Scott Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 01/31/2007 11:37:04 AM: > David F. Skoll spake the following on 1/31/2007 8:07 AM: > > Philip Prindeville wrote: > > > >> What interest would the victim of the spam have in forging > >> log files? What does he have to cover up? > > > > The alleged victim may not be a victim at all, but might be trying > > to get the person he's complaining about in trouble. > > > > We've had a few unfounded accusations that we've been sending > > spam over the last few years; I'm sure it's happened to many others on > > this list. > > > You evil spammers always say that you don't send spam! ;-) > (Please notice the smiley, I don't want to start a war!) > And people will report stuff that they actually "subscribed" to as spam when > they tire of it.
Which is why the end recipient of the message suspected/accused of being spam must submit the entire message, or at least enough to substantiate the claim that it is spam, to their ISP and/or the sender's ISP, and/or the abuse addrress for the sender's domain. Any other claim doesn't have sufficient evidence on it's own to prove spamming. _______________________________________________ NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal boilerplate in the above message, it is NULL AND VOID. You may ignore it. Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.roaringpenguin.com MIMEDefang mailing list [email protected] http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
