On Wed, 2013-04-24 at 17:12 +0100, hospice admin wrote: > we're having problems with an outfit called 'Bite Sized Seminars' in > the UK, who seem to be sending mail out through another company called > 'Communicado'. A quick google suggests we aren't the only ones. > > We have developed a number of rules that identify their mail by > looking for their phone numbers, common phrases, etc in their mail > shots with varying success (I'm happy to share these with anyone who > may find them helpful). > > The problem I'm trying to solve is that they seem to register hundreds > of .co.uk domains, and have access to loads of sending IPs, so I can't > just write a rule to do the obvious. I've complained about them to > Nominet, and they aren't interested ... according to them, they are > doing nothing wrong. I've also complained to various IP providers, > some of which say they will do something, but rarely do. I've even > rung them ... again ... no joy. > I think you'll find that the whois database operators object quite strongly if you try to trawl their database: they usually state that this is forbidden. I wouldn't put much faith in Nominet either: every domain name they sell makes their cash register ring.
Have you tried complaining to the Information Commissioner's Office? They seem to have succeeded in shutting down cold callers where the Telephone Preference Service couldn't or wouldn't do anything, so I think they'd be worth a try. > Here's my question - am I missing a trick here, particularly regarding > the hundreds of domain names? For example, is it possible to do a > 'whois' and process the output in some way? > Is there anything common in the headers you could trap, such as Reply-to: headers or any pattern to the domain names they use? Both have approaches have worked for me with this type of rule given a small score and used as elements in higher scoring meta rules. Martin
