Where to request SpamCop features?

[showker]

Do they read it anyway?

It would be superb if SpamCop reports would include "found" domains in the email.

They do when entering into the online reporting facility, but NOT in the returned

reports emailed back.

I checked this morning for about 80 spamvertised domains I extracted from the

"Held Mail" file, but there were "not found" in any of the SpamCop reports.

This would greatly facilitate tracking the spamvertised domains, who owns them

and where they're hosted.

ESSENTIAL INFORMATION for spam trackers.

SpamCop seems to spend so much time on 'who sent' the email, knowing the

sender these days are botnets and non-human entities.

[StevenUnderwood]

Do they read it anyway?

First... moving this to the forum named: New Feature Request (even though this is NOT a new feature... it exists now if you know how to use it and have the motivation to go through the steps.

They do when entering into the online reporting facility, but NOT in the returned reports emailed back.

Second... It sounds like you are using quick reporting which has the explicit task of ONLY targeting the source since historically, most of the mistakes happened when innocent sites are reported.

To report the web sites (that it does find), you will need to use the 2 part reporting steps of submitting and then sending the reports after confirming the reports are not going to incorrect places.

You do not say how you are submitting your reports or what kinds of accounts you have. If you are emailing your spam (as attachment) to your reporting address, use: submit.<secret code>[at]spam.spamcop.net instead of: quick.<secret code>[at]spam.spamcop.net. If you have a spamcop email account, you can forward as attachment from webmail your spam to the same address or use your Reporting Page "Held Email" tab to select the messages and use one of the "Queue for reporting" options.

Again, these methods require you to check where your reports are going and actually send them.

SpamCop seems to spend so much time on 'who sent' the email, knowing the sender these days are botnets and non-human entities.

SpamCop's main goal is to find, report and list the SOURCES of the spam. There are other places that target the websites of the spammers. That is NOT spamcop's focus.

[kamaraju]

This would greatly facilitate tracking the spamvertised domains, who owns them

and where they're hosted.

ESSENTIAL INFORMATION for spam trackers.

SpamCop seems to spend so much time on 'who sent' the email, knowing the

sender these days are botnets and non-human entities.

If you want to go after the spamvertized domains there are mainly two options that I am having good results with.

1) Send your spam emails to knujon (www.knujon.com)

2) Report the spamvertized URLs to the registrars directly by using a tool called complainterator (www.complainterator.com)

BTW. Requesting features to spamcop is useless and waste of time. I have been here for couple of years and they have not been implementing any new featuers AFAIK.

hth

raju

[QuantumMechanic]

Second... It sounds like you are using quick reporting which has the explicit task of ONLY targeting the source since historically, most of the mistakes happened when innocent sites are reported.

I dont mean to wade into an argument here - but the only details I have seen and have been advised about quick reporting are that it is simply a quicker way.

Where do you get the information from regarding quick reporting that states it is actually a different service than other reporting methods?

[Wazoo]

I dont mean to wade into an argument here - but the only details I have seen and have been advised about quick reporting are that it is simply a quicker way.

Where do you get the information from regarding quick reporting that states it is actually a different service than other reporting methods?

The 'Original/Official' FAQ has never been updated to include this feature' .... Some folks have tried to handle this by generating data on the SpamCop FAQ single-page expanded version found here in the Forum (links at the top of the page) amd additional pages for the Wiki. For exmple; Quick Reporting

[QuantumMechanic]

The 'Original/Official' FAQ has never been updated to include this feature' .... Some folks have tried to handle this by generating data on the SpamCop FAQ single-page expanded version found here in the Forum (links at the top of the page) amd additional pages for the Wiki. For exmple; Quick Reporting

Curious - not the expected behaviour. It makes little difference ultimately since other contributors to Spamcop.net and users will probably report (in the long winded fashion) the same spam at somepoint. Not that I do not find this a surprising amd slightly disapointing shortcoming of a feature that is really the only method of including hundreds of items per day from spam traps.

[Farelf]

Curious - not the expected behaviour. ... Not that I do not find this a surprising amd slightly disapointing shortcoming of a feature that is really the only method of including hundreds of items per day from spam traps.

I'm missing something - what would be the expected behaviour and what (actual) behaviour disappoints? This is the place to say exactly what you would prefer - though there seems some justice in the observation these pages are not exactly used as a mine of inspiration for the developers. But there's always a chance some useful clarification of reporting functions and processes might result.