Re: Is it possible to submit spam via email without having to verify it online?

posted to spamcop & spamcop.mail, f/ups to spamcop

Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:
> I perform substantial checks before my own automated system send out
> spam reports.  I would like to contribute to the spamcop RBL system,
> but report spam to it is extremely cumbersome.

I'm interpreting your post as being one about reporting spam, not about
being a subscriber to the spamcop mail system, which is described here
http://www.spamcop.net/ces/individuals.shtml   SpamCop Email System for
Individuals

This newsgroup is about problems with that SC mail system, not about
reporting issues, so I'm posting f/ups to my post to spamcop.  That
group and spamcop.help are for general spam discussion issues, including
reporting.

Re cumbersome.  Do you mean you are pasting the spams into the webparser
one at a time and finding that cumbersome, or do you mean you are email
submitting many spams at a time and are finding it cumbersome to have to
click up each link for the reporting process?

> I am trying to report 100+ confirmed spams a day - many of which are
> not yet RBL'd.

If you are submitting to the webparser one at a time, you can improve
efficiency by submitting many spams at a time by email -- but that still
requires individually approving the reports by following each parser
approval link for regular reporting.  Another option is quick reporting,
but it has some disadvantages.

Regular reporting is a safeguard against spamsource mistakes made by the
parser, because each report notify is reporter approved prior to being
sent and counted.  Regular reporting also provides an opportunity for
the spamvertised links to be reported.

Another alternative is quick reporting, which has requirements and
disadvantages.  The requirements for quick reporting are that your
request to quick report has to be approved, and you also have to be
configured for a mailhosted account, which is described here
http://www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/397.html  How do I configure
Mailhosts for SpamCop?

The advantage of the mailhosted account is that the parser is much less
likely to make a mistake in indentifying the source, because the parser
is configured to recognize your mailhost.  However, the condition or
configuration of your mailhost can change unexpectedly, so even having a
mailhosted account is not perfect assurance that some parsing error
cannot occur.

If a reporter is both mailhosted and approved to be a quick reporter,
then many spams can be submitted by email at one time, and all of the
spams are parsed for spamsource and reported without any approval
process by the reporter.  That lack of oversight can cause a reporter to
report their own mailhost many times if the parser makes an error, which
could result in the reporter's own provider becoming blocklisted and
causing significant grief to the reporter -- including loss of email
account.

Another disadvantage to quick reporting depending upon one's point of
view is that only spamsource is counted, and there is no parsing for the
spamvertiser, and no notification of the spamvertiser's provider.

The principle advantage is that it is very fast compared to the regular
report approval process.  Another advantage, depending on the point of
view, is that the spamvertiser provider is not notified.  There are many
blackhat providers which some reporters would rather not be providing
with spam evidence which evidence is only superficially munged with
standard SC mungeing.

-- 
Mike Easter
kibitzer, not SC admin