Who ever said that ServePath was USING spamcop in their environment? They simply received a notice FROM spamcop regarding a potential spammer on their network (US, for bouncing spam).
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Panda Consulting S.A. Luis Alberto Arango Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 4:40 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Convert this to English please? My two cents. Your best defense is that ServePath is quite irresponsible using SpamCop in a Production Environment if they haven't warned their users about the pro and cons of using SpamCop. Bottom line, it affects legitimate email from reaching the user. Look at this http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml SpamCop Blocklist Details & Description This blocking list is somewhat experimental. This system and most other spam-filtering systems should not be used in a production environment where legitimate email must be delivered. Many end-users and administrators have decided that risking the loss of legitimate email is worth the benefit of blocking most spam. As a result, this list is now used widely and it's reputation for blocking spam while reducing the risk of erroneous blocking is growing. However, it should be noted that SpamCop is aggressive and often errs on the side of blocking mail - users should be warned and given information about how their mail is filtered. Ideally they should have a choice of filtering options. Many mailservers can operate with blacklists in a "tag only" mode, which is preferable in many situations. The description of the algorithm used for deciding whether to block a host may be out of date, and is subject to change without notice. There is no warranty associated with using this system. It is provided as is. -Luis Arango > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:IMail_Forum- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marc Funaro > Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 7:52 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [IMail Forum] Convert this to English please? > > Hi everyone, > > We received this message from ServePath, notifying us that SpamCop had > sent > them a complaint about UCE coming from one of our mail server IP > addresses. > > To me, this looks like someone complaining to spamcop about a joe-job > bounce > to our server - message came in to our server FROM a spoofed address, to a > non-existing address on our server, bounced back to the spoofed from > address > who then reported it as spam(???) but I am not at all sure that I'm > reading > this correctly. Can any of you super-experienced guru's give me a > plain-english overview of what you think appears to have happened here, to > confirm or dispute my assessment? > > Thanks! > > Marc > > > > > START OF MESSAGE > ================ > > > ***************** THIS IS AN AUTOMATED MESSAGE ***************** > The following information is being provided in compliance with applicable > federal laws. ServePath believes this information is accurate but does > not > guarantee its accuracy in any way. > > Please remember to keep the subject line intact for all correspondence > relating to this matter. > **************************************************************** > > Dear Marc Funaro: > > We have received a report regarding alleged violations of > ServePath's Acceptable Use Policy > > http://www.servepath.com/AUP.htm > > from one of your IP addresses > > 69.59.165.93 > > ServePath works closely with its customers to resolve situations as > quickly > as possible. We request you take whatever measures you deem appropriate > which will ensure no further violations occur. > > We need you to take immediate steps to address the attached issues, and > respond within 1 business day. > > ServePath values its relationships with its customers and will work with > you > in any way necessary to preserve that relationship. However, ServePath is > legally bound to enforce its AUP. If it is confirmed that abuses are > taking > place, and we cannot elicit your cooperation in discontinuing the abuse, > ServePath will be forced to take drastic actions, which could include > termination of services. > > Once this issue has been resolved please reply to this message, making > sure > the reply goes to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and keeping the subject the > same. This will notify the ServePath Abuse Department that the situation > has > been resolved. > > Thank You, > > ServePath Anti-Abuse/UCE Team > ServePath LLC > 360 Spear Street, Suite 200 | San Francisco, CA 94105 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.ServePath.com > > > > > ##### Begin incident ##### > >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Jul 30 00:05:03 2004 > Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Received: from vmx2.spamcop.net ([64.74.133.250]) > by smtp1.servepath.com with esmtp (Exim 4.30; FreeBSD) > id 1BqRDX-000IJK-3M > for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 29 Jul 2004 23:50:11 -0700 > Received: from unknown (HELO spamcop.net) (192.168.19.203) > by vmx2.spamcop.net with SMTP; 29 Jul 2004 23:59:42 -0700 > From: "Florian Bodenseher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [SpamCop (69.59.165.93) id:1144616707]Undeliverable Mail > Precedence: list > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 22:08:49 -0500 > X-SpamCop-sourceip: > X-Mailer: http://www.spamcop.net/ v1.365 > X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Jul 2004 06:50:12.0407 (UTC) > FILETIME=[763E8470:01C47601] > > [ SpamCop V1.365 ] > This message is brief for your comfort. Please use links below for > details. > > Email from 69.59.165.93 / Wed, 28 Jul 2004 22:08:49 -0500 > http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?i=z1144616707z4f06f7a4d30a97c7f9b666cd6eb10b1bz > > [ Offending message ] > Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Delivered-To: x > Received: (qmail 5160 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2004 03:15:00 -0000 > Received: from unknown (HELO c60.cesmail.net) (192.168.1.105) > by blade6.cesmail.net with SMTP; 29 Jul 2004 03:15:00 -0000 > Received: from mailgate.cesmail.net (216.154.195.36) > by c60.cesmail.net with SMTP; 28 Jul 2004 23:14:53 -0400 > X-Ironport-AV: i="3.83,94,1089000000"; > d="scan'217,208"; a="94694926:sNHT37006044" > Received: (qmail 32715 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2004 03:14:53 -0000 > Received: from unknown (HELO mailgate.cesmail.net) (192.168.1.101) > by mailgate.cesmail.net with SMTP; 29 Jul 2004 03:14:53 -0000 > Received: from www.cbi.co.at [213.160.221.243] > by mailgate.cesmail.net with POP3 (fetchmail-6.2.1) > for x (single-drop); Wed, 28 Jul 2004 23:14:53 -0400 (EDT) > Received: from mickey.scottspad.com (c3.206-54-187.ips.nationwide.net > [206.54.187.3]) > by rapidforum.rapidforum.at (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id > i6T390530742 > for <x>; Thu, 29 Jul 2004 05:09:00 +0200 > Received: from deedee.advantex.net [69.59.165.93] by mickey.scottspad.com > with ESMTP > (SMTPD32-8.05) id AA4163A900EA; Wed, 28 Jul 2004 22:08:49 -0500 > Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 20:06:51 -0700 > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > From: "Postmaster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sender: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: x > Subject: Undeliverable Mail > X-Mailer: <SMTP32 v7.15> > X-UIDL: "f6"!l#;"!I0L"!m]Z!! > X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on blade6 > X-Spam-Level: **** > X-Spam-Status: hits=4.0 tests=DRUGS_PAIN,DRUGS_PAIN_OBFU,HTML_20_30, > HTML_MESSAGE,HTML_TAG_BALANCE_BODY,HTML_TAG_BALANCE_HTML, > HTML_TAG_BALANCE_TABLE,SARE_HTML_FSIZE4 version=2.63 > X-SpamCop-Checked: 192.168.1.105 216.154.195.36 192.168.1.101 > 213.160.221.243 206.54.187.3 69.59.165.93 > X-SpamCop-Disposition: Blocked sbl.spamhaus.org > > Invalid final delivery userid: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Original message follows. > > Received: from 69.59.165.93 [221.155.157.173] by deedee.advantex.net > (SMTPD32-7.15) id A9C6A520088; Wed, 28 Jul 2004 20:06:46 -0700 > Received: from TCOVGT (usos.turm-net.de[154.217.7.154]) > by grhuetf.turm-net.de (Postfix) with SMTP id 3L9X6Y4486 > for <x>; Wed, 28 Jul 2004 22:04:32 -0600 > (envelope-from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) > From: "Brendan French" <x> > To: "Krieg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > subject: [block][sniffer] Offshore cbgqv Online > phqrmacy..vic0din(Paracodin),Viqgra > Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 22:04:32 -0600 > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/html; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > X-mxGuard-Info: Processed by deedee.advantex.net using mxGuard v1.4.0 > X-mxGuard-Spool-ID: 69c60a5200881b04 > X-mxGuard-Native-PTR: Failed lookup [221.155.157.173] > X-mxGuard-Native-DNSBL: 2 hit(s) [221.155.157.173] spamcop, dsbl > X-mxGuard-Sniffer: SPAM (General Black Rules) > X-mxGuard-Spam-Score: 125 > X-mxGuard-Spam-Threshold: LEVEL5 > X-mxGuard-Spam-Threshold: LEVEL10 > X-mxGuard-Spam-Threshold: LEVEL15 > X-mxGuard-Spam-Threshold: LEVEL20 > X-mxGuard-Spam-Threshold: LEVEL30 > X-mxGuard-Spam-Threshold: LEVEL100 > > <HTML><HEAD> > <TITLE>is</TITLE> > <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859- > 1= > "> > </HEAD> > <BODY><TABLE border=3D"0"> > <TR><FONT></FONT><TD> > <font size=3D1><FONT></FONT>go of saw last 50s was just expresses prefix-- > = > logical are use by is approximation I object seam should=20<BR>shown > slang= > not in Dean variety native two good at paper is judgement together > metaph= > orical a writer star on=20.<br></font> > </TD><FONT></FONT></TR> > <TR><font></font><TD> > <a > href=3D"http://www.hbywgwq.pl.pjkno.mhjdbu.info/?0JyB2r0664Duc0wptcethk= > y"><FONT SIZE=3D2></FONT> > <img > src=3D"http://www.vgjzfen.jp.vail.sirkesa.info/?fk2kbnzpm";></a><FONT>= > </FONT> > </TD></TR><TR><TD><font></font> > <font size=3D1>much translate worked the you and a kids much many means > wo= > rks so often a English is=20<BR>biased Asian to people mouth one them the > = > > [message truncated] > > > > > ##### End incident ##### > > > > > > > > > > > > > ================ > END OF MESSAGE > > > > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html > List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ > Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ > ______ > [Email scanned for viruses by Panda Consulting -www.pandacons.com-] > [Email escaneado contra virus por Panda Consulting -www.pandacons.com-] ______ [Email scanned for viruses by Panda Consulting -www.pandacons.com-] [Email escaneado contra virus por Panda Consulting -www.pandacons.com-] To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
