"Peter Guy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
9caecp$9c8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:9caecp$9c8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Let me second Michael here. The spam did indeed originate from
> 64.228.124.155, and 211.198.162.193 is just the relay server.
Yep.
> SC did not
> "err," per se, it just needs to be very rigorous in its parsing to avoid
ANY
> false positives, so it often cries "broken" on these relay chains because
of
> the way the mail servers record their information.
It didn't err, but it has produced a false positive. It claims the the
kornet server is the e-mail source when it isn't - this is why the user is
required to actually read the Spamcop output.
All that's really required is for the admin of the SMTP server at
[211.198.162.193] to get their act together and have the server record a
valid name in its Received: lines so that the chain is not broken as it was
in this case. Oh, and they could actually consider closing their open
relay too :)
_______________________________________________
SpamCop-Help mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://news.spamcop.net/mailman/listinfo/spamcop-help
