parsed through the SC reporting system and if there were sufficient other reports for that IP it will have been listed. I checked for the last 90 days and there were around 50 reports for 98.136.183.45 in that time. But none were frequent enough to trigger a listing the SCBL. But each and every time Yahoo! was alerted. I cannot say what action Yahoo! took but SpamCop did what it claims to do and alerted the ISP and processed the spam through the parsing system. Andrew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 These reports to the following ISP have been reported over and over again for the past 1 year by me ... so why no blacklist ?? The use of Tracking URLs was suggested. You ignored that and provided some other non-useful data. Not much help available in either direction when things happen this way. and what is spamcop[at]mailservices.yahoo.com & level3[at]admin.spamcop.net .. these I dont understand .. please explain Already done. Please use the provided links at the top of this very page to wander through the various FAQs, Wiki, Glossary, Dictionary, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigt Posted June 25, 2010 Share Posted June 25, 2010 I disagree that reporting is a waste of time but will have to agree that no one will see an immediate drop in their spam rate by reporting. I've personally reported around 2 million (literally) spams over the last couple of years -- my spam rate has dropped from around 15K / day 2 years ago to around 3K / day now. Just have to wait for the world's laws and justice systems to catch up with reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
groundrat Posted July 15, 2010 Share Posted July 15, 2010 I have to support SpamCop in the service that they are providing. As has been stated here, the reports are parsed and the complaints documented. However they do not control the providers, they can just make things uncomfortable for them based on the SCBL. I have firsthand experience with a list server that I got on because of a clients domain registration. I have been getting 2 to 3 e-mails a day from the same list sender for more than 2 years. The reports are made, but the provider has a filter on their incoming mailbox. If the reporting of a particular list server does not reach the ISP's threshold they are ignored. SpamCop has no control over that. I would suggest that a tweaking of the SCBL could level that playing field. If there was the ability to track the number of reports sent of a chronic nature and allow the listing of the server, more ISP's would also adjust their policies. The number of ISP's that use SCBL and spamhaus list to reject e-mails is great enough, SC could influence the big-pipe providers to ensure their customers abide by the accepted rules and clean their list's of addresses that don't want mail. Level-3's security has told me specifically they can't handle the level of complaints if they lowered the threshold that they use for the abuse parsing. I would wager if SC added a rolling 30 - 90 threshold to address chronic offenders, the big pipe providers would adjust their policies. Just a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gonnagetcha Posted September 25, 2010 Share Posted September 25, 2010 name='lawisfiction' date='Jun 24 2010, 03:48 AM' post='75908' "...spamcop apprently doesnt really do what they claim ..." Sorry you're having that problem lawisfiction. For myself, when I first started using SpamCop, I got a rash of retaliation emails - I was bombarded with fake FaceBook offers (both sexes, just in case), and was subscribed to a multitude of literature from legitimate companies (an effort to waste my time and to cause me to file false reports), and I couldn't even click the remove link, for fear the email was a forgery and the link was from a Harvester. I used my email account's spam filter to refuse the URL's of many of these without reporting them, and today, after the spammer's efforts met with no success and the law of diminishing returns set in, the amount of spam I receive has been reduced by about 85%. The reality is, these guys are in business to make money, and as Henry Ford once said, "Time is money." Faced with enough reports coming from your IP address, in time they will realize they're not getting any from you and that beating a dead horse is somewhat less than productive. Persevere -- When you least expect it, Gonnagetcha admin edit: removed the font tags, as the resulting display was almost unreadable at this side of the screen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.