sunnybains Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 SPAMCOP ADMINISTRATOR, PLEASE READ THIS! Since about the 15th, more than 50 items of mail have been diverted to the held mail folder. This is very serious because: 1. Most of it is from people I correspond with regularly. 2. Not all mail from given senders are blocked. Some gets through, some doesn't. 3. There does not seem to be any excessive amount of BCC'ing or anything else wrong with the mails being held. 4. Before the 15th, the filter seems to have been working reliably. I've been using spamcop for years now and have been able to trust the filter. It may let some stuff through, but didn't keep back things that are important. Since I get a hundred or more spams a day, I cannot afford to spend time wading through it all. I have to trust you. But you must have changed the filters in a BIG way and not told us: and the change is NOT for the better. Please let me know what you are doing to fix this problem. Or maybe someone else will direct me to an online service I can trust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted November 24, 2005 Share Posted November 24, 2005 Hardly seems URGENT!!!! if this has been going on for a week. The range of experiences posted run from one user complaining that not enough stuff is being blocked, others with no problem in their flow, and now your posting of too much stuff getting "handled" ....???? And yet, you offer nothing to "work" with. Please provide a Tracking URL on some of these items "wrongfully" diverted to your Held folder and let someone actually see the issue / details ..... Some of your terminology is also in question ... in general, the SpamCop e-mail system "blocks" nothing, so if this is an issue, there is something else going on .... It does seem that if JT changed something major a week ago that there would be a ton-load of folks upset, yet ..... no traffic over on news://news.spamcop.net/spamcop.mail on anything like this, not seen is a lot of other folks posting here with experiences like you're suggesting ...???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff G. Posted November 24, 2005 Share Posted November 24, 2005 Yes, a few Tracking URLs for legit messages that got held would be helpful. Also, please FAQ about the personal webmail filters in the SpamCop FAQ. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenUnderwood Posted November 24, 2005 Share Posted November 24, 2005 It is quite possible that one or more of the servers you correspond with (or your own redirection server) has become listed. We need more information, which is why we are asking for the Tracking URL for one of the False Positive messages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunnybains Posted November 25, 2005 Author Share Posted November 25, 2005 Hardly seems URGENT!!!! if this has been going on for a week. The range of experiences posted run from one user complaining that not enough stuff is being blocked, others with no problem in their flow, and now your posting of too much stuff getting "handled" ....???? And yet, you offer nothing to "work" with. Please provide a Tracking URL on some of these items "wrongfully" diverted to your Held folder and let someone actually see the issue / details ..... Some of your terminology is also in question ... in general, the SpamCop e-mail system "blocks" nothing, so if this is an issue, there is something else going on .... It does seem that if JT changed something major a week ago that there would be a ton-load of folks upset, yet ..... no traffic over on news://news.spamcop.net/spamcop.mail on anything like this, not seen is a lot of other folks posting here with experiences like you're suggesting ...???? 36549[/snapback] It may not seem urgent to you, but I use Spamcop to save time, not to waste it, and like many people e-mail is crucial with my business. I had no problem with false positives (i.e. falsely held mail) until the 15th. Only found out (as it wasn't systematic... i.e. it wasn't that all mail from was being held and therefore obvious that there was a problem) until my agent called me to find out why I hadn't replied to my e-mail. And I have no reason to believe that other people aren't having the same problem and, like me before Wednesday night, just didn't know it. For whoever is in charge of checking the accounts, I did "release and whitelist" for all the e-mails that were wrongly stuck. Doesn't that give you data to go on? Best, S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbiel Posted November 25, 2005 Share Posted November 25, 2005 It may not seem urgent to you, but I use Spamcop to save time, not to waste it, and like many people e-mail is crucial with my business. I had no problem with false positives (i.e. falsely held mail) until the 15th. Only found out (as it wasn't systematic... i.e. it wasn't that all mail from was being held and therefore obvious that there was a problem) until my agent called me to find out why I hadn't replied to my e-mail. And I have no reason to believe that other people aren't having the same problem and, like me before Wednesday night, just didn't know it. For whoever is in charge of checking the accounts, I did "release and whitelist" for all the e-mails that were wrongly stuck. Doesn't that give you data to go on? 36613[/snapback] No that does not give us any data. Nobody here has any access to your account information. No one here has any idea of what IP addresses are being affected. The request for a Tracking URL has been ignored by you (it contains data which we can use to try to help) Basicly you have blown a lot of hot air but provided no useful information (other than a date that things seemed to change which does not tie into anything anyone else is reporting here). I will close this with the standard form reply. If you have a specific question about a section of the FAQ that confuses you, please identify/post that section here with your question and we will attempt to help you understand. If you haven't looked at a FAQ yet, please see the information provided at What is SpamCop? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted November 25, 2005 Share Posted November 25, 2005 It may not seem urgent to you, Only pointing out the obvious .. you say URGENT .. I see almost a week gone by .. then I see multiple days gone by in your follow-up .... I seem to have a different definition of URGENT!!! ???/ And I have no reason to believe that other people aren't having the same problem and, like me before Wednesday night, just didn't know it. Can't offer support for a problem not known about ... and there still seems to be a lack of others posting about this situation, even after you brought it to light ...??? For whoever is in charge of checking the accounts, ....... Doesn't that give you data to go on? 36613[/snapback] First of all, please note the strip of data I laced into the top section of each forum section; "The primary mode of support here is peer-to-peer, meaning users helping other users. (please remember this at all times!)" The second item if interest would be a listing of who's who apparently, as tis also has been attmpted to be made clear ... this suppport forum for the SpamCop.net tool-set is not directly connected to the Parsing & Reporting system, and is only located within the same facility that the e-mail servers are housed, owned and maintained by the same person .. please follow the links provided, the first one being Start Here - before you make your first Post ... one link existing within items found there is Section 8 - SpamCop's System & Active Staff which would show that the Admin of this Forum has no access to your e-mail account .... I did "release and whitelist" for all the e-mails that were wrongly stuck. Did this solve the "problem" ?????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunnybains Posted November 27, 2005 Author Share Posted November 27, 2005 Here is some data: 1. Doing release and whitelist has helped... the amount of stuck mail is reducing rapidly. However, because I get e-mail from a lot of people I don't know, I'll have to keep checking until my confidence in the system returns. For instance, a lot of the blocked e-mail has been from staff and students _within my own university_. There are more than 700 students alone who can ask me for help, so there's no way that I can whitelist them all. 2. Some URLs: This was the last e-mail wrongly held: X-Spamcop-Checked: 192.168.1.103 213.171.216.72 X-Spamcop-Disposition: Blocked bl.spamcop.net and here are a bunch of others. X-Spamcop-Checked: 192.168.1.103 213.171.216.111 X-Spamcop-Disposition: Blocked bl.spamcop.net X-Spamcop-Checked: X-Spamcop-Disposition: Blocked SpamAssassin=5 X-Spamcop-Checked: 192.168.1.103 213.171.216.118 X-Spamcop-Disposition: Blocked bl.spamcop.net X-Spamcop-Checked: 192.168.1.103 213.171.216.70 X-Spamcop-Disposition: Blocked bl.spamcop.net X-Spamcop-Checked: 192.168.1.101 213.171.216.111 X-Spamcop-Disposition: Blocked bl.spamcop.net Note that all of these are from different people. I checked all of the last IP addresses on the "Checked" line (as directed to on your FAQ) and not one of them is listed at bl.spamcop.net. What is most alarming is that more than half of the people I'm having trouble getting e-mail from are local (i.e. at the same university where I teach) and that they're not blocked _consistently_. I hope this is sufficiently far from being 'hot air' to protect me from further abuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff G. Posted November 27, 2005 Share Posted November 27, 2005 2. Some URLs: This was the last e-mail wrongly held: X-Spamcop-Checked: 192.168.1.103 213.171.216.72 X-Spamcop-Disposition: Blocked bl.spamcop.net 36676[/snapback] Those are not Tracking URLs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted November 27, 2005 Share Posted November 27, 2005 You say "different people" and talk about "different e-mail addresses" .. but that's as far as you go. So as far as I can go is; http://www.senderbase.org/?searchBy=ipaddr...=213.171.216.70 213.171.216.119 mail119.livemail.co.uk 5.3 5.2 213.171.216.118 mail118.livemail.co.uk 5.3 5.2 213.171.216.117 mail117.livemail.co.uk 5.1 5.2 213.171.216.75 smtpin08l.livemail.co.uk Y 5.1 5.2 213.171.216.77 smtpin09l.livemail.co.uk 5.1 5.2 213.171.216.113 mail113.livemail.co.uk Y 5.0 5.2 213.171.216.70 smtpin10l.livemail.co.uk 5.0 5.2 213.171.216.111 mail111.livemail.co.uk Y 5.1 5.2 213.171.216.76 smtpin07l.livemail.co.uk Y 5.1 5.2 213.171.216.71 smtpin01l.livemail.co.uk Y 5.0 5.2 213.171.216.114 mail114.livemail.co.uk Y 5.1 5.2 213.171.216.73 smtpin03l.livemail.co.uk Y 5.0 5.2 213.171.216.78 smtpin05l.livemail.co.uk Y 5.0 5.2 213.171.216.112 mail112.livemail.co.uk Y 5.0 5.2 213.171.216.72 smtpin02l.livemail.co.uk Y 5.0 5.2 213.171.216.74 smtpin04l.livemail.co.uk Y 5.0 5.2 213.171.216.79 smtpin06l.livemail.co.uk Y 5.0 5.1 It would appear that the "ISP / Host" is very much in common ... whitelist this host???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenUnderwood Posted November 27, 2005 Share Posted November 27, 2005 2. Some URLs: 36676[/snapback] And to follow up on Wazoo's post, it looks like it might be your ISP with the problem with a new spam system they implemented. These are for 213.171.216.72 but the other IP's have the same types of reports against them. This message was stopped because of the content of the message, the others because the hosts transferring the message were listed in the spamcop bl. X-Spamcop-Checked: X-Spamcop-Disposition: Blocked SpamAssassin=5 They all seem off the spamcop bl now: Report History: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Submitted: Saturday, November 26, 2005 4:56:30 AM -0500: I am sorry, we have new spam filters! 1566175782 ( Forwarded spam ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175781 ( Forwarded spam ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175780 ( 213.171.216.72 ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175779 ( 213.171.216.72 ) To: abuse[at]fasthosts.co.uk -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Submitted: Saturday, November 26, 2005 4:56:30 AM -0500: I am sorry, we have new spam filters! 1566175718 ( Forwarded spam ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175717 ( Forwarded spam ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175716 ( 213.171.216.72 ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175713 ( 213.171.216.72 ) To: abuse[at]fasthosts.co.uk -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Submitted: Saturday, November 26, 2005 4:56:30 AM -0500: I am sorry, we have new spam filters! 1566175633 ( Forwarded spam ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175632 ( Forwarded spam ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175631 ( 213.171.216.72 ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175630 ( 213.171.216.72 ) To: abuse[at]fasthosts.co.uk -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Submitted: Saturday, November 26, 2005 4:56:30 AM -0500: I am sorry, we have new spam filters! 1566175559 ( Forwarded spam ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175558 ( Forwarded spam ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175557 ( 213.171.216.72 ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175555 ( 213.171.216.72 ) To: abuse[at]fasthosts.co.uk -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Submitted: Saturday, November 26, 2005 4:56:30 AM -0500: I am sorry, we have new spam filters! 1566175529 ( Forwarded spam ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175528 ( Forwarded spam ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175527 ( 213.171.216.72 ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175526 ( 213.171.216.72 ) To: abuse[at]fasthosts.co.uk -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Submitted: Saturday, November 26, 2005 4:56:30 AM -0500: I am sorry, we have new spam filters! 1566175510 ( Forwarded spam ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175509 ( Forwarded spam ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175508 ( 213.171.216.72 ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175507 ( 213.171.216.72 ) To: abuse[at]fasthosts.co.uk -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Submitted: Saturday, November 26, 2005 4:56:30 AM -0500: I am sorry, we have new spam filters! 1566175478 ( Forwarded spam ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175471 ( Forwarded spam ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175470 ( 213.171.216.72 ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175469 ( 213.171.216.72 ) To: abuse[at]fasthosts.co.uk -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Submitted: Saturday, November 26, 2005 4:56:30 AM -0500: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender 1566175438 ( Forwarded spam ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175437 ( Forwarded spam ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175436 ( 213.171.216.72 ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175433 ( 213.171.216.72 ) To: abuse[at]fasthosts.co.uk -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Submitted: Saturday, November 26, 2005 4:56:30 AM -0500: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender 1566175357 ( Forwarded spam ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175355 ( Forwarded spam ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175352 ( 213.171.216.72 ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175351 ( 213.171.216.72 ) To: abuse[at]fasthosts.co.uk -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Submitted: Saturday, November 26, 2005 4:56:30 AM -0500: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender 1566175251 ( Forwarded spam ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175239 ( Forwarded spam ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175234 ( 213.171.216.72 ) To: [concealed user-defined recipient] 1566175229 ( 213.171.216.72 ) To: abuse[at]fasthosts.co.uk -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbiel Posted November 27, 2005 Share Posted November 27, 2005 1. Doing release and whitelist has helped... the amount of stuck mail is reducing rapidly. However, because I get e-mail from a lot of people I don't know, I'll have to keep checking until my confidence in the system returns. For instance, a lot of the blocked e-mail has been from staff and students _within my own university_. There are more than 700 students alone who can ask me for help, so there's no way that I can whitelist them all.36676[/snapback] Remember that you do not have to white list individual users, you can white list entire domains which in your case looks like it would be "livemail.co.uk" or going ever broader as "co.uk" you could even go as far as whitelisting ".uk" but that would probably open up too much spam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.