Jump to content

Any deputies around?


Recommended Posts

I rely on getting messages from an Alabanza-based server that occasionally gets blocked, despite no recent spam complaints (I checkd the history). Here's the page with the details:

http://mailsc.spamcop.net/w3m?action=blche...p=209.239.41.66

I see that it's been detected sending to spamtraps, but that may very well be due to the increased MyDoom activity. If you look up the IP in the "news.admin.net-abuse.sightings" group, you'll see only ONE report, back in 2001. A check in the OpenRBL comes up very clean, expect for the SpamCop BL (and the DRBL, which is quite a blunt instrument, IMO).

Please, if any of the deputies can unlist us, I'd appreciate it. I can't help all the other choir directors in the world communicate if our messages can't get out (and I can't receive them in my own "spamcop.net" mailbox either).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I already sent them the info, but by the time they get to it, and then contact the deputies address, my communications will be quite messed up. The last time we were blocked, a friendly deputy took a quick look at the specifics and unblocked our server, without having to wait around for the Alabanza folks to interact. So, I'm still hoping that there's a friendly deupty around who will take a quick look at the specifics and see what can be done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I already sent them the info, but by the time they get to it, and then contact the deputies address, my communications will be quite messed up. The last time we were blocked, a friendly deputy took a quick look at the specifics and unblocked our server, without having to wait around for the Alabanza folks to interact. So, I'm still hoping that there's a friendly deupty around who will take a quick look at the specifics and see what can be done.

In general, all the known Deputies are friendly <g> ... Catch is that there's a very limited number of them. If one of them (and will assume Ellen) did it in the past, it's pretty rare that she does it without giving some kind of reason. So, the question is, what was the reason last time and is it happening again?

As far as you not being able to receive anything, what happened to the "whitelist" feature of your e-mail account?

Looking at the bl report, I see spamtraps are an issue. So yes, there's a possibility that something is rotten, but repeating your past experience, sending a direct note to deputies at spamcop.net, as JeffG already suggested is the fastest way to have alook taken. But, repeating JeffG's comment, this is something that Alabanza should be concerned with.

You should note, having been through this before .. that this web-based thing is no where near as active as the newsgroups were/are ... (hint)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I rely on getting messages from an Alabanza-based server that occasionally gets blocked, despite no recent spam complaints (I checkd the history). Here's the page with the details:

http://mailsc.spamcop.net/w3m?action=blche...p=209.239.41.66

I see that it's been detected sending to spamtraps, but that may very well be due to the increased MyDoom activity. If you look up the IP in the "news.admin.net-abuse.sightings" group, you'll see only ONE report, back in 2001. A check in the OpenRBL comes up very clean, expect for the SpamCop BL (and the DRBL, which is quite a blunt instrument, IMO).

Please, if any of the deputies can unlist us, I'd appreciate it. I can't help all the other choir directors in the world communicate if our messages can't get out (and I can't receive them in my own "spamcop.net" mailbox either).

The listing is legit -- there is someone sending spam thru that server to the spamtraps -- maybe a compromised machine or it could be an insecure cgi on the server ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as you not being able to receive anything, what happened to the "whitelist" feature of your e-mail account?

The way I understand it, the whitelist only applies to the following headers:

Envelope Sender aka Return Path

From:

Sender:

The "From:" is useless in this case, because it varies too much, and many of the messages don't have a "Sender:" (they have both a "Resent-From:" and a "Resent-Sender:" but those would be ignored, I imagine). I'll try whitelisting the domain name of the server in hopes that it gets seen in the "Return Path."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they are mailing list messages, whitelisting the return-path should work (assuming that the mailing list software modifies that).

Sadly, my suggestion of whitelistable IP Addresses for SpamCop Email System Customers has not been implemented.

Since it looks like you are probably using the SpamCop Email System, I am moving this Topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...