Personal Whitelist Problem

[Guest SkydiveMike]

Well, the first one is actually a reply to a report which I have already replied to seperately....not a yahoogroups problem.

Actually it is another instance of the same thing indicating a continuing problem.

The only thing we could do here (or even JT the system administrator) is to remove the Yahoo whitelisting entry from the FAQ and state that due to the way yahoogroups is angling their headers, these messages can not be whitelisted.

Once again, this is NOT a problem with the spamcop email system.  This is a problem with yahoogroups using compliant headers.  Almost any system trying to use those headers for handling will fail.

The spamcop system documentation (aka the FAQ) states that whitelisting yahoogroups is possible and instructs on how to do it. The spamcop email system does not behave as documented. As a paying customer I really don't care whose "fault" it is -- I care that I have purchased a service which does not behave as documented.

Following your analogy, if msn/yahoo/aol changed their system so that popgate.spacmop retrivals stopped working does that mean that spamcop should stop supporting that system? History indicates that this answer is no; when one of the services changes something the spamcop developers/owners make changes to popgate.spamcop so as to restore the documented functionality. Following the historical model, spamcop developers/owners/whoever should implement a fix in spamcop so that yahoogroups can be whitelisted -- even if the root cause is yahoo, not spamcop.

Also, your whilelist entry returns.groups.yahoo.com is redundant as those same messages would be caught by the groups.yahoo.com entry.

22474[/snapback]

Understood, one of the suggestions was to try recreating the entries what you are seeing is the result of me adding returns.yahoogroups.com as suggested.

[StevenUnderwood]

X-SpamCop-Disposition: Blocked bl.spamcop.net

X-SpamCop-Whitelisted: returns.groups.yahoo.com

David:

Could you post a tracking URL for your message that was whitelisted or at least the "Return-Path:" field from your message.

SkydiveMike has posted several examples where that header looks like:

Return-Path: <SRS0=a35P=PU=returns.groups.yahoo.com=sentto-3514713-18437-1104934199-mikes.mailinglists=pobox.com[at]bounce2.pobox.com>

http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z709641967z74...52d81f1f49b76bz

My current theory is that Mike's forwarder is modifying that header, causing the problems. To fix that, he could have his yahoo messages sent directly to his spamcop.net account. If your Return-Path: is clear of the additional garbage, that would prove that yahoo is NOT messing with the header (as I have charged in one of his threads) and it is actually his forwarder (looks like pobox.com).

[Merlyn]

I agree, according to the FAQ he must change his Yahoo groups settings for everything to be sent directly to his Spamcop account.

[Guest SkydiveMike]

Spamcop's "official" support forum IS this peer-peer forum with the few employees monitoring it for additional help when needed.  You are correct, this IS the official support forum, but spamcop set it up to be peers helping peers and it has worked (and continues to work) well for many years.  You will get a useful answer in a much shorter amount of time from people who actually use the system and know how it operates as opposed to talking to some "tech" who is reading a scripted manual asking you the same questions we are asking.

22476[/snapback]

Unfortunately it didn't/isn't working for me -- my problem requests keep getting moved to the "lounge" -- a place where I am afraid they will be totally ignored by the "few employees monitoring" the forum. In this case a "peer" has chosen to "hide" my problem in the lounge and that doesn't bode well for a continued business relationship between myself and spamcop.net.

[StevenUnderwood]

Well, the first one is actually a reply to a report which I have already replied to seperately....not a yahoogroups problem.

Actually it is another instance of the same thing indicating a continuing problem.

I don't want to get you angry again, but do you have either "spamcop[at]devnull.spamcop.net" or "devnull.spamcop.net" in your whitelist?

You stated this should be a system setting, and that may be a good topic for the reccomendations forum, but as it is right now, it is not.

The spamcop email system does not behave as documented.

Actually, the spamcop system appears to be behaving EXACTLY as it is documented here. More specifically, why your entries are NOT matching is explained here and here which are the bottom 2 links from the main whitelisting FAQ page.

Return-Path: <SRS0=a35P=PU=returns.groups.yahoo.com=sentto-3514713-18437-1104934199-mikes.mailinglists=pobox.com[at]bounce2.pobox.com>

does NOT match groups.yahoo.com

And now that DavidT (in another thread) has mentioned that the whitelist worked for him, I will assume that Yahoo is sending the correct header (have asked him for confirmation) and that spamcop is not modifying his headers, I must assume they are modified during it's trip to your spamcop.net account. The only other service touching these messages is pobox.com.

Could you ask pobox.com if the Return-Path: header seen in your samples is being set by their systems? Could you ask them if you can turn off that modification?

[Merlyn]

Your problem is not being hidden there are answers all over the place.

[Guest SkydiveMike]

The problem (and I have answered this in several places where I had specific examples) is that the Return-Path: (which spamcop email uses for whitelisting) is not simply from groups.yahoo.com but has other "stuff" included as well.  This might be added by a forwarder or by yahoo itself (thinking as I write this that the forwarder might be more reasonable as the problem has not been reported widespread).

This modification makes the whitelisting entry useless as it specificaly looks at the right end of the field to try and match.  groups.yahoo.com does not equal groups.yahoo.commoretexthere

22475[/snapback]

And as I have stated before:

• Spamcop documentation states that whitelisting yahoogroups is possible
  
• History agrees with the documentation in that is has worked
  
• The spamcop system should perform "as documented"
  
• The spamcop system currently doesn't perform "as documented"
  

Ultimately, this is the problem I am attempting to get resolved. Maybe if the forum moderators would leave me problem in a problem forum and not "hide" it in a "lounge" a spamcop employee could actually read/participate/solve the problem.

[Merlyn]

I agree with you. According to the FAQ:

http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?...986entry15986

1. if you don't already have one, purchase a SpamCop email account

2. log into Yahoo!Groups and add your "spamcop.net" email address as one of the addresses used with Yahoo!Groups (found in "My Groups / Email Preferences")

3. change your subscriptions to each group so that mail will be sent to your SpamCop address

4. log into "https://webmail.spamcop.net" add the following to your whitelisting:

returns.groups.yahoo.com

As you say it looks like they are going through another server and being forwarded to Spamcop. If #2 and #3 above is followed I wonder if it would work? I am thinking it would.

[StevenUnderwood]

The location in the forums does not really matter whether "one of the few employees" will see your message. They scan and post in all of the forums here.

And the "peer" doing the moving is the (and I believe only at this point) moderator of these forums. It is his job to move the posts where he believes they will get answers the best. I think I would have left it in the email forum, but that is not my decision. Right now, I can not remember the exact reason given for the move to the lounge, but Wazoo has always been careful to explain his reasons, usually in a PM at the time of the move.

Unfortunately it didn't/isn't working for me

Well, it seems to me it is working. It may have been resolved even quicker if you worried less about where the answers were and stayed on topic in following up on the questions asked. You basically had the answer shortly after you posted the tracking URL last night. You may not like the answer, but it is there.

Spamcop is working as advertized. One of the fields that the yahoogroups FAQ entry is based on, is being changed in your configuration, so it is not applicable in your case.

Your 2 options are to have pobox.com stop modifying the Return-Path: header or route your yahoogroups messages so they are not touched by pobox.com.

Please come back and post when you have it working again.

[Merlyn]

Are you following the Spamcop documentation?

According to the FAQ:

http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?...986entry15986

1. if you don't already have one, purchase a SpamCop email account

2. log into Yahoo!Groups and add your "spamcop.net" email address as one of the addresses used with Yahoo!Groups (found in "My Groups / Email Preferences")

3. change your subscriptions to each group so that mail will be sent to your SpamCop address

4. log into "https://webmail.spamcop.net" add the following to your whitelisting:

returns.groups.yahoo.com

It looks like they are going through another server and being forwarded to Spamcop. If #2 and #3 above is followed I wonder if it would work? I am thinking it would.

[Guest SkydiveMike]

I don't want to get you angry again, but do you have either "spamcop[at]devnull.spamcop.net" or "devnull.spamcop.net" in your whitelist?

A question won't get me angry -- blindly referring me to the FAQ without reading my original very first post and/or moving a problem report to the lounge may .

I do have spamcop.net in my white list which should match devnull.spamcop.net and/or spamcop[at]devnull.spamcop.net as per the documentation. I do not understand how any of these emails end up in my held mail.

You stated this should be a system setting, and that may be a good topic for the reccomendations forum, but as it is right now, it is not.

I thought this was both a system setting and something I put in my whitelist -- I understand that it isn't a system setting, however, since my whitelist contains spamcop.net none of the "ISP Replies" to reported spam should ever end up in held mail.

Since ISP replies to reported spam do not route through my email forwarder, and these are not processed properly and as documented by my whitelist, the problem is on the spamcop system whitelist side.

[StevenUnderwood]

The spamcop system currently doesn't perform "as documented"

No, your mail path is changing one of the parameters (Return-Path: header) that that documentation relies on.

Look at it this way.

Directions say to remove the lid from a boiling pot of water. However, you don't have a cover on your pot of boiling water. Is it the directions fault if you burn yourself by reacing into the water to remove the lid (that isn't there). The directions assumed there was a lid.

The spamcop FAQ directions assume that no system has modified the Return-Path:x[at]returns.groups.yahoo.com field. Your messages have been modified between leaving Yahoo and arriving at spamcop. Eliminate that modification and your whitelists will continue to work as documented AND do what you expect them to.

P.S. These multiple threads are why it would be good to have all these discussions within one thread rather than insisting they be in a specific forum.

[StevenUnderwood]

In this specific case, I agree there seems to be a problem with your account that JT should look at. I don't seem to be having this problem with my whitelists.

Actually, I just looked at my filter and whitelist and I have "reports.spamcop.net" listed which gives me just the replies to any reports I send.

One additional peculiarity. Why is a user at abuse[at]embratel.net.br using a Return-Path: <spamcop[at]devnull.spamcop.net>? devnul.spamcop.net is usually where the "you have spam waiting to report" messages should come from and would never see anything but internal IP addresses.

<note> the specific case mentioned above is that SkydiveMike stated he had a whitelist entry for spamcop.net and an email arrived in the held mail with <spamcop[at]devnull.spamcop.net> in the Return-Path: header.

[Guest SkydiveMike]

Your problem is not being hidden there are answers all over the place.

22483[/snapback]

I disagree. I used the words "hidden" and "hide" to refer to hidden from the spamcop emoployees who also monitor this official support forum. I have not received any posts, nor any forum private messages, nor any email from any spamcop employee. My belief is that since my problem report is "hiding" in the lounge the employees are not seeing/believing/investigating/responding to it. My problem report would get a different level of "respect" from the spamcop employees monitoring the forum if it had been left where it belongs and not moved to he lounge.

I do not know the real motives for moving my problem report and therefore can only assume the worst and this does not bode well for a continued business relationship between myself (*) and spamcop.

It is sad and pathetic, really. I was one of the first filtered email / HORDE users and now I am looking elsewhere.

(*) This includes everyone on my "family" plan as well as a number of people using spamcop on my recommendation.

[Guest SkydiveMike]

The location in the forums does not really matter whether "one of the few employees" will see your message. They scan and post in all of the forums here.

The lack of any spamcop employee response to my problem argues strongly against that statement.

I think I would have left it in the email forum, but that is not my decision.

Thank you for the support

but Wazoo has always been careful to explain his reasons, usually in a PM at the time of the move.

I have never received a PM from Wazoo -- curious

22486[/snapback]

[agsteele]

I don't expect "customer service jargon" on this forum I expect customer service. Given that this is a support forum hosted on a spamcop.net server I have every right to expect that service. I should not be required to report my problem in multiple places, nor should I be subject to "peer" behavior on an official support forum.

22462[/snapback]

Perhaps this is the problem... You expect customer service from an employee in these forums but most of those who've been here for awhile, trying to offer help and assistance, actually recognise these forums for what they are. 'Peer' support forums which employees visit from time to time.

Expecting something that isn't going to be delivered is a guaranteed way to get frustrated. If that frustration then boils over, the peers who offer their time freely and generously understandably take it personally because their expectations are entirely different from yours.

Persisting in expecting something that isn't available in these forums will just keep the frustration levels high and mean that, as you're discovering' even the peer support stops.

Andrew

[StevenUnderwood]

The lack of any spamcop employee response to my problem argues strongly against that statement.

That is not unusual as they only post/reply when they have additional information to add or if it is beyond the scope of the peer-peer support (i.e. something we would not have access to). If they post in here 12 times a month, they have been busy.

Your problem has been determined and there is no real need for a deputy and/or administrator to poke in here except to confirm/deny the results found.

If you want a direct reply from a spamcop employee, you would need to contact thenm directly as stated previously at support<at>spamcop.net.

[Guest SkydiveMike]

In this specific case, I agree there seems to be a problem with your account that JT should look at.  I don't seem to be having this problem with my whitelists.

22492[/snapback]

And, of course, there is always the possibility that JT is so busy that he reads the "Email System & Accounts" forum before or instead of the lounge, right?

[StevenUnderwood]

And, of course, there is always the possibility that JT is so busy that he reads the "Email System & Accounts" forum before or instead of the lounge, right?

22498[/snapback]

And there is also the possibility that he will not read these for several days at a time. If you require a response, email is the only way to raise that possibility.

[Guest SkydiveMike]

Perhaps this is the problem...  You expect customer service from an employee in these forums but most of those who've been here for awhile, trying to offer help and assistance, actually recognise these forums for what they are.  'Peer' support forums which employees visit from time to time.

Believe it or not I do actually understand that point.

There is a difference, however, between:

• a peer offering support out of the goodness of his/her own heart with that service being "lacking" in someway.
  
• A peer taking an affirmative action to prevent or slow down support (such as moving threads form a "real" problem forum to a "lounge" forum)
  

I received a good dose of the first bullet that I am quite thankful for.

Unfortunately, I also received a good does of the second bullet and now am reconsidering my business relationship with spamcop.net because of it.

Persisting in expecting something that isn't available in these forums will just keep the frustration levels high and mean that, as you're discovering' even the peer support stops.

Andrew

22496[/snapback]

Is is possible (even a little bit) that the peer support is lessened because some of the technical peers don't have time to "hang out in the lounge" and therefore are not even aware of the problem report? I think so.

[Guest SkydiveMike]

That is not unusual as they only post/reply when they have additional information to add or if it is beyond the scope of the peer-peer support (i.e. something we would not have access to).

A number of peers have posted that it is beyond the scope of peer-to-peer support as the problem requires access to my account -- yet there still is no spamcop employee response. Is is possible (even a little bit) that the spamcop employees (who you admit are "busy") read the spamcop filtered email account forum before or instead of "hanging out in the lounge?" I think so.

If you want a direct reply from a spamcop employee, you would need to contact thenm directly as stated previously at support<at>spamcop.net.

22497[/snapback]

I have done that and still receieved no reply. Is it possible, even a little bit, that they be so busy that they "accept" on faith that since the moderator has moved the thread to the lounge it is not "really" an issue and therefore have not even looked into it? I think so.

[Guest SkydiveMike]

And there is also the possibility that he will not read these for several days at a time.  If you require a response, email is the only way to raise that possibility.

22500[/snapback]

I have done that (sent email to support[at]spamcop.net) and still receieved no reply. Is it possible, even a little bit, that they be so busy that they "accept" on faith that since the moderator has moved the thread to the lounge it is not "really" an issue and therefore have not even looked into it? I think so.

[Miss Betsy]

Perhaps this is the problem... You expect customer service from an employee in these forums but most of those who've been here for awhile, trying to offer help and assistance, actually recognise these forums for what they are. 'Peer' support forums which employees visit from time to time.

Expecting something that isn't going to be delivered is a guaranteed way to get frustrated.

Thank you, Andrew.

If you want a direct reply from a spamcop employee, you would need to contact thenm directly as stated previously at support<at>spamcop.net.

I believe that somewhere I read that you had contacted 'official' support, but had not gotten an answer. That is one of the good points of using the peer to peer forum - the answers are quicker in coming.

And apparently from another post, your problem was identified and the solution given, but you didn't like it (or in your frustration over not getting 'customer service' overlooked it).

Would you prefer the 'boilerplate' answers suggested by another poster? That's what a help desk has...

Though I am not so sure that email questions should not be much more separated from the reporting side because, IIUC, that is a business while the reporting side is more of a cooperative.

But, in spite of all the imperfections of the system, there are more happy people than unhappy people. There are some people whom you can't please - unless you see it their way.

Miss Betsy

[Guest SkydiveMike]

Return-Path: <SRS0=a35P=PU=returns.groups.yahoo.com=sentto-3514713-18437-1104934199-mikes.mailinglists=pobox.com[at]bounce2.pobox.com>

does NOT match groups.yahoo.com

And now that DavidT (in another thread) has mentioned that the whitelist worked for him, I will assume that Yahoo is sending the correct header (have asked him for confirmation) and that spamcop is not modifying his headers, I must assume they are modified during it's trip to your spamcop.net account.  The only other service touching these messages is pobox.com.

Could you ask pobox.com if the Return-Path: header seen in your samples is being set by their systems?  Could you ask them if you can turn off that modification?

22482[/snapback]

Here are the full headers from a yahoogroups email that did not end up in held mail:

Content-Transfer-Encoding:    7bit

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 22:15:13 -0000 [01/03/2005 05:15:13 PM EST]

Delivered-To:

    * spamcop-net-mike.mclean[at]spamcop.net

    * mikes.mailinglists[at]pobox.com

    * mailing list GtD_Palm[at]yahoogroups.com

From: Tonia <tbruehl[at]yahoo.com>

In-Reply-To: <DPEMLFLDFOHLOMDENBBEEEBNFMAA.michael9[at]michael9.cnc.net>

List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:GtD_Palm-unsubscribe[at]yahoogroups.com>

MIME-Version: 1.0

Mailing-List: list GtD_Palm[at]yahoogroups.com; contact GtD_Palm-owner[at]yahoogroups.com

Message-ID: <crcg5h+4h3r[at]eGroups.com>

Precedence: bulk

Received:

    * (qmail 1210 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2005 23:50:36 -0000

    * from unknown (192.168.1.103) by blade4.cesmail.net with QMQP; 3 Jan 2005 23:50:36 -0000

    * from boggle.pobox.com (208.58.1.193) by mailgate2.cesmail.net with SMTP; 3 Jan 2005 23:50:36 -0000

    * from boggle.pobox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by boggle.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76F49FE314 for <mike.mclean[at]spamcop.net>; Mon, 3 Jan 2005 17:49:07 -0500 (EST)

    * from n7a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com (n7a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com [66.94.237.41]) by boggle.pobox.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 8ED2CFCA65 for <mikes.mailinglists[at]pobox.com>; Mon, 3 Jan 2005 17:31:42 -0500 (EST)

    * from [66.218.69.6] by n7.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 03 Jan 2005 22:15:20 -0000

    * from [66.218.66.28] by mailer6.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 03 Jan 2005 22:15:20 -0000

    * (qmail 76364 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2005 22:15:19 -0000

    * from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m22.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2005 22:15:19 -0000

    * from unknown (HELO n6a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com) (66.94.237.40) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Jan 2005 22:15:19 -0000

    * from [66.218.69.5] by n6.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 03 Jan 2005 22:15:19 -0000

    * from [66.218.67.150] by mailer5.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 03 Jan 2005 22:15:19 -0000

Reply-To: GtD_Palm[at]yahoogroups.com

Return-Path: <SRS0=ly7t=PS=returns.groups.yahoo.com=sentto-3514713-18407-1104790520-mikes.mailinglists=pobox.com[at]bounce2.pobox.com>

Subject: [GtD_Palm] Re: Forced off Palm at work, advise needed.

To: GtD_Palm[at]yahoogroups.com

User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82

X-Apparently-To: GtD_Palm[at]yahoogroups.com

X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster

X-Originating-IP: 56.0.84.24

X-Sender: tbruehl[at]yahoo.com

X-spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.0 (2004-09-13) on blade4

X-spam-Level: **

X-spam-Status: hits=2.2 tests=FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD version=3.0.0

X-SpamCop-Checked: 192.168.1.103 208.58.1.193 127.0.0.1 66.94.237.41 66.218.69.6 66.218.66.28 66.218.66.218 66.94.237.40 66.218.69.5 66.218.67.150

X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-email

X-Yahoo-Profile: tbruehl

X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.94.237.40

This has similar headers to the messages that fail (tracking URLs above) but did make it to my inbox. So regardless of who is munging/changing the Return-Path it works in some cases and doesn't work in other cases -- i.e. the spamcop email system is receiving two similar inputs and generating two vastly different outputs.

[StevenUnderwood]

X-spam-Checker-Version:  SpamAssassin 3.0.0 (2004-09-13) on blade4

X-spam-Level:  **

X-spam-Status:  hits=2.2 tests=FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD version=3.0.0

X-SpamCop-Checked:  192.168.1.103 208.58.1.193 127.0.0.1 66.94.237.41 66.218.69.6 66.218.66.28 66.218.66.218 66.94.237.40 66.218.69.5 66.218.67.150

This message did not hit your whitelist either. It simply did not get sent to the Held Mail because there was no reason to (the IP's this message travelled through were not on the BL). If it sees your whitelist, there will be an X-Whitelisted: groups.yahoo.com entry in the headers even if the message would not have been blocked.

You will notice that the Return-Path: is similiar to the previous one:

Return-Path: <SRS0=ly7t=PS=returns.groups.yahoo.com=sentto-3514713-18407-1104790520-

and not Return-Path: <x[at]returns.groups.yahoo.com> which would match your whitelist.