Christopher McCrory <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think this is a violation of the SpamCop TOS. Somewhere in there is
> says something like, Don't report stuff you asked for like mailing
> lists, newsletters, etc.
>
> I can't find the link now :(, bu
Vicky Rode writes on 5/12/2004 12:21 AM:
Just wondering why was my e-mail thread (Hierarchical Credit-based
Queuing (HCQ): QoS) dated 5/9/2004 9:36 PM reported as a spam? Just
That question is best asked of the admin of widowmaker.com, a user of
which reported your nanog post to spamcop
I would agree with your analogy if Spamcop limited automatic reporting
to subset of the community. The problem is they do not.
In Spamcop's defence, it seems that their systems were never designed
to handle the wide variety of 'attack vectors" that spam uses today.
Spamcop also
Chris Brenton wrote:
On Tue, 2004-05-11 at 18:15, Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. wrote:
As an ex-admin, I have some "serious issues" about the way Spamcop
works, but this argument is similar to one that says a credit reporting
company has to prove that you are a deadbeat before reporting th
On Tue, 2004-05-11 at 18:15, Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. wrote:
>
> As an ex-admin, I have some "serious issues" about the way Spamcop
> works, but this argument is similar to one that says a credit reporting
> company has to prove that you are a deadbeat before reporting th
Chris Brenton wrote:
Further, Spamcop should implement some form of check to verify that the
e-mail is in fact spam before they go pointing the finger and/or
blocking mail servers. The problem of end users leveraging Spamcop to
get them off of mailing lists or a simple way of DoSsing a
On Tue, 2004-05-11 at 16:35, Guðbjörn S. Hreinsson wrote:
>
> Possible someone on the list didn't understand the content, didn't
> realize this was sent via a mailing lists and submitted this as a spam
> message to SPAMCOP. Less likely someone didn't know how to
>
On Tue, 11 May 2004 21:23:55 -, "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Gu=F0bj=F6rn_S._Hreinsson?="
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> But an IQ test would be nice. What should be the I to test for?
http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=19991114&mode=classic
pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
> >. There have been no reminders from
> > the mailing list since I signed up which I think is a good policy for a
> > mailing list. The mailing list only uses "Precedence: bulk" to mark it
as
> > a mailing list.
>
> the list is pretty active, so i would dare say that reminders are
> superfluous.
Possible someone on the list didn't understand the content, didn't
realize this was sent via a mailing lists and submitted this as a spam
message to SPAMCOP. Less likely someone didn't know how to
get off the mailing list and this was the result.
In both cases the submitte
JC Dill wrote:
It could also simply be a mistake. The inet-access list was once
reported as a spam source by a happy subscriber who was busy reporting
hundreds (or thousands?) of spams and clicked /included a list post by
accident.
--
p.s. Please do not cc me on replies to the list. Please
At 12:09 PM 5/11/2004, Jared Mauch wrote:
I've found that a number of people that are spamcop subscribers
report messages as spam that are not when they don't know how to
get removed from lists.
It could also simply be a mistake. The inet-access list was once reported
as a spam
I got one of those during the Spring last year, when I was writing about
the state of the net in Iraq. Someone used SpamCop to get my ISP's abuse
desk interested in me. Not much to be said about that.
On Tue, 11 May 2004 12:00:14 -0700 (PDT) Gregory Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm guessing here, but it was probably because the *.rr.com addresses
> originate a LOT of spam and someone has a procmail filter that
> automatically refers any mail from that domain to spamc
cut and paste
> of the reported incident.
>
>
> Please advice.
>
I think this is a violation of the SpamCop TOS. Somewhere in there is
says something like, Don't report stuff you asked for like mailing
lists, newsletters, etc.
I can't find the link now :(
t and paste
> > of the reported incident.
>
> Vicky:
>
> I'm guessing here, but it was probably because the *.rr.com addresses
> originate a LOT of spam and someone has a procmail filter that
> automatically refers any mail from that domain to spamcop...
>
>
On Tue, 11 May 2004 11:51:10 PDT, Vicky Rode said:
> Just wondering why was my e-mail thread (Hierarchical Credit-based
> Queuing (HCQ): QoS) dated 5/9/2004 9:36 PM reported as a spam? Just
My guess is that somebody's automated tool saw "credit-based" and
concluded that it was Yet Another Mortg
> Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 11:51:10 -0700
> From: Vicky Rode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Spamcop
>
>
> Hi there,
>
> Just wondering why was my e-ma
)
by vmx2.spamcop.net with SMTP; 10 May 2004 07:47:00 -0700
Received: from [68.13.211.63] by spamcop.net
with HTTP; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:47:01 GMT
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [SpamCop (24.30.181.126) id:988145978]Hierarchical Credit-based
Queuing (HCQ): QoS
Prec
t;
Anyhow, SpamCop V1.3.3 is proud to point out that the following item of
mail, sent to this list (nanog), meets its seal of Spam-Proval. I know
cause my ISP (home) asked me "Eric, what's up with this?"
The originating host ran FreeBSD 5.0 and sendmail 8.12.8 when the mail
wa
Yes, we got bunch of these as well (at least 10), just two came in today.
I know for sure its not actual spamcop since they send copy of email in
question. Plus email was sent to all email addresses of particular
dedicated hosting website, but the website is used for advertising and
customers
FYI, for those of you who get worried when you see mail from spamcop
hitting your postmaster addresses:
http://www.julianhaight.com/forgery.shtml
It may be forged.
--
/->
Marius Strom | Always carry a sh
22 matches
Mail list logo
