Re: [mailop] 'abuse@' a hosting company - was this a valid response?

Paul Smith wrote: Hi, just wanting a bit of an opinion here. We received spam from a leased/hosted server (195.154.62.181) to an email address which has never been used legitimately (ie it was a scraped email address) We reported it to abuse@ the hosting company with headers, message, etc.

Re: [mailop] 'abuse@' a hosting company - was this a valid response?

On 2017-04-13 09:26:19 (+0100), Paul Smith wrote: We received spam from a leased/hosted server (195.154.62.181) to an email address which has never been used legitimately (ie it was a scraped email address) We reported it to abuse@ the hosting company with headers, message,

Re: [mailop] 'abuse@' a hosting company - was this a valid response?

Hi! > We received spam from a leased/hosted server (195.154.62.181) to an > email address which has never been used legitimately (ie it was a > scraped email address) > > We reported it to abuse@ the hosting company with headers, message, etc. > > The response we got back was essentially

[mailop] 'abuse@' a hosting company - was this a valid response?

Hi, just wanting a bit of an opinion here. We received spam from a leased/hosted server (195.154.62.181) to an email address which has never been used legitimately (ie it was a scraped email address) We reported it to abuse@ the hosting company with headers, message, etc. The response we