colegg Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 Anyone, I just want to know how to obtain reasonable help when wanting to contact SpamCop regarding spam. At the moment I'm a paid user of reporting services only...and that will soon end. I just want to know what to do with things like spam I get that is deliberately backdated, so places like SpamCop won't check it. Four today, I got...and I sent them directly to Julian Haigh for handling (with proof they were backdated by the senders). That's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 I'm not sure what you're asking actually. I'm trying to imagine that you found your way here, you registered yourself, came into a Forum, jumped right in asking for some clue as to how to get some help .. but somehow not noticing that there'ds a heck of a lot of traffic already in place here from others that have asked for (and received) help on their "special" issues. The newsgroups for SpamCop support have been in place for years, this ting is headed into its second or third month ...??? Plenty of help available. Julian's pretty busy, which is why the normal support issues are generally offered by other users, though there are a couple of paid employess that do a number of specialized tasks and offer some general help when time allows. So now, to your specific issue ... specific help can only be offered if the data is made available. You'll probably get a note from Julian pointing you to the newsgroups or this Forum (though it's really not my place to speak for him, just offering my experience and knowledge) .. so if you feel the need, post some of the headers here or over in the spamcop.spam newsgroup so others can see your specific issues. In genral, the SpamCop parser starts at the top of the header and works down, and the "date of the spam" is taken from the first valid line seens, usually from your own ISP. The date you allege is bogus (from your words, I'm going with you looking at the Date: line in the header) doesn't count for squat. So, generally, if there's an issue with the time frame, it's due to something going on with your ISP, their time clock is set wrong, general mis-handling of e-mail, etc., etc. ... There's a recent Topic here that deals with one user's ISP that bounced the sample spam around for four days before actually getting around to putting it into that user's InBox. If you want help, just ask your question. That's what this Forum is here to try to handle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spambo Posted March 18, 2004 Share Posted March 18, 2004 Anyone, I just want to know how to obtain reasonable help when wanting to contact SpamCop regarding spam. At the moment I'm a paid user of reporting services only...and that will soon end. I just want to know what to do with things like spam I get that is deliberately backdated, so places like SpamCop won't check it. Four today, I got...and I sent them directly to Julian Haigh for handling (with proof they were backdated by the senders). That's all. This is where you get help, if the users who participate can't answer a problem a Deputy or admin will step in. SpamCop doesn't use the "spammer's date", and won't detect an incorrect date unless the destination mail server has its clock set wrong - or - isn't RFC compliant and the parser is forced to ignore the headers it inserts. Sending Julian the "proof" that spammers backdate (or otherwise incorrectly date) their spams is kind of useless - every experienced anti-spammer is well aware of this practice. At best Julian will see a badly configured destination server receiving yet another example of Rule #1. If you want to know what the problem is then post a tracking URL from one of the misdated spams, or post a sample set of headers. If you're expecting a personal response from the former owner of SpamCop, though, I think you'll be disappointed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.