Wrong reporting information for IP?

[ob1db]

I noticed this response from the system:

Report spam to:

Re: 65.163.15.194 (Administrator of network where email originates)

To: nomaster[at]devnull.spamcop.net (Notes)

which I ordinarily would just shrug and ignore. When I happened to double-check the IP, I see this:

Parsing input: 65.163.15.194

[report history]

Routing details for 65.163.15.194

[refresh/show] Cached whois for 65.163.15.194 : jasone[at]sectorlink.com

Reports disabled for abuse[at]sectorlink.com

Using best contacts

host 65.163.15.194 = 65-163-15-194.servdns.com (cached)

Host 65-163-15-194.servdns.com (checking ip) IP not found ; 65-163-15-194.servdns.com discarded as fake.

No reporting addresses found for 65.163.15.194, using devnull for tracking.

Curious as to why the known contact at sectorlink isn't used, I ran the IP through deadbeef.com, which I find turns up contact info on a lot of websites that Spamcop can't.

I got:

Lookup results for 65.163.15.194 [at] whois.deadbeef.com

abuse[at]sprint.net - ARIN abuse contact for netblock containing 65.163.15.194

I am wondering why deadbeef gets a seemingly valid abuse contact when SC isn't!

David

[Miss Betsy]

The spamcop parser is programmed to try certain places to determine a reporting address. It doesn't think.

However, if reporters find a better reporting address, they can present their evidence (which must be complete) in the newsgroup spamcop.routing and deputies will manually change reporting addresses. (there are links to the newsgroups somewhere on the forum)

When the report goes to devnull, the IP address is blocked even if no report is sent. Many people think for persistent spammers, blocking is the most important part of spamcop reporting since often reports are ignored.

Miss Betsy

[Telarin]

I would suggest contacting the deputies regarding that range as abuse[at]sprint.net is the data shown currently by ARIN WHOIS.