GFPhelps Posted January 25, 2005 Share Posted January 25, 2005 I recently received a phishing e-mail, allegedly from Washington Mutual. I was disappointed to see that when SpamCop processed the e-mail, that there was no automatic report to be sent to the security department at Washington Mutual, i.e., to e-mail address spoof[at]wamu.com, as disclosed on the Washington Mutual web site. I sugggest adding this as a SpamCop enhancement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted January 25, 2005 Share Posted January 25, 2005 Discussed much in a number of other places. The basic problem is that these other outfits can't seem to agree on a standard address, some don't want to be bothered, some go with that the first 100 notifications are enough, etc. etc. etc. Then one gets into that the SpamCop parser isn't looking at "content" .. but you are asking for a "judgement call" on the visibility of a URL within a submittal. You might wish to feed your discovered reporting address and the URL it was found on to Marjolein, owner of the Ban-spam page, linked to from the Forum FAQ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turetzsr Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 I recently received a phishing e-mail, allegedly from Washington Mutual. I was disappointed to see that when SpamCop processed the e-mail, that there was no automatic report to be sent to the security department at Washington Mutual, i.e., to e-mail address spoof[at]wamu.com, as disclosed on the Washington Mutual web site. I sugggest adding this as a SpamCop enhancement. 23580[/snapback] ...Although not exactly what you request, see thread "Additional reporting?, Stock picks, piracy, viagra". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lking Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Discussed much in a number of other places. The basic problem is that these other outfits can't seem to agree on a standard address, some don't want to be bothered, some go with that the first 100 notifications are enough, etc. etc. etc. 23588[/snapback] The following was reported in The Washington Post as a place to report Phishing: Anti-Phishing Working Group, http://www.antiphishing.org/ I have not received any phish bate lately (don't tell any one!) but looking at their web page it looks like the right place to report. They have the same reporting requirements as spamcop (email attachment with full header etc.). They appear to ask for all reports so figured I would add <reportphishing[at]antiphishing.org> to the TO: list. If (when) I get some phishing spam I will report any blow back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 The following was reported in The Washington Post as a place to report Phishing: Anti-Phishing Working Group, http://www.antiphishing.org/ I had added that URL to the Forum FAQ eons ago <g> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lking Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 I had added that URL to the Forum FAQ eons ago <g> 26253[/snapback] That's good to know. I will take it as an endorsement, you never know who paid the guy at the Post. My luck , i've read 25778 entries and missed the one ... <g> Corporate memory is good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firefly Posted May 15, 2005 Share Posted May 15, 2005 I was rather astonished to see, when I reported a PayPal phishing scam, that spoof[at]paypal.com was one of the reporting addresses listed. Perhaps PayPal asked that it be added? In the past, I've added that address myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turetzsr Posted May 24, 2005 Share Posted May 24, 2005 I was rather astonished to see, when I reported a PayPal phishing scam, that spoof[at]paypal.com was one of the reporting addresses listed. Perhaps PayPal asked that it be added? In the past, I've added that address myself.28041[/snapback] ...This has happened to me, as well (although not recently). I presumed it was because a PayPal-controlled web server was referenced in the body of the spam, perhaps to retrieve the PayPal logo or something.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lking Posted May 24, 2005 Share Posted May 24, 2005 ...I presumed it was because a PayPal-controlled web server was referenced in the body of the spam, perhaps to retrieve the PayPal logo or something.... That is correct. The phishers (phishermen?) reference the paypal wabpage for logos, as well as in the fine print "help", "security/privacy", "contact use" and other non-phishing pages to make the email look real. I like you send the original email to spoof[at]paypal.com and reportphishing[at]antiphishing.org in addition to [at]spam.spamcop.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff G. Posted May 24, 2005 Share Posted May 24, 2005 I like you send the original email to spoof[at]paypal.com and reportphishing[at]antiphishing.org in addition to [at]spam.spamcop.net28457[/snapback] Please see the second paragraph of my posting http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?...indpost&p=27444 concerning revealing your confidential submit address at spam.spamcop.net. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lking Posted May 24, 2005 Share Posted May 24, 2005 Please see the second paragraph of my posting http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?...indpost&p=27444 concerning revealing your confidential submit address at spam.spamcop.net. Thanks! 28489[/snapback] Yes I read you post last month <g>. And yes you are correct, I should have been explicit about using Bcc: with [at]spam.Spamcop.net. I just "assumed" every one else has read and remembers all posts <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.