Jump to content

Bad example of something


Wazoo
 Share

Recommended Posts

Brought here from a PM;

Hi Wazoo

I'm new here

As you're a regular user of spamcop based on the accumulative post cound, maybe you can be of some help.

I've had many e-mails in recent weeks of spam relating to the supposed CANADIAN PHARMACY + E-PHARMACY.

Need i tell you they most commonly advertise Viagra and the like.

Some of them have come from people using the names:

PENELOPE HELLMANN

NAFIA HUNDREISER

LORELIE KINDER

MATTEO SIESS

LENE THALHEIM

INDRA ZIBACH

DIANE FISCHER

DEREKA NEIGER

PAULA MAHLE

ALDWYN HARTZMANN

JULCHEN HARDT

ELIN HENSEL

PATRICIA EDMONDS

RAIMOND DECKER

JENNI WIRTHMANN

PEGGY KIMBALL

NAFIA FRAUEN

BOB SCHROEDER

LINDSEY GASTON

CECIL MCALLISTER

ELDON BOUCHARD.

There have been many others. They are ones i still have stored in my inbox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brought here from a PM;

Nay Gentle Wazoo, this is a good example - of the deceipt that spammers would practice on their innocent victims such as your correspondent. Of the difficulty for a newcomer to simply lurk and learn when nothing seems to make sense and there's no sign of that changing anytime soon. Of the indignity felt by the ordinary spam-sufferer at the sheer effrontery of those myrmidons of spamdom which makes it impossible for said sufferers to bite their tongues any longer. Of the very natural reluctance we all have of stepping out into a crowd of strangers and loudly announcing that we're new and would like to ask some questions but we don't quite know how to start (and please don't ridicule/belittle us for our innocence). In short, the dilemmas and conflicts of the human condition in microcosm.

And I recall that Realtor-lady from Phoenix who upbraided us soundly for not doing more in the way of basic education of the general public which she took to be an important part of our job descriptions (what one says, many think).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, to comment on the list.

Spammers usually/often come up with names to personalize their "From:" fields (and "Reply to:") by using the same lists as those of their victims. Which means sooner or later you receive spam from "yourself". It doesn't mean (99.9% of the time) that the spammer has taken over your computer. It just means everyone on the list gets a turn at being the pretend sender - though maybe with a preference for female names which is human factors engineering at work. Whatever way the lists are populated, very little/vanishingly small amounts of spam come from the actual/real person it purports to be from. Even the email addresses (the rest of the From:) are mostly faked, often they match the personal name part of the "From:" to make it all look more realistic.

Which is why SpamCop (and most others) concentrate on the IP address of the server which sent the spam. That is much harder to fake.

So, the list is meaningless. If they are real people they are almost certainly quite innocent. So it follows that what you must never do is send them email back to complain. That is a form of backscatter which is to say you spamming them. And they would be quite entitled to report you for spamming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So much not said there .. for example, was there an actual question?

So much said there, but .... nothing of any value in the data offered up for an example of whatever point you were trying to make.

I'm new here

Guessing, assuming, pretending ... you found this place based on a search engine query? But from appearances, not much looking around, searching, reading, whatever was done before deciding to Register here so as to be able to post, or in this case, use the PM system. Then, even after Registering, there doesn't seem to be an indication of any of the various search tools being used .. hard to guess if any of the existing Topics/Discussions, Posts were even looked at before deciding to send me a PM ..????

I read the PM .... actually a number of times .. trying to figure out just what I was supposed to do with it. I see no query. I see a list of 'names' which I'll have to assume is data seen in the From: lines of those e-mail spams, but I don't really know. That the From: and/or Reply-To: addresses in spam e-mail are forged garbage is covered all over this Forum, in the FAQs, in the Wiki, even on gazillions of web-pages around the world that have been generated by those that have even a few clues about spam. The point is, I have no idea why this list of names was supposed to be significant.

As you're a regular user of spamcop based on the accumulative post cound, maybe you can be of some help.

Interpretation of that sentence is somewhat difficult.

"user of spamcop" ...??? actually, I use the Parsing & Reporting system very little.

"accumulative post count" .... this actually is more of a sign of an active Forum administrator.

"can be of help" .....??? hard to say. No question asked, the generalities of your PM are addressed in literally thousands of exisiting posts within this Forum, covered by FAQ entries, Wiki pages, even some Dictionary and Glossary entries. As it is, I expect to be blasted once again because I'm 'jumping on a user' ... Just noting that I disregarded my initial thoughts of simply ignoring this PM, once again working from the premise that a post (OK, a PM in this case) was made, and as compared to so many other 'support' Forums, lists, and such, there will be a response provided.

I've had many e-mails in recent weeks of spam relating to the supposed CANADIAN PHARMACY + E-PHARMACY.

Need i tell you they most commonly advertise Viagra and the like.

Whereas, there are others in the world that have been seeing this crap for years. Which also feeds back into search engine results .... CANADIAN PHARMACY alone should bring back a ton of results, no matter what search engine is used. Even using the 'internal' search tool within the Forum returns a boat-load of results. Looking at any number of search engine results, one would/should have strumbled across a link to http://spamtrackers.eu/wiki/index.php?titl...nadian_Pharmacy which goes into much detail about the garbage involved with this spam and associated spamvertised web-sites.

Some of them have come from people using the names:

<elided long list of names>

The assumption has to be that you copied this data from garbage seen in the From: lines of your spam e-mail .. assumption because of your description using the terms "from people" .... whereas in reality, "those people" only exist as a part of a spam tool that stuffs crap data into the header lines of the generated spam. But that's another whole subject that has been beat to death over the years in thousands of existing Posts/Discussion within this Forum, nevermind the rest of the Internet.

There have been many others. They are ones i still have stored in my inbox.

This is where your PM stopped. No question, no query, no clue/hint as to what you actually wanted from me. So, I brought it out into the open in the off chance that others could read in what I missed, and perhaps provide whatever it is that you're looking for.

This entire Forum is about supporting the use of the SpamCop.net tool set, other areas generated to allow discussion of other things besides spam. I invite you to look around, use some of the tools and data provided, and then hopefully get around to posting just what it is that you actually wanted to ask about. My guess is that there is already at least one existing Topic/Discussion/FAQ/Wiki-entry that covers it. If not, please actually ask your question .... and again, this is a public Forum, the general thought that if you have a question, there are probably others that are thinking the same thing, but don't want to 'look stupid' so they never actually ask/post the question .. thusly, it never gets answered. In contrast to some other folks providing 'support' .. I don't see much value in answering most questions in private, as I know that there are others than can benefit from seeing that same data/answer .....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nay Gentle Wazoo, this is a good example

Believe me .... tried to pick an exisitng Canadian Phamacy Topic to merge this into, but .... wasn't able to figure out just what the 'issue' was ... the spam itself, the Domain, the (asumed) e-mail addresses, could have ran with a possible filtering issue, a problem with the use of BLs, on and on .. gave up and went with a 'new' Topic to address the main 'problem' I had with the PM itself .... the lack of a hint just why it was sent in the first place.

As usual, thanks for jumping in (long before I finished composing my Reply) and trying a response from another direction. Much appreciated.

PM reply sent to point user to this Topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... As usual, thanks for jumping in (long before I finished composing my Reply) and trying a response from another direction. Much appreciated. ...
de nada :). So, for the assumed purpose of the PM and, in short, a place to start the whole "reporting of the bad guys" thing in the SpamCop context is SpamCop Parsing and Reporting Service and for the expanded version and help beyond those pages What is SpamCop?.

And there are other ways to address other aspects of getting back at them, many of which are mentioned elsewhere in these pages. But ... one (or just a dozen) steps at a time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My guess is that there is already at least one existing Topic/Discussion/FAQ/Wiki-entry that covers it. If not, please actually ask your question ....

OK, apparently some possible language issues, obviously some philosophical differences .... brought here from a PM (no editing beyond the inserted replies)

Wazoo

I've just read your article within a thread which you started by using the precise e-mail i originally sent you. Personally, as you, it appears, are a regular board member, i thought i'd ask you via the e-mail if you [1] had personally entailed many spams from canadian pharmacy and [2] what your thoughts are.

Although I saw no such questions in your original PM, I did in fact provide a response to those issues in the generation of this Topic.

I had no intention of browsing through threads in all topics/sections to find a suitable thread to post it

Noted, but also noting that in my Reply, I made mention of the various seach tools provided at the top of this very page. I also raised the possibility that you may have found your way 'here' by using a search tool elsewhere, but ...

cos, in all fairness, many posts / threads mostly relate to spamming but merely via a 'general chat' method moreso that precise topic threads for a/one particular spamming concern.

EG:

1. CANADIAN / E-PHARMACY

2. LOANS

3. SUPPOSEDLY ''HAVING WON A PRIZE'' WHEN IN FACT, THE PRIZE WON IS THE MOST MINIMAL OF PRIZES STATED. EG: PREMIUM BONDS.

TO GET THE PRIZE, DIAL A NUMBER COSTING £1+ / $2+ PER MINUTE.

This scenario actually more depends on the subject matter, noting the different Forum sections provided for specific questions, issues, areas of interest .... which as I stated previously, merging your PM'd data as a new Post into an exisiting Topic/Discussion was found not to be possible, as you didn't actually specify what your question really was in that PM. You made no mention of a Parsing & Reporting problem, you didn't mention using the SpamCopDNSBL, there was no mention of a SpamCop.net e-mail account, so ... the Lounge is where I chose to place you PM'd data as a Post/Topic, again, so others would have the opportunity to see what I missed and try to reply in their own way .. which is exactly what happened.

Perhaps there's also the missed mission of this Forum ... This Forum is a support venue for the SpamCop.net tool set. The general suggestion in these parts .. do not read your spam, do not play with your spam, just report your spam. There are other places on the net for folks that want to simply talk about their spam.

Having read your long post, the 6th/7th one in the thread you started, you don't appear to be making me feel a welcomed member of the board do you ? A clear 'no' is the answer.

Answer this question: Am i welcome to use your forum or not?

Don't suggest to me ''yes, provided you stay to the forum policy / rules cos i ain't a spammer, bear that in mind OK.

Let me see. My intial thought at first read of your first PM was to simply ignore it, move on to the next PM/issue to answer the question raised there. You will note, I didn't do that. I responded to your PM, and also made it available for others to try to pitch in and answer your unasked questions. As seen, others did in fact try to offer some help, but also had the same issue ... trying to figure out just what you wanted ....

People that 'are not welcome to use this Forum' don't 'exist' for long. Accounts get Banned, IP Addresses can get added to the IPTables, complaints go out to hosting ISP, on and on .... Your PM was acted upon, others have offered some additional data and attempts at help, your Account is still live .... what is it that has you running with the "I don't like you" theme?

There is a Forum FAQ .. there are Pinned and FAQ entries offering hints, suggestions, guidelines on how to use this Forum. There are links provided to things like a Glossary, the Wiki, additional FAQs, etc. to provide even more data and background on a whole slew of Topics, details, specifics.

It appears to me that cos your forum relates to spam, you are Wazoo, to a 50%+ indication, suggest in a roundabout way that i may be a worthless person joining the forum for a mere sake of it rather than taking part.

When did i join the board, approx 25 hours back.

Cos i haven't posted since, does that indicate i'm a spammer to you?

I have tried and tried to make full sense out of the above .... but I am going with that there's a language issue involved here. Where exactly do you come up with that I am calling you a spammer, called you worthless, etc., etc., etc.???? Again, I chose "NOT" to simply ignore your PM, rather making it an open-to-the-public actual post such that others could try to see what I couldn't. I stated that if you actually have a question that you actually Post it.

A PM is not an e-mail. As Admin of this Forum, I'm the guy that fixes things that are broken, handle user problems with using and interacting with this application, resolves account issues, among a zillion other things. Your decision to attempt to talk to me directly/privately about an item that is so well known and publically discussed is a waste of time for both of us. The lack of a specific question in the initial PM was why it showed up here as a 'new' Topic. As it is, you've chosen to contact me again directly/privately, you only make mention of "my long post" .. yet the Topic/Discussion is still left to flounder because you chose not to reply to anyone in that Discussion, thus no one seems to know just what you 'really want to know' ....

Has anyone else seen this type of spam? .... see my previous Reply, data is found all over the net.

My thoughts? .... frigging spam/spammer, frigging ignorant users that keep feeding them money ... what else is there to say?

welcome to the Forum? ... thus far, you haven't actually 'used the Forum' ... sending me PM's isn't what 'the Forum' is all about. Public interaction between/among users is what 'the Forum' is all about. So once again, I have again chosen to make your query and comments known to others, such that they can also respond, if they so choose. You are also welcome to post your comments and replies here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll put my two cents in, hope the original poster can read this...

I've had many e-mails in recent weeks of spam relating to the supposed CANADIAN PHARMACY + E-PHARMACY.

Need i tell you they most commonly advertise Viagra and the like.

Some of them have come from people using the names:

PENELOPE HELLMANN

NAFIA HUNDREISER

LORELIE KINDER

These names are forged. These people (if they exist) had nothing to do with the sending of the spam. Since spammers can make these names up by the carload, they aren't even useful for filtering purposes. Best thing to do with them is NOTHING -- anything else may be a complete waste of your time.

thought i'd ask you via the e-mail if you [1] had personally entailed many spams from canadian pharmacy and [2] what your thoughts are.
(1) Yes, I have probably received thousands of spams from these outfits.

(2) I think they are crooks and should be avoided at all costs. I think their spam mail and their websites should be reported to all responsible providers (and I do report them).

It appears to me that cos your forum relates to spam, you are Wazoo, to a 50%+ indication, suggest in a roundabout way that i may be a worthless person joining the forum for a mere sake of it rather than taking part.

When did i join the board, approx 25 hours back.

Cos i haven't posted since, does that indicate i'm a spammer to you?

I don't read here that anyone has accused you of being a spammer. At worst, you are being chided for not taking advantage (via a search) of the voluminous material on this site and on others that involves this subject, or for not being clear as to what your question may have been. Some of us may also wonder why you sent your query directly to one of the board members rather than posting it on the board for all to read.

I hope you will recover from the ill feelings and read (or post to) this board. It can be very educational even if it sometimes raises your blood pressure. This is also the best way to ensure that you get everyone's attention to your question -- not just the person to whom you send a private message.

-- rick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yet another attempt (Rick, above) to explain things, reassure the member (s)he is welcome, without reponse. Perhaps because of the mindset:

It appears to me that cos your forum relates to spam, you are Wazoo, to a 50%+ indication, suggest in a roundabout way that i may be a worthless person joining the forum for a mere sake of it rather than taking part.

When did i join the board, approx 25 hours back.

Cos i haven't posted since, does that indicate i'm a spammer to you?

Actually about 44% of the current membership (totalling 7325 at this instant) have never made a post. Most have joined long before the last day or two. That is fine, presumably they looked and lurked and learned and may still drop by from time to time. There is no expectation of or requirement for active participation. Unless they want to ask questions or make observations. Then the whole purpose of this "bulletin board" is to receive their posts and for others to read and perhaps respond to those posts (particularly questions).

There are no dumb questions, though it might be found they have been asked before and those can be found, together with the answers (where they can be answered) using the resources here. I have given specific links (earlier post) pointing to information about the purpose and function of SpamCop. Discussions of other matters are carried out "here", in the Lounge forum. Lurk and learn - or participate, it doesn't matter. But no member should assume that the PM facility is an alternative to making posts like everyone else.

The voluntary membership here is under no obligation to oblige such an expectation, which in most cases would be considered outrageous. Of course there might be exceptions in special circumstances (like when there is a real need for confidentiality or if the matter is thought to be of no public interest) but I see no request for such consideration so far, with this member. And Wazoo, who has single-handedly contributed 17.7% of all posts to these pages over their whole history, in addition to administering and maintaining this board and handling associated work, is possibly the last of the volunteers who should be approached in this way, due to workload.

Except when there is a clear and accepted need to do otherwise, any PMs received (certainly by admin and moderators) will be usually posted in an appropriate forum and in public. So there is no point in not posting if there is a matter to be addressed within the (quite broad) scope of matters covered within the forums. There is no "back door" - it's all about transparency and building the information base for the whole membership.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, apparently some possible language issues, obviously some philosophical differences .... brought here from a PM (no editing beyond the inserted replies)

OK, my reply to both PM's received from this user are posted here, PM's were provided unedited. Others have jumped in and tried other ways and things to try to answer. Well, I received yet another PM from the same user ....

welcome to the Forum? ... thus far, you haven't actually 'used the Forum' ... sending me PM's isn't what 'the Forum' is all about. Public interaction between/among users is what 'the Forum' is all about.

I stand behind that comment and most definitely reiterate .... this user has not yet "used this Forum" .... The most amazing part, the URL of this discussion is included in his/her latest PM/response ....

Provided once again, with no editing, from this last PM .... I am definitely inclined not to respond to this one directly.

Hi Wazoo

I'm new here

Made into a new Topic, replied to at http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=9084

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Are you shying away now Wazoo?

Matter being, you haven't responded to the second PM i sent you.

Maybe you've read it and thus feel somewhat guilty of your ''wording'' in your post on the forum i relate to.

Typical ain't it, some people love finding / assuming fault about others.

One of the answers to that is people with some form of 'insecurity' need to do so to back-up their own faults.

Are you gonna appologise and make me feel welcome to the forum?

I'm waiting for your responce.

EDIT: added later;

As usual, I chose "NOT to ignore" this user;

That's actually pretty funny .... there are a number of people waiting for you to "actually use this Forum" ..... I am in disbelief that you even included the URL of 'your new Topic' in this Reply, yet have yet to get around to getting off of your ass and participating. You were always "welcome" .. however, your conduct thus far is seen at best as aggravating.

If you want to participate in the Forum please do. If all you want to do is send me PM traffic, there are ways I can put a stop to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me too. Keeping most of it off the board, similar to the above and part of my reply included ...

I am making allowances for you apparently wanting to keep this private ...
The public part (in my judgement)
I get numerous spam me. Probably second most common is loans followed by ''SUPPOSED DISK / HARDDRIVE CLEANERS''.

EG: REGISTRY CLEANER and several more, many of which pop-up on screen unless i have the pop-up blocker activated of course.

Sounds like fairly standard fare. SpamCop's approach is to analyze the detailed message headers to find the internet address of the "server" sending spam (because you can't trust the email "From:" address), then looks up the person/organization responsible and advises them they are sending spam. Often they don't know - the spammers have snuck a trojan into the machine and are using it part-time for their purposes. Anyway, if it continues (if whoever is responsible doesn't fix it) and gets to a certain point that machine is added to SC's blacklist which can be used by other networks to block incoming mail until it stops sending spam. It takes more than reports by any single reporter to get a server blacklisted.

That last bit is "public" and will be added to the topic Wazoo started.

Hmmm ... I should have said "...to filter incoming mail until it stops..." instead of "...to block incoming mail until it stops..." since the warranted purpose is for filtering NOT for blocking.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect the PM-er thought SpamCop is some kind of law enforcement agency and he/she was going to devulge a list of spammers in hope it will be passed on to a higher authority. This is the simplest interpretation that would explain the tarse tone and content of the PM and requires no further assumption. (take it from a scientist who is always looking for the shortest logical path to a conclusion)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...