Peter, I seem to have been receiving various adds for "optimised SMTP" delivery but not sure if any relate to SparkPost. The version of you address with "at" rather than "@" is visible in a couple of places
Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: cctalk <cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org> On Behalf Of Peter Coghlan > via cctalk > Sent: 01 September 2020 09:11 > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts > <cctalk@classiccmp.org> > Subject: Re: Spam > > Paul Koning wrote: > > > On Aug 31, 2020, at 6:55 PM, Peter Coghlan via cctalk > <cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > > > Anybody else on cctech/cctalk receive a blatant spam today from an > > > outfit called "SparkPost" with "OptIn Live" in the subject? > > > > > > Regards, > > > Peter Coghlan. > > > > Nope. > > > > Keep in mind that criminals often forge source addresses. So while it > > may say it came from cctalk, it doesn't mean it actually did. Looking > > at the full headers will often tell you, if you care to go to the trouble. > > > > The spam I got did not come from cctalk. I didn't say it came from cctalk, I > said it came from an outfit called "SparkPost". I asked if anyone else on cctalk > received the same spam because I am attempting to figure out how > SparkPost obtained the email address that I use only for cctalk. > > From the responses received, it appears that other cctalk list members did > not receive the same spam which reduces the likelyhood that someone (ie > SparkPost) had subscribed to cctalk specifically to harvest the email > addresses of the list members, a possibility which was advanced on this list a > while back. > > > > > For example, I get spam every few weeks claiming to be from one > > specific person on the list here, but it never actually is from that address. > > > > Same here except that it is in regard of the freecycle mailing list rather than > cctalk. > > Regards, > Peter Coghlan. > > > paul > >