MIG Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 Hello All, https://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z6545751660z5e326ea89b256a6150d73e004fb98521z Is there a logical explanation for "I know this ISP's abuse address", as opposed to the actual information ?(which I know, unsure if I need to put it here) ? confused GH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petzl Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 7 hours ago, MIG said: Hello All, https://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z6545751660z5e326ea89b256a6150d73e004fb98521z Is there a logical explanation for "I know this ISP's abuse address", as opposed to the actual information ?(which I know, unsure if I need to put it here) ? confused GH the report will go to SpamCop admin chances are putting in real address will have it "bitbined" but not to SpamCop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIG Posted May 11, 2019 Author Share Posted May 11, 2019 14 hours ago, petzl said: the report will go to SpamCop admin chances are putting in real address will have it "bitbined" but not to SpamCop Hey Petzl, "Go to SCA", I understand, "Bitbinned, but not to SC", I don't. Why not devnull it with the regular redirect to SC? GH still confused... Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lisati Posted May 12, 2019 Share Posted May 12, 2019 For some reason, I saw a "report spam now" button when looking at the report linked to by tracking link. Be that as it may...... There are a variety of reasons that Spamcop will not send reports directly to a provider. Perhaps the admins want to keep an eye on spam reports for that particular provider, or perhaps it needs some kind of special handling. I've noticed with reporting emails that appear to arrive via Yahoo, for example, sometimes the reports go to "internal spamcop processing" (or similar) and sometimes they go to an abuse address. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petzl Posted May 12, 2019 Share Posted May 12, 2019 12 hours ago, MIG said: Hey Petzl, "Go to SCA", I understand, "Bitbinned, but not to SC", I don't. Why not devnull it with the regular redirect to SC? GH still confused... Cheers! SpamCop admin will send report on to Level3 also you have not submitted report? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIG Posted May 12, 2019 Author Share Posted May 12, 2019 1 hour ago, petzl said: SpamCop admin will send report on to Level3 also you have not submitted report? Thanks Petzl, Geez, GH thought SCA was Lvl3😩. Anyhoo, it just got weirder, I received an email from SFB@L3 thanking me for notifying an abuse address I didn't notify😵 I simply do not understand why SCparser doesn't know "that" abuse address, why does it have to go all the way to Lvl3? (feels like dealing with KGBMi5FBi)... Re "submitted SC report", I did, I used account that has my email address as recipient, n then, I parsed with acc that has no email address so I could post the URL here.... 'Cause, as we know, SC doesn't have the facility to keep recipient email addresses private... Maybe I didn't cancel the 2nd parse, I'll check, thanks for the heads-up! Cheers! GH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIG Posted May 12, 2019 Author Share Posted May 12, 2019 4 hours ago, lisati said: For some reason, I saw a "report spam now" button when looking at the report linked to by tracking link. Be that as it may...... There are a variety of reasons that Spamcop will not send reports directly to a provider. Perhaps the admins want to keep an eye on spam reports for that particular provider, or perhaps it needs some kind of special handling. I've noticed with reporting emails that appear to arrive via Yahoo, for example, sometimes the reports go to "internal spamcop processing" (or similar) and sometimes they go to an abuse address. Hey Lisati, Sorry I didn't acknowledge your post, didn't see it... need new eyes.. Thanks for the explanation, "keep an eye, special handling" GH can understand... Re "report now", yes I didn't clear/cancel the 2nd parse - thanks "TEAM😁!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lisati Posted May 12, 2019 Share Posted May 12, 2019 That's OK. I first noticed changes to the way Yahoo emails were being processed a couple of years ago, after Yahoo changed something at their end which seemed to break regular processing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petzl Posted May 12, 2019 Share Posted May 12, 2019 10 hours ago, MIG said: I simply do not understand why SCparser doesn't know "that" abuse address, why does it have to go all the way to Lvl3? because level 3 have told them not to send SC reports to the registered abuse address Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIG Posted May 13, 2019 Author Share Posted May 13, 2019 10 hours ago, petzl said: because level 3 have told them not to send SC reports to the registered abuse address Thank you Petzl, "them" = ? Why then did L3 send the report to the registered abuse address and notify me? G🦗H feels like Alice... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIG Posted May 13, 2019 Author Share Posted May 13, 2019 11 hours ago, lisati said: That's OK. I first noticed changes to the way Yahoo emails were being processed a couple of years ago, after Yahoo changed something at their end which seemed to break regular processing. Thank you Lisati, G🦗H Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petzl Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 15 hours ago, MIG said: Why then did L3 send the report to the registered abuse address and notify me? becauase SC admin admin sent it to whomever in L3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIG Posted May 18, 2019 Author Share Posted May 18, 2019 On 5/14/2019 at 7:43 AM, petzl said: because SC admin admin sent it to whomever in L3 Thanks Petzl, Alice broke the looking glassG🦗H Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.86812d1032bf875715674c9bc1d0eaec.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.