SpamCop Listing - is it just another headache?

[chrisfourie]

:angry: SpamCop has become a total frustration for us.

Spamcop unfortunately is running their list and not actually even stopping the spammer. They decided that any bounces it receives from mail boxes over quota or anyone with an auto responder is now spam.

As a result, incorrect mail servers get listed and to quote SpamCop:

"It appears this listing is caused by misdirected bounces. We have a FAQ which covers this topic: Why auto-responses are bad (Misdirected bounces). Please read this FAQ and heed the advice contained in it."

We have got 1000's of clients who uses a "catch all" mail account on our servers from where their own internal mail servers collect the mail and thus making it impossible for us to even attempt what they suggest, and to make matters worse, you cannot even trace the "incorrect listing" to the source and to quote SpamCop again:

"spam traps are secret, no reports or evidence are provided by SpamCop"

Autoresponders for example, that reply to the spam messages forged header can also result in a listing. So with that being said, its kind of hard to stop autoresponders and mail forwards unless we eliminate them from services we offer.

In any event if we disable bounces then mail servers such as AOL will no longer accept mail from our servers because the server is not RFC compliant.

This has been a heated issue for many ISP's worldwide (even here in South Africa) and these SpamCop lists that are supposed to be helping are actually shielding the spam source itself.

Are there any other IPS's out there experiencing the same frustrations?

[Derek T]

:angry: SpamCop has become a total frustration for us.

Spamcop unfortunately is running their list and not actually even stopping the spammer. They decided that any bounces it receives from mail boxes over quota or anyone with an auto responder is now spam.

In any event if we disable bounces then mail servers such as AOL will no longer accept mail from our servers because the server is not RFC compliant.

Bollocks

This has been a heated issue for many ISP's worldwide (even here in South Africa) and these SpamCop lists that are supposed to be helping are actually shielding the spam source itself.

Are there any other IPS's out there experiencing the same frustrations?

Probably. There are also thousands of ISPs out there who reject during the SMTP transaction and thus bounce to real sender rather than some innocent third party. Your call.

[chrisfourie]

Bollocks

Probably. There are also thousands of ISPs out there who reject during the SMTP transaction and thus bounce to real sender rather than some innocent third party. Your call.

OK "bollocks" which term are you actually referring to?

1. something rubbish

2. a falsehood or series of lies

3. something great

4. the best possible

5. testicles

6. exclamation on making a error.

I am a member of this forum on the basis of getting constructive comments and information on a very real situation effecting thousands if not millions of clients with their own mail servers and similar problems.

Please remember and I quote "The primary mode of support here is peer-to-peer, meaning users helping other users. (please remember this at all times!)"

I noted you are "Not a SpamCop employee, just a happy customer!" and I'm very pleased for you but, have you ever stopped for one minute and given any thought to the possibility of how much revenue is lost when legit email is returned because of incorrect listings.

Can you honestly say that being a "happy customer" of Spamcop that you no longer receive any spam and that you have never lost a potential client because their message were blocked?

If you answer NO to any of the questions above, how can you be a "happy customer"?

[Paranoid2000]

Spamcop unfortunately is running their list and not actually even stopping the spammer. They decided that any bounces it receives from mail boxes over quota or anyone with an auto responder is now spam.

That is because unsolicited bounces are spam. The root cause is spammers using forged sender addresses which they have been doing for some years now. They now include people's email addresses (especially known anti-spam activists and anyone who has complained about their spam) as a means of retaliation.

The majority of spam I now receive are such bounces.

ISPs who persist in sending out bounces to forged addresses do the following:

• They waste their own outgoing bandwidth;
  
• They assist spammers in causing inconvenience to users;
  
• They increase the chance of blocklists hitting legitimate mail.
  

Ultimately, email administrators need to adjust their systems to reject incoming mail that is forged or for non-existent accounts (the SpamCop FAQs and SpamHaus' ISP spam Issues FAQ provide plenty of information on doing this).

If an email administrator is not prepared to run their server responsibly, then SpamCop's blocklisting is a desireable consequence and serves the community (and other ISPs) in limiting spam - much like blocklisting a zombie PC does.

Moderator Edit: split out from a duplicate Topic Starter originally made into the How to Use the SpamCop Forum section .. then merged into 'this' discussion.

[dra007]

Everyone here ..in this forum, benefits directly or indirectly from using, reporting and subscribing to spamcop. We just have little tolerance for rants based on misinformation and unwillingness to takle the problem that gets the ranters listed. In general people that come here inquisitive and with a positive attitude get the help they ask for.

[dra007]

Everyone here ..in this forum, benefits directly or indirectly from using, reporting and subscribing to spamcop. We just have little tolerance for rants based on misinformation and unwillingness to takle the problem that gets the ranters listed. In general people that come here inquisitive and with a positive attitude get the help they ask for.

You placed the same rant in two forums, a moderator will delete one or merge them.

Moderator Edit: split out from a duplicate Topic Starter originally made into the How to Use the SpamCop Forum section .. then merged into 'this' discussion.

[Wazoo]

OK, I haven't seen the second rant yet, having started at the top .. but finding this posted into the How to Use ... the SpamCop Forum has me a bit 'excited' ....

Moving this to the Blocking List Help Forum for now ....

Moderator Edit: split out from a duplicate Topic Starter originally made into the How to Use the SpamCop Forum section .. then merged into 'this' discussion.

[Wazoo]

chrisfourie's initial duplicate posts, the first reply that cut to the heart of the issue raised, and the obvious lack of research has me now leaning towards moving this to the Lounge area as not much more than a rant.

Posting from a saix.net IP address, using a webmail account/address for registration here, no mention of any IP addresses that may be involved with the issue raised .... little credence offered to being "the guy in charge" at this point.

The reference to AOL not accepting e-mail for the reasons cited is just much too funny, as AOL made the headlines when they in fact changed their e-mail servers to stop this mis-utilization by spammers.

Window is open for a while to allow chrisfourie to return and put something on the table to actually discuss .. however, that window will close in a few hours, this will be moved to the Loinge .... probably closed to further discourse as it really serves little purpose in the current status of "the net" ....

[Derek T]

OK "bollocks" which term are you actually referring to?

1. something rubbish

2. a falsehood or series of lies

3. something great

4. the best possible

5. testicles

6. exclamation on making a error.

Can you honestly say that being a "happy customer" of Spamcop that you no longer receive any spam and that you have never lost a potential client because their message were blocked?

If you answer NO to any of the questions above, how can you be a "happy customer"?

1 and/or 2, you choose.

Oh I receive LOTS of spam, the more the better! About 100/day are safely filtered into heldmail and then reported to keep the blocklist up-to-date. One or two a day slip under the radar into my inbox and are reported likewise. SpamCop does not block, it filters so I can say with hand on heart that I never had a genuine email blocked. I get prehaps one false positive a month in the heldmail - I can live with that. So yes, a very happy customer

[chrisfourie]

I would like to apologise to the Administrators of this Forum for posting my first "rant" in the wrong section, hope I have not caused you to much inconvenience.

It is so sad to see the negative attitude Administrators and SpamCop "Customers" of this Forum take towards posts from innocent victims when SpamCop is being questioned for their actions.

Perhaps you are ALL correct, this rant belongs in the "Loinge" area.

The fact that ISP's Worldwide must adhere to SpamCop's standards or stand a chance of being black listed sounds to me like bully tactics see: (Bully Online), or is SpamCop working towards what the Americans refer to it as "Antitrust" see:(Antitrust)

Oh and before I forget, to Derek T a "happy customer" of SpamCop, who still receives LOTS of spam (about 100+ a day) and who has never had a genuine email blocked, or should I rather say filtered....

WAKE UP!!!!! smell the roses.

When are you going to realise that SpamCop is not working, its hardly a "hick-up" in the Spammers day to day workflow. You are spending MUCH more time reporting spam to SpamCop than what it will take you to just delete the message but, I must agree with you, it does feel good at the time knowing that you have done your bit, just sad to realise, you are going to have to do it again the next day, the day after that, and after that and after that.....

Enlighten yourself, take a look at some of the following articles.

What Is Spamcop Really Policing?

Why not to use SpamCop -- some first-hand accounts

Spamcop and Gmail lock horns again

Major Problems Caused By Spamcop

Why Spamcop Is Harmful

Sampling of Spamcop False Reports

Why Spamex does not support the use of Spamcop.net

Why the SpamCop blocking list is harmful

OptInRealBig.com has filed suit against SpamCop

Regards ALL

[Telarin]

Spamcop is just like any tool out there. When used correctly, it does exactly what it is intended for, which is to notify the source ISP of a spam or mail server configuration problem on their end, and to help mail server administrators and end-users in the filtering of spam from their incoming email.

But like any other tool, it can be misused. In a system with customer end-users, blocking based on the SCBL is probably one of the misuses, as it does not give users the option of whether or not they want to block incoming email. This is especially true if the ISP uses the SCBL in a blocking fasion, and does not offer any kind of white listing options to go along with it.

On the other hand, as a server admin, I choose to use the SCBL in a blocking fashion. My end-users have no say whatsoever in the mail server configuration or operation, I can and do read email as part of my daily job and report excessive inappropriate use as I feel necessary. This may sound a bit draconic, but if you work for a company with more than a handful of employees, this is standard operations, they just don't tell you about it unless you read what you signed in your employment agreement.

For us, email is extremely important, which is why I elect to use the SCBL in a blocking fashion. This may seem counterintuitive, but let me explain. If I block an incoming email from a real customer, the immediately get an error back, and can call in to make sure their business is taken care of. On the other hand, if all email is filtered into junk mail folders, a customer may think their message was delivered, when in fact it is buried under several hundred messages in a junk mail folder, and may very well get deleted without ever being seen.

The SCBL has also substantially reduced administrative costs for our mail server. Any email that our server accepts must be maintained indefinitely. This journaling of email requires substantial storage resources both online and offline, as well as a significant amount of time to do the actual archiving. By rejecting around 15,000 messages each day, Even if you only figure 4 or 5k per message, and considering the number of image spams now floating around, that estimate probably falls far short, I save nearly 2GB of storage and archiving space each month. This improves mail server performance, it reduces the cost of hardware necessary, it reduces the amount of time I have to spend archiving old messages to DVD, and it reduces the amount of time it takes me to find and recover old messages when needed.

I have also had several instances where I have worked with mail admins whose mail was blocked by the SCBL to correct their problems. Not only was their issue fixed, making one less mail server on the internet spewing spam, but this prevented their problem from escalating to listings on blocklists that are much harder to get off. Spamcop is an excellent early-warning system because of its automation, aggressiveness, and rapid response times.

So, as I said, when one knows what the tool does, and uses it accordingly, it works well. However, when one uses the tool as something it isn't, it can be extremely clumsy and ineffective. Have you ever tried to drive a nail with a pipe wrench? It works eventually, but its certainly no the best way to do it, and you will likely end up with several bent nails and a sore thumb before you successfully get one nail driven.

Edit: Oh, and as a side note with regards to your "Time spent reporting spam" portion of your rant. I use OL SpamCop to report whatever spam slips through the filters. This usually amounts to about 30 emails per day, total for 40+ mailboxes. Thats less than 1 spam per person per day, not too bad. OLSpamCop allows me to simply select the messages, click the report button, and click ok. It takes me only a matter of a few seconds to do this, even when I troll through the Junk E-mail folders of all my users looking for spam.

[dra007]

Claims of innocence from the occasional ranters and munchkin trolls that come here to vent are hard to take seriously given as Wazoo puts it

the current status of "the net" ....

...

When information is provided (something you have failed to do) the innocence changes into misconfigured servers, hijacked PCs and the like...as long as you are unwilling to fix YOUR PROBLEM, you will continue to be listed and we will continue to filter you from our inboxes...

[Derek T]

Claims of innocence from the occasional ranters and munchkin trolls that come here to vent are hard to take seriously.

When information is provided (something you have failed to do) the innocence changes into misconfigured servers, hijacked PCs and the like...as long as you are unwilling to fix YOUR PROBLEM, you will continue to be listed and we will continue to filter you from our inboxes...

Which means that SpamCop is working as it should and if that pisses off spam-friendly admins like the OP, that's just a bonus. Especially one who can't spell 'hiccough'.

[Farelf]

... even when I troll through the Junk E-mail folders of all my users looking for spam.

Appreciation for the view of your world Will, well said.

Totally OT and just because we're starting to see it used thusly and often often around the internet - you do mean trawl, don't you? I would hate to think of your terrified users scattering all ways to once, like sparks in burned-up paper, in flight from the daily rampage of the Russell, Resident Corporate Troll, licensed to fold, spindle and mutilate. There again, maybe that's exactly what you mean.

[nadia]

Since last week I know about the existence of SPAMCOP. Nothing I ever wanted to know. SPAMCOP blocks Emails of my friends. I've never asked to anyone to "control" my emails. SPAMCOP is not in the position to take such decisions ... and while SPAMCOP kills single private mails, tons of viagra, big tits, fake watches flood my mailbox. Great job! SPAMCOP is ineffective as possible and destructive. I don't talk about any commercial e-mail, bulks or something like this. I talk about regular SINGLE mails about private topics; friends, family. SPAMCOP has blocked e-mails sended to me, telling about a friend. He died on August 1, 2006.

SPAMCOP's bouncing e-mails messages are unwanted: this is spam. SPAMCOP cuts off freedom of free people. This is not acceptable and... this is illegal. Funny? Wait and see.

Have a nice day...

[Farelf]

... SPAMCOP blocks Emails of my friends. ...

If your friends' emails are being blocked it's *your* provider doing the blocking (maybe using the SC block list, maybe others too). Can you whitelist them? Or would you rather act the victim a bit longer?

[chrisfourie]

SPAMCOP has blocked e-mails sended to me

Nadia, I understand your frustration. SpamCop will only block email from your friends if the IP number of their service provider (ISP) is listed in the SpamCop database. Your friens should get a "bounce back" message from their ISP similar to the one below:

Hi. This is the qmail-send program at mail.yourfriendsisp.net.

I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.

This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.

<yourname[at]yourisp.net>:

123.123.123.123 does not like recipient.

Remote host said: 554 Service unavailable; Client host [999.999.999.999] blocked using bl.spamcop.net

Your friends will have to check the SpamCop database that their ISP's IP number is no longer listed before they will be able to send email to you.

[Farelf]

...Your friends will have to check the SpamCop database that their ISP's IP number is no longer listed before they will be able to send email to you.

Or maybe you can whitelist your friends' email addresses (not available from all providers or for all accounts of even those that do provide it, some might be "exclusive" whitelists - meaning only those addresses on the list are accepted).

[Telarin]

Totally OT and just because we're starting to see it used thusly and often often around the internet - you do mean trawl, don't you? I would hate to think of your terrified users scattering all ways to once, like sparks in burned-up paper, in flight from the daily rampage of the Russell, Resident Corporate Troll, licensed to fold, spindle and mutilate. There again, maybe that's exactly what you mean.

Hmm, I suppose it depends on the day. I suppose trawl would be more correct on MOST days... Then again...

[Wazoo]

Nadia, I understand your frustration. SpamCop will only block email from your friends if the IP number of their service provider (ISP) is listed in the SpamCop database.

Once again .. SpamCop.net does not have the power to "block your e-mail" .... Any blocking action is accomplished by the receiving ISP choosing to use the SpamCopDNSBL in a blocking fashion, which is contrary to SpamCop.net's recommendation.

Your friens should get a "bounce back" message from their ISP similar to the one below:

Hi. This is the qmail-send program at mail.yourfriendsisp.net.

I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.

This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.

<yourname[at]yourisp.net>:

123.123.123.123 does not like recipient.

Remote host said: 554 Service unavailable; Client host [999.999.999.999] blocked using bl.spamcop.net

Your friends will have to check the SpamCop database that their ISP's IP number is no longer listed before they will be able to send email to you.

Your description is sound, yet .. it also depends on the receiving ISP to set up its tools correctly. You can find many examples offered in this Forum from folks that don't see the proper format that you've suggested. The most frustrating are those that state in the 'error' message that it was the e-mail address that was blocked .....

[nadia]

If your friends' emails are being blocked it's *your* provider doing the blocking (maybe using the SC block list, maybe others too). Can you whitelist them?

No.

Or would you rather act the victim a bit longer?

Comment t'expliquer? Le premier qui me ballance un commentaire bidon est un cher compatriote Ce n'est vraiment pas mon jour aujourd'hui.

[nadia]

Nadia, I understand your frustration. SpamCop will only block email from your friends if the IP number of their service provider (ISP) is listed in the SpamCop database. Your friens should get a "bounce back" message from their ISP similar to the one below:

Hi. This is the qmail-send program at mail.yourfriendsisp.net.

I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.

This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.

<yourname[at]yourisp.net>:

123.123.123.123 does not like recipient.

Remote host said: 554 Service unavailable; Client host [999.999.999.999] blocked using bl.spamcop.net

Your friends will have to check the SpamCop database that their ISP's IP number is no longer listed before they will be able to send email to you.

Thank you for your explanations, I think I understand so far...

My topic is another one, not technical at all.

ONE single email from XY, telling me whatever is not spam. It is not, because both participants, XY and myself, do agree in this communication. The email is blocked. WHY? There is no reason. The freedom of sender and recipient are both repressed. No Sir, this is not an imprevisible event, this is an intended act. Who authorises SPAMCOP to decide whatever for me? - In this case: producing *something* (i.e. database) causing damages? - I do not, I will never. Read this carefully: I forbid SPAMCOP to decide anything for me. Do not repress my freedom! SPAMCOP is located in the United States - one of my favourite countries over the world. I have a message for you

[chrisfourie]

Especially one who can't spell 'hiccough'.

Bring me my fool, I am in need of entertainment.

prehaps - never heard of this word

therer - another word invented by you?

Just for fun, a few more from you...

mibile

eamil

mcahines

Wecome

yopu

providor

doinf

yopumight

ypour

"There is no man so good, who, were he to submit all his thoughts and actions to the laws, would not deserve hanging 10 times in his life." (Michel de Montaigne)

b*llsh*t - must say you like to insult users of this forum

[Wazoo]

ONE single email from XY, telling me whatever is not spam. It is not, because both participants, XY and myself, do agree in this communication.

No one has any argument with that.

The email is blocked. WHY? There is no reason.

Please read what has already been written here. Please take the time to look at the SpamCop FAQ. Answers, descriptions, and definitions exist already. Note: SpamCop.net does not block your e-mail. That is the end of this part of the discussion.

The freedom of sender and recipient are both repressed. No Sir, this is not an imprevisible event, this is an intended act.

You and your friend are allowed to send any and all the e-mail you wish to send. However, one of your ISPs has decided to block and and all traffic from an e-mail server hat is also spewing bad traffic. That ISP chose to configure his/her system to block any and all e-mail coming from that server. It is this ISP that you would be accusing of repressing your 'freedom' ... please take it up with that ISP.

Who authorises SPAMCOP to decide whatever for me? - In this case: producing *something* (i.e. database) causing damages?

Actually, that's a pretty silly question, especially while you are spouting off about the U.S. Constitution. There are literally thousands of BLs in existence, SpamCopDNSBL is but one. Anyone in the world is "allowed" to generate their own BL based on any decision they choose to use. The ramifications of using any of those BLs is based on how the ISP chooses to configure things at his/her end. On the other hand, this question is in fact already in existence within the SpamCop FAQ

- I do not, I will never. Read this carefully: I forbid SPAMCOP to decide anything for me. Do not repress my freedom! SPAMCOP is located in the United States - one of my favourite countries over the world.

Yet again, SpamCop.net doesn't see, touch, block, do anything with or to your e-mail. Forbid all you want.

[chrisfourie]

Do not repress my freedom! SPAMCOP is located in the United States - one of my favourite countries over the world.

Nadia, I'm from South Africa and also do not agree with SpamCop's way of operating. The mere fact that any person with internet access can create a login on their web site and start submitting reports for spam makes the hair on my neck stand up.

What can be done.... not much, but give it time, more and more internet users and ISP's will soon realise that they are actually loosing more revenue from legit email being blocked by SpamCop due to incorrect listings, than what they would have saved from a few spam messages being filtered.

I have already planted a seed of doubt with two ISP's after I have proofed to them that clients of theirs are loosing legit e-mail and business because of SpamCop. They are both launching a full investigation.