Can't resolve my "No source IP address found, cannot proceed." spam

[Peace Freak]

Been getting more and more of similar spam recenctly that give the No Source IP address found error. Tried a few workarounds from the forum including adding mail hosts to my account. The first email address (yahoo) I tried but even that came back with "Headers not found." (for both the email and web submission options).

Here is the Tracking URL of a spam that has the no IP address error:

http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z5441936525z3...de1b03f35eece4z

and here is the header:

winaticket[at]gmail.com

Reply-To: adrianbayford[at]yahoo.co.jp

Return-Path: <winaticket[at]gmail.com>

Envelope-To: info[at]pastoralhotel.com

Delivery-Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 17:36:13 -0600

Received: from [94.30.125.114] (port=6008 helo=mail.cridigital.co.uk) by bracey.site5.com with esmtps (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <winaticket[at]gmail.com>) id 1Tjend-0006un-6H for info[at]pastoralhotel.com; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 17:36:13 -0600

Received: from User ([67.100.195.3]) (authenticated user sales[at]cridigital.co.uk) by mail.cridigital.co.uk; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 15:55:04 +0000

Mime-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1251"

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

X-Priority: 3

X-Msmail-Priority: Normal

X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000

X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000

Gillian and Adrian Bayford Donation. (Charity)

[turetzsr]

Hi, Peace Freak,

...What I would recommend is that you try a search of other articles in the SpamCop Forum. To do that, find the text field near the top of a SpamCop Forum web page between the white "button" labeled "Search for -->" and the blue "button" labeled "GO," type into that field the text of the error message, including the quote marks, click one of the buttons and review the links that are returned. One or more may be relevant to your particular situation.

...One of the frequent reasons for the error, if I remember correctly, is that the spam came from another user of your own e-mail provider.

...Good luck!

[SpamCopAdmin]

>- This header is incomplete. Please supply the full headers of the spam you're trying to report.

That is the key part of the error.

Several basic elements are missing from the headers. No "From" or "To" or "Date."

SpamCop notices the missing elements and thinks there is probably a copy/paste error involved, so it won't process the spam.

- Don D'Minion - SpamCop Admin -

- Service[at]Admin.SpamCop.net -

.

[turetzsr]

...Ah, perhaps I should have looked at the parse result before posting my suggestion! If I'm reading it right, it appears to me that there are non-header lines where only internet header lines should be:

<snip>

Reply-To: adrianbayford[at]yahoo.co.jp

Return-Path: <winaticket[at]gmail.com>

Envelope-To: x

Delivery-Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 17:36:13 -0600

Received: from [94.30.125.114] (port=6008 helo=mail.cridigital.co.uk) by bracey.site5.com with esmtps (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <winaticket[at]gmail.com>) id 1Tjend-0006un-6H for x; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 17:36:13 -0600

Received: from User ([67.100.195.3]) (authenticated user sales[at]cridigital.co.uk) by mail.cridigital.co.uk; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 15:55:04 +0000

Mime-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1251"

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

X-Priority: 3

X-Msmail-Priority: Normal

X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000

X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000

Gillian and Adrian Bayford Donation. (Charity)

Hello Dear,

<snip>

...If I'm not mistaken, SpamCop is expecting a blank line between the "X-Mimeole" line and what appears to be the first line of the body of the spam, "Gillian and Adrian Bayford Donation. (Charity)".

[keef]

...One of the frequent reasons for the error, if I remember correctly, is that the spam came from another user of your own e-mail provider.

Shouldn't Spamcop be able to deal with or at least advise that this is the problem then?

[turetzsr]

Shouldn't Spamcop be able to deal with or at least advise that this is the problem then?

...Sorry, I have no way of knowing whether that's feasible and, if so, why the SpamCop parser doesn't do it; I am just another user of the system. There seem to be quite a few features that people would like to see in the parser that for various reasons aren't there. In my opinion, it does what it does well and, since it's free, I don't see much basis for complaint about those features I'd like to see that it doesn't provide. <g>

...You're welcome to raise a "New Feature Request," if you wish. But please be aware that, from what I can tell, few such requests are adopted and SpamCop staff tend to not even comment on them. Given how frequently this one occurs, I'd say chances of a change are very, very slim.

[Farelf]

Given the "no material changes" rule, the utility of detailed "diagnostics" from the parser is questionable, perhaps even counter-productive if it might tempt reporters to "fix" broken headers (and that one, the O/P's case, is thoroughly defective as Don pointed out - even if the correct separation of header and body was in place, the other deficiencies would still make the parser choke and we can't even be sure whether or not it actually originated from outside the recipient's own network - which could be yet another complication, as Steve T suggests).

The parser is all business when the headers are unusable - it simply refers reporters to the instructions on obtaining full unaltered headers in case it is something the reporter is not doing right and if that is not the cause then there is nothing that can be done without risking the integrity of the "evidence". That is frustrating for those with a burning need to understand but it seems it is not SC's mission to be a learning centre. But this forum has, in part, assumed that role.

The proportion of unreportable spam from broken mass-mailers and the like is very low (though there may be waves of it from time to time) and, it seems to me, it doesn't persist for very long - it is pretty ineffectual as spam. Also it could cause difficulties for the networks through which it transits, which might not be tolerated for very long.

Just my opinion ...

[SpamCopAdmin]

>- SpamCop is expecting a blank line between the "X-Mimeole" line and what appears to be the first line of the body

SpamCop expects there to be a blank line between the headers and the body text, but it can't tell if there are body text lines in the headers. The parse can only see if there is no body text.

In this case there are basic elements of the headers that are missing. SpamCop expects to see headers that contain at least most of the basic elements.

- Don D'Minion - SpamCop Admin -

- Service[at]Admin.SpamCop.net -

.