Problem with one particular spammer

[Sven Golly]

There is one particular spammer that annoys the heck out of me (and from what I understand, lots of others too). The company is called "DiversityBusiness.com" and they harvested my email from somewhere, don't honor any opt-out attempts and their hosts (ATT.NET for the originating IP, TWTELECOM.NET for the spamvetised site) do nothing. I've done both SpamCop reports on these guys AND tried the direct route to abuse[at]att.net and abuse[at]twtelecom.net. Nothing has helped.

I know I'm tilting at windmills here. But one thing that puzzles me is why, in spite of my reporting, hasn't this company been put into the SpamCop BL?

Here are the tracking URLs:

http://www.spamcop.net/mcgi?action=gettrac...rtid=5678789619

http://www.spamcop.net/sc?track=http%3A%2F...34%2Fremove.asp

And: http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z5214066739z4...1b2eff5f38e996z

The last link is interesting because it has that ISP does not wish to receive reports and DiversityBusiness.com has been appealed previously. So I don't know what that means in combination.

Anyway hope this is enough info to go on. Any comments or suggestions are welcome. Thanks.

[turetzsr]

<snip>The company is called "DiversityBusiness.com"

...Indeed, you seem to not be the only one with complaints about them; see http://www.goodsearch.com/Search.aspx?Keyw...versityBusiness.

<snip>

But one thing that puzzles me is why, in spite of my reporting, hasn't this company been put into the SpamCop BL?

<snip>

...It's a very good thing that no one person can do this! Consider: if I didn't like you and knew your IP address, I could easily create phony reports that allege that your IP address is the source of spam; if SpamCop allowed one user's (my) reports alone to get an IP address on the blacklist, your IP address would be there! FYI, to see some details about how SpamCop determines what gets on the BL, look at the SpamCop FAQ (links near top left of nearly every SpamCop Forum page) article labeled "What is on the list?" and see the section labeled "SCBL Rules."

[Farelf]

Hi Sven,

I guess the best advice is to keep the reports going and, for the sending address at least, when enough reporters are doing the same it will reach the tipping point. If there is enough traffic that is NOT reported as spam, that IP address might never be listed. You can read that inference into the general description of the SCbl algorithm which is seen at:

What is the SpamCop Blocking List (SCBL)?

- so every report of actual spam will help towards assigning the spammer to his deserved place.

That IP address is high volume so there is a lot of inertia to overcome before it would be classed as a spam source. On the positive side, it already has a "Poor" SenderBase reputation score:

Report on IP address: 99.56.226.230. Whatever reputation scoring the SCbl uses (could be the same for all I know) must be inclining the same way. On the negative side, some networks would be using that SB reputation score or something similar to block mail from that address already, potentially reducing the number of spam reports.

As for not honouring the removal requests within 10 business days - that is in breach of the CAN-Ð…PAM Act Provisions (PDF) for whatever use that might be (limited, I understand, but there are remedies within the Act).

Anyway, keep plugging away. It (mostly) takes time and even more when people give up on it.

[SpamCopAdmin]

I removed the "do not send" flag on DiversityBusiness.com so that SpamCop will resume sending reports about their web pages.

I also reviewd 99.56.226.230. It should start being listed soon.

- Don D'Minion - SpamCop Admin -

- service[at]admin.spamcop.net -

[Sven Golly]

I removed the "do not send" flag on DiversityBusiness.com so that SpamCop will resume sending reports about their web pages.

I also reviewd 99.56.226.230. It should start being listed soon.

- Don D'Minion - SpamCop Admin -

- service[at]admin.spamcop.net -

Thanks. I get up to 3 emails from these guys daily and they seem to do it with impunity. They pass themselves off as sort of a non-profit and they are anything but.

As for not honouring the removal requests within 10 business days - that is in breach of the CAN-Ð…PAM Act Provisions (PDF) for whatever use that might be (limited, I understand, but there are remedies within the Act).

Yeah I've tried filing a Can-spam action and it's just not worth the effort. Spammers know that.

I sort of like the approach the Knujon is taking in trying to fight the bad actors in the domain registry space. Although they are wayyy underfunded and tilting at some pretty powerful windmills.