This is probably much more appropriate over on mailop; please see:
http://chilli.nosignal.org/mailman/listinfo/mailop
I don't recall offhand is any Spamcop personnel hang out there, but
it's plausible to think they might.
---rsk
Anyone-
We are having a bit of trouble with spamcop blocking 2 of our MTAs with IPs of
208.65.145.71 and 208.65.145.66. We have yet to receive any samples of the spam
and do not seem to be able to submit for removal as it appears someone has
attempted to do this for us and basically used up
Hello,
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 3:29 AM, Mike wrote:
>
> I have a security incident to report and need to make contact with a
> senior level contact responsible for spamcop/ironport immediately.
>
Although I'm pretty sure the OP will have got in touch with someone by
n
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>> And you need a *senior* level contact, why?
>
> He probably meant "someone who has seen an IP address before", not
> level1-support.
spamcop being largely volunteer run has people on it that have a few
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:41:57PM -0400,
valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote
a message of 33 lines which said:
> > I have a security incident to report and need to make contact with
> > a senior level contact responsible for spamcop/ironport
> > immediately.
>
> And y
On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 19:29:48 -0700, Mike said:
> I have a security incident to report and need to make contact with a
> senior level contact responsible for spamcop/ironport immediately.
And you need a *senior* level contact, why?
pgpu7h5Yq79f2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
I have a security incident to report and need to make contact with a
senior level contact responsible for spamcop/ironport immediately.
Thank you.
On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 09:08 -0600, David E. Smith wrote:
> As long as we're going off-topic, might as well go all the way :V
Well, the conversation has continued here despite repeated mentions of
mai...@mailop.org so unless the MLC deem it off-topic and squash the
thread I guess it'll rumble on.
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 02:28, Graeme Fowler wrote:
> Fresh operational content: one of the reasons services like Spamcop
> occasionally list services like Facebook is that they don't honour 5xx
> responses to RCPT TO:. I'd offer some statistics but I'm concerned that
> the legal brigade will jump down my throat, but I suggest that anyone
> running a system like an academic mail platform take a look at the
> number of invalid recipients services like Facebook try to deliver.
Out of ~1.5m emails on the 3rd, it was only 4 invalid recipients here.
There was one
tance you're seeking.
2. You're still making an anti-spam 101 level mistake here, by
erroneously claiming that Spamcop blocks Facebook: Spamcop doesn't,
because they can't. If *your* customers can't get mail from Facebook,
then it's because something within *your* o
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 23:27 -0800, Shon Elliott wrote:
> So really, my customers, and myself are victims of
> Spamcop's blocking of Facebook.
I forget how far back in this thread someone said:
Spamcop *listed* Facebook for valid reasons according to their published
listing crite
Dean,
I started the thread with the original question, and after not hearing a
suitable response from either Spamcop or someone from the networking side of
Facebook, I gave up on this thread when people like Michelle started chiming in
their opinion. This thread wasn't meant to be an op
On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 19:42:39 EST, Michael Holstein said:
>
> > The evesdroppring reported below on csuohio.edu end-users Email is a
> > prima facie violation of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.
> >
>
> I'm not sure why this got under your skin so badly, but aggregate
> statistics !=
> The evesdroppring reported below on csuohio.edu end-users Email is a
> prima facie violation of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.
>
I'm not sure why this got under your skin so badly, but aggregate
statistics != eavesdropping. The SPAM appliance vendor software gathers
these statist
On 3/4/2010 3:14 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 15:35:47 EST, Dean Anderson said:
>> elided.
>
> My To: list:
>
> To: jim deleskie Cc: nanog@nanog.org
>
> Your To: list:
>
> To: valdis.kletni...@vt.edu, Shon Elliott , Adam
> Stasiniewicz , Reed Loden ,
> Noel Butler
On 3/4/2010 2:35 PM, Dean Anderson wrote:
> When there are 100 million facebook organizations, perhaps your
> comparison will be appropriate. But even then, only if your friends
> participate in all 100 million. Getting the occasional facebook,
> linkedin, and plaxo invitation from your friends
> Its like calling 5 ICMP packets a DDoS.
>
Okay .. here's a fun exercise (granted, as a .edu, the FB stats are
statistically over-represented) .. this is yesterday.
total email : 1,594,435
from @*facebook* : 17,274 (1.1%)
Taken as a total of *legitimate* email that got through the spam filt
On Thu, March 4, 2010 3:19 am, Jay Hennigan wrote:
> Facebook, like many similar sites, rather aggressively requests that its
> users supply their email credentials so that the site can "invite" their
> contacts. All of them. Every stinkin' email address they can mine.
Also, Facebook sends mai
On 3/4/2010 1:37 PM, jim deleskie wrote:
> I'm not going to both on this thread anymore.. waste of time. Sorry
> for the bulk mail/spam generated by my replies to nanog.
>
> I'll stop feeding the trolls now.
Nice recovery attempt for a lost cause.
--
"Government big enough to supply everything
On 3/4/2010 1:16 PM, jim deleskie wrote:
> If I leave all boxes checked to send mail/notices/app requests to
> everyone in my list, or if I give FB my gmail password to pull all my
> contacts and send them an invite, its pure @ my request, sure FB is
> happy I do it, but it is no way spam. Its like
On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 15:16:25 -0400, jim deleskie said:
> If I leave all boxes checked to send mail/notices/app requests to
> everyone in my list, or if I give FB my gmail password to pull all my
> contacts and send them an invite, its pure @ my request, sure FB is
> happy I do it, but it is no way
I'm not going to both on this thread anymore.. waste of time. Sorry
for the bulk mail/spam generated by my replies to nanog.
I'll stop feeding the trolls now.
-jim
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:25 PM, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 03:16:25PM -0400, jim deleskie wrote:
>> If I leave
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 03:16:25PM -0400, jim deleskie wrote:
> If I leave all boxes checked to send mail/notices/app requests to
> everyone in my list, or if I give FB my gmail password to pull all my
> contacts and send them an invite, its pure @ my request, sure FB is
> happy I do it, but it is
If I leave all boxes checked to send mail/notices/app requests to
everyone in my list, or if I give FB my gmail password to pull all my
contacts and send them an invite, its pure @ my request, sure FB is
happy I do it, but it is no way spam. Its like calling 5 ICMP packets
a DDoS.
-jim
On Thu, M
On 2/25/10 10:12 PM, deles...@gmail.com wrote:
> Maybe I'm wrong on this, and I'm not a mailadmin anywhere nor have I been or
> pretended to have been in the past. But I'm pretty sure FB only sends you
> mail based on the prefrences you choose, and I know this is the answer you
> where given so
deles...@gmail.com wrote:
> Maybe I'm wrong on this,
You are I'm afraid.
> and I'm not a mailadmin anywhere nor have I been or pretended to have been in
> the past. But I'm pretty sure FB only sends you mail based on the prefrences
> you choose, and I know this is the answer you where given so
world, reachability to various social
networking sites is becoming less reliable.
> -Original Message-
> From: Rich Kulawiec [mailto:r...@gsp.org]
> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 7:15 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Spamcop Blocks Facebook?
>
> [ This discussion reall
[ This discussion really should be on spam-l, not nanog. ]
I'm not affiliated with Spamcop, however, it's well-known among
those of us who work in this area that (a) Facebook has been spamming
for quite some time and (b) they're not the only "social network"
that
t; Blocked - see
>> http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?69.63.178.170;
>
> Using the Spamcop BL *solely* as the basis for rejecting mail is a sure way
> to lose wanted email. From Spamcop's website:
>
> "... SpamCop encourages use of the SCBL in concert with an actively m
;
Using the Spamcop BL *solely* as the basis for rejecting mail is a sure way
to lose wanted email. From Spamcop's website:
"... SpamCop encourages use of the SCBL in concert with an actively maintained
whitelist of wanted email senders. SpamCop encourages SCBL users to tag and
divert email
Maybe I'm wrong on this, and I'm not a mailadmin anywhere nor have I been or
pretended to have been in the past. But I'm pretty sure FB only sends you mail
based on the prefrences you choose, and I know this is the answer you where
given so mostly a statement. How does that equal spam :)
Yep. I understand that. Which is why I asked if anyone from Facebook or Spamcop
was lurking around. Since Facebook knows they have an issue, how about hearing
from someone over there at Facebook regarding this issue? Like it or not,
Facebook is a very popular service. Regardless whether they use
tement. How does that equal spam :)
> --Original Message--
> From: Reed Loden
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Spamcop Blocks Facebook?
> Sent: Feb 26, 2010 12:46 AM
>
> On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 19:14:37 -0800
> Shon Elliott wrote:
>
>> Anyone from Face
that equal spam :)
--Original Message--
From: Reed Loden
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Spamcop Blocks Facebook?
Sent: Feb 26, 2010 12:46 AM
On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 19:14:37 -0800
Shon Elliott wrote:
> Anyone from Facebook or Spamcop lurking around to look into this? It's quite
> annoying.
On Thu, 2010-02-25 at 22:46 -0600, Reed Loden wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 19:14:37 -0800
> Shon Elliott wrote:
>
> > Anyone from Facebook or Spamcop lurking around to look into this? It's quite
> > annoying.. I can't imagine how many other users are scratching t
On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 19:14:37 -0800
Shon Elliott wrote:
> Anyone from Facebook or Spamcop lurking around to look into this? It's quite
> annoying.. I can't imagine how many other users are scratching their heads on
> this one...
I'm a long-time SpamCop member, so I fo
Found this: http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=10783
Looks like SpamCop is fully aware they are listing facebook's email
servers.
-Original Message-
From: Shon Elliott [mailto:s...@unwiredbb.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 9:15 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org >
cked - see
http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?69.63.178.170;
from= to=
proto=ESMTP helo=
Feb 25 19:08:23 postfix/smtpd[12682]: disconnect from
outmail011.snc1.tfbnw.net[69.63.178.170]
Anyone from Facebook or Spamcop lurking around to look into this? It's quite
annoying.. I can't imagine how
Hi
If there are some members of Spamcop here, please contact me off-list
Mehmet
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
40 matches
Mail list logo
