d.gorton Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 Dear Sir/Madam, My name is Dean Gorton and I'm writing to you on behalf of Macmillan Publishers. Sometime ago we paid a subscription to the Spamcop Blacklist and we currently downloading the bl.data and use Spamcop to protect our network from spam. However it has been brought to my attention that our primary outbound gateway was listed, 194.129.50.175. This has happened once before but was cause by a automated reply being sent to one of your spam traps. As a result we have now stopped sending all virus alert and spam notifications. Yet we have been listed again. I noticed that this time it was only one Of your registered members that reported us and not a spam trap yet we where list. This does seem somewhat draconian and raise some concerns that we may be blocking mail genuine mail by using your list. Could you please send me some information, such as the original header so May take this matter further Dean Gorton Network and Communications Manager Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agsteele Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 My name is Dean Gorton and I'm writing to you on behalf of Macmillan Publishers. Sometime ago we paid a subscription to the Spamcop Blacklist and we currently downloading the bl.data and use Spamcop to protect our network from spam. However it has been brought to my attention that our primary outbound gateway was listed, 194.129.50.175. This has happened once before but was cause by a automated reply being sent to one of your spam traps. As a result we have now stopped sending all virus alert and spam notifications. Yet we have been listed again. I noticed that this time it was only one Of your registered members that reported us and not a spam trap yet we where list. This does seem somewhat draconian and raise some concerns that we may be blocking mail genuine mail by using your list. Could you please send me some information, such as the original header so May take this matter further 25432[/snapback] Hi Dean! The IP address you just provided is not currently listed in the SpamCop BL. Equally SenderBase does not list the IP. So it may have aged off the list but it is certainly not listed now. These forums are peer support forums. So it is is generally quite difficult to assist you further. To get direct help with the issue you would normally speak with the person nominated to receive reports for your IP block. If that person is not within your organisation then it could be your upstream provider. Whether it is someone else in your organisation or the upstream folk, they will have received copies of the reports from individual concerned. It looks like reports are currently going to postmaster[at]macmillan.co.uk and/or abuse[at]dsl.pipex.com or possibly abuse[at]uk.uu.net. You could also contact deputies(at)spamcop.net who can assist you. You might wish to get yourselves added to the recipients of complaints for your IP to speed up the process should it happen in the future. A moderator may move this thread to the BL forum since that may be a more appropriate location for further discussion. Andrew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek T Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 Dear Sir/Madam, it has been brought to my attention that our primary outbound gateway was listed, 194.129.50.175. This has happened once before but was cause by a automated reply being sent to one of your spam traps. 25432[/snapback] Does this help? Submitted: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 06:41:21 GMT: Out of Office AutoReply: News and nntp URI schemes * 1378642367 ( 194.129.50.175 ) To: spamcop[at]imaphost.com * 1378642340 ( 194.129.50.175 ) ( refuted ) To: abuse[at]uk.uu.net Post-acceptance OOOs and NDRs are bad news in the current climate. See the FAQ. BTW one report alone can not get you listed; something else must be going on. Senderbase shows an alarming increase in traffic from that IP. Is it possible that there is a zombied machine on your network? Or is a 930% increase in traffic explaned by a recent increase in legitimate use? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.