URLs in plain text message

[qjvgpuryy]

Here is the link to a message with a fairly obvious URL in it:

http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z516987788z0c...2caeb403ca8883z

Couldn't SpamCop scan messages for 'http://' or 'www.' (or both) instead of looking for anchor tags? That way it would catch more links.

qjvgpuryy

[Wazoo]

I've got a couple of issues with the spam I see ... how was it actually submitted?

For instance, I'm surprised at the lack of an error message due to lines;

X-Mailer:

-:

MIME-Version: 1.0

The second line there would normally cause a problem ...

The we get down to the line; Content-Type: text/html ... which even if one chooses to ignore the "converted to text" lines ... the URL in question isn't an HTML construct .. you'll note that all the other HTML elements and commands are in place. This not-found issue you're pointing out is intentional, addressing the reporting of an innocent due to the spammer "displaying" a "text" URL while hiding the "real" URL within HTML tags.

instead of looking for anchor tags? That way it would catch more links.

The parser is looking for anchor tags because of the Type = HTML in the header ... finding "more" links by ignoring these "checks" would result in ticking off way too many innocents.

That said, there is nothing to prevent you from doing a manual report, if you're so inclined.

[qjvgpuryy]

It was submitted through the web site using the two-part eudora/outlook hack form (like always).

I'm surprised at the lack of an error message due to lines;

X-Mailer:

-:

MIME-Version: 1.0

The second line there would normally cause a problem ...

I copied and pasted the headers from Outlook without changing them in any way.

the URL in question isn't an HTML construct

That's correct, so

This not-found issue you're pointing out is intentional, addressing the reporting of an innocent due to the spammer "displaying" a "text" URL while hiding the "real" URL within HTML tags.

doesn't apply in this case, does it? But I do see your point, since I've seen that "display vs. real" trick in other spam I've submitted.

there is nothing to prevent you from doing a manual report, if you're so inclined.

I'm not sure what you mean - is there a more manual way than the web form (or is that a newbie question)?

[Wazoo]

is there a more manual way than the web form (or is that a newbie question)?

"manual" means doing the research and generating your own e-mail to send your complaint to the appropriate target. Could be a murky waters thing for a self-described newbie ... If we were to key in on your being 100% sure that the URL listed in your spam needs reporting and you're unhappy that the SpamCop parser can't or won't "see" it ...

You could paste the URL into the web-based form ... single-line entry (no Enter key) .. press the Submit button, and some analysis will be done to derive a "report" address. Usually one can use this address to send "your" own complaint, though sometimes you'll come up with an internal SpamCop address (usually some agreement between that ISP and SpamCop) and sometimes you'll end up with an address that might be the spammer him/her-self. Decisions on what to do next come with experience ... go with what displays, do some more research, throw up hands in disgust/frustration .... Some take the leap and go with a paid subscription so that they can add additional targets in the report output ..