Vincenzo,

Thanks for the response.

Not typically a 'missing' address.  Rather they just misspelled the email
address of the recipient.  But in general, it's any time mail arrives on a
domain and the email address doesn't match a recipient on that domain.

The problem is that I receive nearly 10,000 emails a day with invalid
recipient names.  Spammers love to simply walk through a dictionary of names
for recipients hoping for hit.

The problem is that according to the SpamCop website, SpamCop has this
'super secret... nobody really knows' "Spam-trap".  There is literally no
way to filter on the "spam-trap" special address.

I realize that ethically I need to inform legitimate senders that they made
a mistake on the address.  But in order to do that ~2 times a day, I'm now
going to bounce the other ~9,998 spam emails per day as well.  And most
likely hit SpamCop's spam-trap and be blacklisted again.

I am about to lose a client over the fact their email won't get through to a
server that uses SpamCop's blacklist.  So I HAVE to do whatever it takes to
not get blacklisted again.  At this point, it means stopping all bounces,
even for legitimate sender's mistakes.

SpamCop simply says I shouldn't do 'delayed bounce' (i.e. accept all email,
then send a separate bounce).  Alternatively, I (i.e. my mail server) should
simply reject the request in the SMTP server if it is an invalid recipient
address (send a negative response on the inbound mail request).  But that
means running my virtual address mailet inside the James SMTP server in
order for it to determine valid/invalid, which I don't think is possible in
James, is it?

That's why I'm so concerned.  I see no acceptable answer.

Thx again.

Jerry

-----Original Message-----
From: Vincenzo Gianferrari Pini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 9:54 AM
To: James Users List
Subject: Re: "Delayed Bounces" and SpamCop

Camron,

I understand that for "undeliverable" you mean that the recipient 
address is missing, right? In this case you need indeed to bounce back 
to the legitimate sender that made a mistake.

Why don't you try to match the "'spam trap' email address as the sender" 
and ghost it in such case, and otherwise bounce back?

Vincenzo

JWM wrote:
> Could someone give me some suggestions on how to deal with this?  This is
a
> very serious problem.  I don't see a solution that doesn't have serious
down
> sides.
>
> How are others dealing with this SpamCop problem?
>
> If the question is not clear, please let me know and I'll try to explain
> further.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jerry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Camron G. Levanger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 11:24 AM
> To: 'James Users List'
> Subject: RE: "Delayed Bounces" and SpamCop
>
> I am in the same boat, I have just turned off bouncing for now.
>
> Camron G. Levanger
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.dreamlabmedia.com-----Original Message-----
> From: JWM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 10:12 AM
> To: 'James Users List'
> Subject: "Delayed Bounces" and SpamCop
>
> SpamCop keeps listing my server as a spammer.  I have my opinions about
> SpamCop in general and mail servers who would bounce mail solely on a
> rumor-mill service.  But the fact remains that it's happening.
>
> For the record... I have a small set of clients, I'm not an open relay,
and
> I'm certain no spam is being generated out of my server.
>
> According to SpamCop, I must be bouncing undeliverable emails (which I
am).
> Apparently, the latest spammer trick is to put SpamCop's 'spam trap' email
> address as the sender, so when I bounce the email as undeliverable, it
goes
> straight to SpamCop and I am now a "sender of spam".
>
> SpamCop says my mail server should simply reject the request immediately
as
> undeliverable and not even accept it.  The way I understand James working,
> that's not possible.  James accepts everything and then runs the mail
> through the matcher/mailet/processor chain, right?  So instead of an "I
> can't accept this email" response, James accepts the mail, and then will
> send a bounce response email later.
>
> What is the answer here?  
>
>       1) Simply turn off bouncing on undeliverable (that's my interim
> fix).  But this means users who send legitimate email to my clients with a
> simple typo in the address will never know the email was not delivered.
>       2) leave as is and do delayed bounces (I'll go out of business if
> SpamCop keeps listing me...)
>       3) have James do immediate rejection (don't know how to do it...)
> and since I run virtual addressing, James would still have to run a mailet
> or two on each inbound connection in order to allow me to tell it whether
I
> want to accept it.  Is that possible?
>
> Maybe this problem is already solved, and I'm just unaware.  But at this
> point, this is a very serious problem for me.
>
> Has anybody else been hit by SpamCop??  What is the consensus of opinion
on
> bouncing undeliverable emails?
>
> Please help!
>
> Thx
>
> Jerry
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>   


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to