C2H5OH Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 Spamcop couldn't find a reporting address for 109.121.206.199 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turetzsr Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014        Yes, I get "No reporting addresses found for 109.121.206.199, using devnull for tracking." But RIPE says: Abuse contact info: lir[at]inetg.bgwhich matches the address you suggested in your Topic name. But SpamCop also says: There are several possible reasons for this: The site involved may not want reports from SpamCop. SpamCop administrators may have decided to stop sending reports to the site to prevent listwashing. SpamCop uses internal routeing to contact this site, only knows about the internal method and so cannot provide an externally-valid email address. There may be no working email address to receive reports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C2H5OH Posted December 18, 2014 Author Share Posted December 18, 2014 Hi turetzsr, yes, I know there are several reasons why Spamcop might not want to send a report. In this case however, Spamcop says "no reporting addresses found". That's different from the occasional "does not wish to receive..." or "I refuse to bother.." etc messages. Or when a report is devnulled because 90 out of 90 reports have bounced. Maybe the error message could be modified to more accurately state the true reason, "known hostile" or "anti-listwashing"; or would that give the bad guys too much help? - Just a suggestion.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turetzsr Posted December 18, 2014 Share Posted December 18, 2014 Hi turetzsr       That's my Forum user ID but I prefer "Steve T" (see my "sig"). <g> yes, I know there are several reasons why Spamcop might not want to send a report. In this case however, Spamcop says "no reporting addresses found". That's different from the occasional "does not wish to receive..." or "I refuse to bother.." etc messages. Or when a report is devnulled because 90 out of 90 reports have bounced.        Please note that the quote in my last reply explaining why SC might not send a report was not a general reply to your inquiry but, rather, was a quote from an SC parse of 109.121.206.199, specifically! Maybe the error message could be modified to more accurately state the true reason <snip> - Just a suggestion....        My guess is that your proposal will not be actioned by SC for fear that it might give away more about their spam parsing algorithm than they are willing to reveal. <g> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.