dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
3838
share rss forum feed

stardotstar

join:2000-12-13
Barker, TX

I am stuck in the fight between spamcop and AT&T-Yahoo!

Appears that Spamcop has used a very poor method of fighting spam, what I would consider a shotgun approach, hurting many wrongfully!

What is strange about this, is that I can only NOT send to one organization.

Here is what I received, finally from spamcop:

This IP address is a webmail server that belongs to Yahoo and is being used to send out large amounts of spam, including fake pharmacy spam, fraudulent 419 scams and others. We have been working unsuccessfully with Yahoo for the past week trying to get their spam levels down.
Instead they have continued to increase.

We can do nothing to stop the spam at its source, but we can help others block spam, including those that have chosen to refuse any mail from identified spam source IP addresses. Only Yahoo can stop the spam coming from their network. You should contact Yahoo with your complaints as only they can stop the spam. Once the spam is stopped, or at least slowed, the server IP will delist from the SpamCop Blocking List.

Richard
Please include previous correspondence with replies

==

On the other side is AT&T-Yahoo, I have reported this and they appear to be doing nothing!

Thanks for letting me vent!


Dick Lasswel

join:2008-04-05
Portland, OR

I too am having trouble with this since this last weekend. I'm sending e-mail via outbound.att.net, which seems to hand off to Yahoo! servers.

I too can also not send to ONE organization. That one organization is no doubt refusing e-mails on the basis of spamcop blacklists.

Actually, I can send to that organization occasionally, perhaps because it's going through a Yahoo! server that happened not to have been blacklisted. But most of my e-mails are returned.


stardotstar

join:2000-12-13
Barker, TX

Still going on today, just tried again!


stardotstar

join:2000-12-13
Barker, TX
reply to stardotstar

On the phone with AT&T, they are transferring me to Yahoo Escalation Team. Will advise!


Dick Lasswel

join:2008-04-05
Portland, OR

I'm a little surprised that I haven't seen more consternation about this in various online forums.

In the various returned e-mails, I am told that spamcop has blacklisted the server being used. It's not always the same server. It's one among 98.139.44.xxx. That's why I'm thinking that in the dozens of servers that Yahoo! uses, AT&T doesn't always hand off to the same one, and not all are blacklisted.

I think the problem here is mainly that of Yahoo!, which lets it's servers be compromised, but perhaps also AT&T for having no options other than Yahoo!, and even by the organization I'm mailing, for somewhat blindly using Yahoo! blacklists to deny delivery.


stardotstar

join:2000-12-13
Barker, TX

I just got off the phone with ATT, they transferred me to their Yahoo Escalation Team.

After going into my online email box, they read my emails from Spamcop and all of the failures and they finally realized that my complaint was valid.

After an hour, they told me they would have to call me back, that they had their maintenance team involved and that they were aware of the problem being caused by Spamcop.

She said she would call me back in about an hour!

Fingers crossed!


Dick Lasswel

join:2008-04-05
Portland, OR

Thanks very much for chasing this down. I sent an e-mail to AT&T user support the other day (copying a returned e-mail pointing to spamcop), and got back a pretty clueless response from an "AT&T Social Media Manager".

A "Yahoo Escalation Team", eh? Sounds like AT&T has had some history of issues with Yahoo!.


Dick Lasswel

join:2008-04-05
Portland, OR

Simple workaround.

Just use your Gmail account, and set your SMTP mailer to use the Gmail outgoing server.

»email.about.com/od/accessinggmai···ings.htm

The Gmail outgoing server doesn't use the Yahoo servers at all. Oughta work. So long, outbound.att.net.


Dick Lasswel

join:2008-04-05
Portland, OR

Eh, cancel that.

If I send it to myself, it doesn't go to a Yahoo! server. But if I send it to anyone else, it does. So the problem isn't uniquely with outbound.att.net.



NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:11
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC

1 edit
reply to stardotstar

said by stardotstar:

After an hour, they told me they would have to call me back, that they had their maintenance team involved and that they were aware of the problem being caused by Spamcop.

The problem is caused by spammers, and whomever is using Spamcop for advice.

The problem is, in a roundabout way, caused by some naive AT&T users; the ones who fall for the "We are cleaning up our accounts list and need proof that you are using yours: Send us your account login details" phish. I have seen, in my spam folder, email sent by bona fide spammers through bona fide Yahoo! servers, with AT&T account details. You can tell from one particular header line in Yahoo! (and, by extension, AT&T) mail:
X-Rocket-Received: from Akari.pacbell.net (%ATT/Yahoo!_Username%@173.228.7.217 with plain)
        by smtp207.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 06 May 2013 13:53:58 -0700 PDT
 

The IP address in that line is the IP address of the message injector; legitimate in this case, because I own the Yahoo! account in question. But Yahoo! is relying on the validity of the account login. A naive AT&T user, who falls for the phish, will have the spammer using his Username+Password. This line would then have the AT&T customer's Username and the spammer's IP address.

--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:11
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
reply to Dick Lasswel

said by Dick Lasswel:

Eh, cancel that.

If I send it to myself, it doesn't go to a Yahoo! server. But if I send it to anyone else, it does. So the problem isn't uniquely with outbound.att.net.

Works for me. This did not touch a Yahoo! server:
Authentication-Results: hotmail.com; spf=pass (sender IP is 209.85.220.44)
        smtp.mailfrom=********@gmail.com; dkim=none header.d=pacbell.net;
        x-hmca=none header.id=********@pacbell.net
X-SID-PRA: ********@pacbell.net
Received: from mail-pa0-f44.google.com ([209.85.220.44])
 by SNT0-MC3-F46.Snt0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4900);
 Tue, 7 May 2013 12:30:13 -0700
Received: by mail-pa0-f44.google.com with SMTP id jh10so743643pab.17
        for <********@outlook.com>; Tue, 07 May 2013 12:30:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.68.35.138 with SMTP id h10mr3998274pbj.49.1367955012527;
        Tue, 07 May 2013 12:30:12 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <********@gmail.com>
Received: from Akari (reki.aosake.net. [173.228.7.217])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id t1sm31491743pab.12.2013.05.07.12.30.11
        for <********@outlook.com>
        (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Tue, 07 May 2013 12:30:11 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: NormanS <********@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <B66D429BA89B40F79C3869B731AB00E8@Akari>
From: "NormanS" <********@pacbell.net>
To: <********@outlook.com>
Subject: [TEST] Just a POC ...
Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 12:29:49 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0007_01CE4B1E.90D42F50"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 16.4.3505.912
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V16.4.3505.912
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 May 2013 19:30:13.0313 (UTC) FILETIME=[4B9DD310:01CE4B59]
 
You need to set up a "Send As" email address in your Gmail account settings.

--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

stardotstar

join:2000-12-13
Barker, TX
reply to NormanS

Norman,

Could not agree with you more about how accounts are hijack to send spam. But that is not the case here.

You have 2 organizations, ATT-Yahoo vs SpamCop. The innocent third party here are all of the consumers this is happening to!

No argument from me that selecting SpamCop Services for your blacklist, is not a great choice.

But, AT&T-Yahoo know that this exists. No one but them know what actions they are taking towards spam and how aggressive they are.

Anyone that has an AT&T email knows that one month it is working great catching spam and then the next you are shaking you head saying what changed!

A consumer should never have to go thru the trouble I have to get this resolved. When I spoke to the Yahoo Escalation Team, they advised " oh yeah, we are aware of what SpamCop is doing."

Well if you know what they are doing, then take action to protect the organization that is handling your mail and your consumers.

Thanks as always for your input.



NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:11
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC

said by stardotstar:

Could not agree with you more about how accounts are hijack to send spam. But that is not the case here.

The case here is that Spamcop publishes a list of IP addresses that hit their spamtraps. This is caused by spammer abuse; even through hijacked accounts.

The case is also that many mail server operators, myself included, have determined empirically that Spamcop lists are reliable.

The case is also that Yahoo! is so big they don't really pay attention; perhaps because the AT&T "Ernestine" mentality has rubbed off on them ("We don't care. We don't have to care; we're The Telephone Company.")

You don't have a say in how your recipients' E-Mail Service Providers run their servers (though you might pressure your correspondents to pressure them).

All that is left is to do battle with your own ESP. And if they are as careless/clueless as Yahoo! appears to be (search the forums for past Yahoo! security breaches), expect this to be a recurring battle.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

stardotstar

join:2000-12-13
Barker, TX

I don't disagree, its just like the random issues with passwords and Outlook! Oh Gosh, .............

Thanks



NetFixer
Snarl For The Camera Please
Premium
join:2004-06-24
The Boro
Reviews:
·Cingular Wireless
·Comcast Business..
·Vonage

FWIW, I still use some of my old AT&T/Yahoo! email accounts as temporary off-site storage containers, but I stopped using the AT&T/Yahoo! outbound servers as my email server smarthost even before I dumped AT&T as an ISP (although I will occasionally still use an AT&T server when testing something). I also had similar problems when I used my domain registrar's outbound servers (and they didn't seem to care that they were on multiple blacklists either). Sometimes, you just have to change the outbound servers that you use; it's unfortunately just the way that the spam wars have caused things to happen.

Currently, I use a Comcast Business Class outbound server as my email server smarthost, and so far (for about two years), they have managed to control spam through their network sufficiently that I have not found myself on anyone's black list.
--
A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.


Dick Lasswel

join:2008-04-05
Portland, OR
reply to NormanS

quote:
Works for me. This did not touch a Yahoo! server:

Not sure I explained correctly what I did. (Excuse the other response, which I may have accidentally posted!)

I'm using Thunderbird as my e-mail client, and I'm running into these Yahoo issues through that. Normally, I send my TBird e-mails to the outgoing server outbound.att.net. Those e-mails were being Yahoo-ized. But I noticed that from my Gmail account, my e-mails didn't go through Yahoo. So I have no trouble communicating with my e-mail target. I just have to do it with Gmail.

But I thought, hey, if that works, why don't I just change the TBird outgoing server to smtp.gmail.com. That should do it! Well, it didn't. The POP e-mail gets sent, but somehow it goes through Yahoo. I don't have a clue why that doesn't work. How does the Gmail server know I'm an AT&T customer??

Am I missing something?


NetFixer
Snarl For The Camera Please
Premium
join:2004-06-24
The Boro
Reviews:
·Cingular Wireless
·Comcast Business..
·Vonage

1 edit

said by Dick Lasswel:

quote:
Works for me. This did not touch a Yahoo! server:

Not sure I explained correctly what I did. (Excuse the other response, which I may have accidentally posted!)

I'm using Thunderbird as my e-mail client, and I'm running into these Yahoo issues through that. Normally, I send my TBird e-mails to the outgoing server outbound.att.net. Those e-mails were being Yahoo-ized. But I noticed that from my Gmail account, my e-mails didn't go through Yahoo. So I have no trouble communicating with my e-mail target. I just have to do it with Gmail.

But I thought, hey, if that works, why don't I just change the TBird outgoing server to smtp.gmail.com. That should do it! Well, it didn't. The POP e-mail gets sent, but somehow it goes through Yahoo. I don't have a clue why that doesn't work. How does the Gmail server know I'm an AT&T customer??

Am I missing something?

I suspect that you simply don't have Thunderbird configured the way you think that you have it configured. I can setup the SeaMonkey email client (which is based on the same Mozilla code as Thunderbird), to send email from any email address through any outgoing email server that I setup. Look very carefully at how you have each email account setup for which outbound email server it is setup to use.

As a test, I just setup an att.net email account that uses the Xfinity (Comcast) residential SMTP server for outgoing email, and I sent a test email to my msn.com account.

Here are the email account setup screens for that test:










Here is a screen shot of the MSN account inbox (in SeaMonkey) for that received email:




And here is the full (edited for spam control) email source for that email:
From - Tue May 07 19:52:19 2013
X-Account-Key: account4
X-UIDL: 74817D47-B779-11E2-9245-00215AD8577A
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-Mozilla-Keys:                                                                                 
x-store-info:J++/JTCzmObr++wNraA4Pa4f5Xd6uensydyekesGC2M=
Authentication-Results: hotmail.com; spf=none (sender IP is 76.96.62.24) smtp.mailfrom=MyName@att.net; dkim=none header.d=att.net; x-hmca=none header.id=MyName@att.net
X-SID-PRA: MyName@att.net
X-AUTH-Result: NONE
X-SID-Result: NONE
X-Message-Status: n:n
X-Message-Delivery: Vj0xLjE7dXM9MDtsPTE7YT0xO0Q9MTtHRD0xO1NDTD0w
X-Message-Info: aKlYzGSc+LntszwVaofz59pRsTsKNYvzJBojdc4kA/jWk6nY55CTpfjqZP03wCoLVZFOYrhmWEJwfzzC7RXD0iYHbhH+bGBUGW82m3mpXUIWPsZatQFjk5WrgV1mKC92j1jjE6kOtri2F1YbPsRECsWizexBy+cEhzeYl/DE4BQ=
Received: from qmta02.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.24]) by COL0-MC3-F21.Col0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4900);
 Tue, 7 May 2013 17:51:55 -0700
Received: from omta04.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.35])
by qmta02.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast
id Yzrd1l0020ldTLk51CrvRn; Wed, 08 May 2013 00:51:55 +0000
Received: from [IPv6:2601:5:c80:62:8dcd:b82c:c376:67e8] ([IPv6:2601:5:c80:62:8dcd:b82c:c376:67e8])
by omta04.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast
id ZCru1l01P1dKt273QCrvBn; Wed, 08 May 2013 00:51:55 +0000
Message-ID: <5189A1AA.7010901@att.net>
Date: Tue, 07 May 2013 19:51:54 -0500
From: My Name <MyName@att.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Firefox/16.0 SeaMonkey/2.13.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: My Name <My_Name@msn.com>
Subject: Test email from att.net through comcast.net to msn.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net;
s=q20121106; t=1367974315;
bh=WzVjNXdL8hUzuqubR8VwLqJ0pDtMgSRgVMKOgXZ6cLM=;
h=Received:Received:Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:Subject:
 Content-Type;
b=W5sb7BeqqSYBTwI/HFkL4l748f/tGkTvxY1+DhMd4XAGeEQYTsSyarAgf+56P2I/u
 mYgEITyHgpY5pF1RWL0JTcQgF4TDXOq6DCg5qpr2ftfYzwjxq4HHFmtACG3ptkc3yw
 Anvd/RDCZUMcwsQ/REQio6JpI+ehuQy6LwHyiPT+jv/kzhCD40iCi+UU1ZFmHo7Xmx
 rbGWqbkgUZNrzk6BlFIQsO91ZqTIMutnun3mLB8DbfkR9hgACBG0tWWO7IiLi0MZxn
 NLq7TEFm0OH5JdgswElQ3eTWseEMtqeq2eD/eWCX2VNOrzYszP+cWdHT4hh0jfRzr4
 Z8PEPaHuG/RoQ==
Return-Path: MyName@att.net
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 May 2013 00:51:55.0747 (UTC) FILETIME=[3CC38330:01CE4B86]
 
This is a test email sent from an att.net account through comcast.net to 
a msn.com account.
 

If you are sure that you have Thunderbird configured correctly, but the email that you want to go through the Gmail server is still going through the ATT/Yahoo! server, post the same information that I did. You especially need to include the (edited for privacy) full source of at least the email headers of one of the misdirected emails. Do that and someone can probably figure out what is actually happening and suggest a solution.
--
A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.

cramer
Premium
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:8
reply to stardotstar

AT&T outsourced their consumer email to Yahoo! a long time ago -- they were very bad at maintaining their systems and were horrible at dealing with the ever growing amount of spam. Complaining to AT&T isn't going to do much good, as they don't have a hand in any of it. Yahoo!, as you've seen, has the bad habit of ignoring complaints. (even from AT&T) Their handling of spam (inbound and out) has gone downhill to the point they're underground these days -- their answer to inbound spam is to ignore messages from 90% of the internet, while outbound spam is apparently utterly unfiltered.

I don't allow people to use @yahoo.com addresses at the sites I maintain because I'm simply tired of dealing with the ***holes. (I don't allow @outlook.com either as every damn one of them has been a spammer)


stardotstar

join:2000-12-13
Barker, TX
reply to stardotstar

My problem, after involving Yahoo Escalation Team, has apparently resolved itself for now.

They called me back but i could not take the call and asked them to call back in 15 minutes, they never did.



NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:11
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC

2 edits
reply to Dick Lasswel

said by Dick Lasswel:

But I thought, hey, if that works, why don't I just change the TBird outgoing server to smtp.gmail.com. That should do it! Well, it didn't. The POP e-mail gets sent, but somehow it goes through Yahoo. I don't have a clue why that doesn't work. How does the Gmail server know I'm an AT&T customer??

Am I missing something?

Yes. If you set up two, or more, different accounts, each is connected to its own default server:

Mozilla Thunderbird SMTP server list.


When you compose, you choose by your desired "From:" address, and it goes through the associated SMTP server:

E-mail addresses and associated SMTP servers.


You can change which SMTP server will be used in the account settings menu:

Server Options menu.


Note that the "Outgoing Server (SMTP):" is a hot button. Click on it to change which server is used by T-Bird.

This is my last stinking damned edit! I should just quit and play some Bioshock: Infinite.

How I actually configured Thunderbird to send "from" 'PacBell' through 'Gmail':

Configuring Thunderbird to send AT&T through Gmail.


And here are the headers:
x-store-info:7YsnRco0gQJ3EyekdHv0zgpxljZUE8IwoYF3VwYK/Ma4GZEWq0BVzXW657YMWgsf/
        E7CJQpdtIP2TNv3q6dDcsyRcpFWmP40TYMdOQQ4OJe6ZZJS5wXQucYjVVxusm4wRA8HaOL1EOo=
Authentication-Results: hotmail.com; spf=pass (sender IP is 209.85.220.42)
        smtp.mailfrom=********@gmail.com; dkim=none header.d=pacbell.net;
        x-hmca=none header.id=********@pacbell.net
X-SID-PRA: ********@pacbell.net
X-AUTH-Result: NONE
X-SID-Result: NONE
X-Message-Status: n:n
X-Message-Delivery: Vj0xLjE7dXM9MDtsPTA7YT0wO0Q9MTtHRD0yO1NDTD0w
X-Message-Info: gamVN+8Ez8UZTCe45FOKWTH9OwGBKqeOiGfXY2et1ClPC5Tn8TPnfCQHKVi539S5m7OHe0kyTbcvaXUw6
        sQImGM1ASDplTy9DBKGGFK7K1Yefl2rIn4ferVmeGsNxdpGNuqpwVdRpHgvf2093QvDEEzlFkcgmM1E0va dqsaGvrI=
Received: from mail-pa0-f42.google.com ([209.85.220.42])
         by SNT0-MC4-F11.Snt0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4900);
 Tue, 7 May 2013 20:27:36 -0700
Received: by mail-pa0-f42.google.com with SMTP id bj3so991006pad.15
        for <********@outlook.com>; Tue, 07 May 2013 20:27:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=x-received:sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to
         :subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=ww6MF2xVkM4Mzu+kHwioEgloel5xYYEQhJQYYiNkEes=;
        b=SAOtvSLJpeFSGbmNgkzH3uWk6EOZv4KCmVAfJxwbxbdDckfCu3y6WASolMSmFwscBr
         SxkvhV4wrH+tnAxYadYCnBMkCTTwRCNCzN41dT0i4XdcnsQaLOBZ/C2HQSDpBX8y/Sw0
         i20d/rgY/T1QNUTuKbbI89c0N8uvSf7oV8NZFqmJJtb5vNHx2Tjf3tXmqazs40oAshES
         4g31lqvwdhDFbofYtvFaMll+yliA8iOsIt9ht4fe1F9nzCRe0CPxk7BcjmRpRWtd3+0v
         kH1YmnSNCYFHyN4WdJUOCDq1rWOZXH8vtpURrw60/hQfr/A30WlhxRoZai12c612Ah65
         4d+A==
X-Received: by 10.66.155.39 with SMTP id vt7mr5905517pab.99.1367983655997;
        Tue, 07 May 2013 20:27:35 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <********@gmail.com>
Received: from Akari.gmail.com ([2001:470:1f05:448:91ad:46ed:ca08:3cc8])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id aa8sm32927635pad.14.2013.05.07.20.27.35
        for <********@outlook.com>
        (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Tue, 07 May 2013 20:27:35 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: NormanS <********@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5189C626.2050906@Akari.aosake.net>
Date: Tue, 07 May 2013 20:27:34 -0700
From: "NormanS" <********@pacbell.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ********@outlook.com
Subject: [TEST] POC ...
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 May 2013 03:27:37.0003 (UTC) FILETIME=[FC960FB0:01CE4B9B]
 

First server touched: "mx.google.com".
Last server touched: "SNT0-MC4-F11.Snt0.hotmail.com".

No Yahoo! servers involvrd.

All of the attempts at cleaning PII, and formatting is frustrating me; delayed me past NetFixer See Profile's post. And Dvorak is calling me home "From the New World" (Symphony #9 in E-minor, I believe).

--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

Dick Lasswel

join:2008-04-05
Portland, OR

Ah, you are EXACTLY right. But I was looking at your detailed instructions and saying "but, but, ... I did that!". Then I realized that I was suffering from user failure. I entered stmp.gmail.com as the outgoing server, and selected it as default, BUT I NEVER TOLD IT TO ACTUALLY USE THAT SERVER. I was assuming that just setting it as "default" made it the one being used. But that's not the case, of course. (I don't change outgoing servers regularly, you see.)

Now that I've done it right, it works as I had originally hoped it would. Thank you thank you thank you!

I am delighted to say again -- so long, outbound.att.net! I'd like to believe that Yahoo get's it's act together, but in the meantime ...


stardotstar

join:2000-12-13
Barker, TX

Did your problem resolve yesterday like mine?


Dick Lasswel

join:2008-04-05
Portland, OR

I can't say. I was too busy trying to get myself separated from Yahoo!.

In fact, it takes some time to verify that it's working, because my e-mails may not bounce for an hour or more.

I'm actually not anxious to return to Yahoo! routing. Evidently this happens every year or two. See

»www.networkworld.com/community/b···-servers


stardotstar

join:2000-12-13
Barker, TX

Thanks, this is the first time I have had this issue. I routinely get the password verification issue!

I don't care to support Google!


stardotstar

join:2000-12-13
Barker, TX
reply to stardotstar

Spoke too soon, not working again this morning!


Dick Lasswel

join:2008-04-05
Portland, OR
reply to stardotstar

said by stardotstar:

I don't care to support Google!

I hear ya. But as long as I'm not sending them money, I have few issues. Of course, they're probably data mining my e-mails that they wouldn't otherwise have had.

I do have other outgoing server options, and so I might use those instead. It is a real shame that AT&T contracts with an organization that is so ineffective against spam.

In the NetworkWorld piece by Larry Chaffin I sent, he curiously blames spamcop for the blacklisting of Yahoo!. That's nuts. All spamcop is doing is identifying servers of spam abuse. They aren't blocking anything. It's the folks who blindly use the spamcop blacklists who are more guilty. But the main fault is at Yahoo!.

stardotstar

join:2000-12-13
Barker, TX

1 edit
reply to stardotstar

Just got off of the phone again with ATT and Yahoo Escalation Team, aside from ATT trying to upsale me, still no resolve.

Here is what I was told by "Liberty" at Yahoo Escalation:

This issue has started on April 29 and ALL ATT customers are subject to this issue. They have had numerous calls regarding it over these days. She further stated that ATT is aware of the issue and is calling it an "outage"! ATT says that its not their problem.

She said that there is nothing they Yahoo can do as the email hosting folks, that this is entirely up to Spamcop!

I told her that I did not agree, but as the consumer I was stuck in the middle of all of this, ATT-Yahoo vs Spamcop!

She apologized and I terminated the call!

Looks like we are in for a long one on this issue and it will be the straw that breaks the camels back for many, to leave ATT!



NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:11
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
reply to Dick Lasswel

said by Dick Lasswel:

I do have other outgoing server options, and so I might use those instead. It is a real shame that AT&T contracts with an organization that is so ineffective against spam.

There aren't a lot of free options; AOL, Gmail, outlook.com (Hotmail). Fastmail is free for IMAP, but you have to pay for POP3 and SMTP. Some other free web mail services also charge fees for POP3 and SMTP.

I do have my ISP servers, and their connection log retention is just two weeks:
x-store-info:8Rlnjmxvy6L6cXs23gz/9HW3P3dIQ3IMJFkGV/UntN6IiSWUzPA5l6yASL6AMc5XU9JDa0
 SegdvDnX78s5T+MbuvpHGp7bC2Xqu0rTXV9XMjFRuKPH2OdGkeRgiXTIoquZ9WmVC9bYU=
Authentication-Results: hotmail.com; spf=none (sender IP is 64.142.16.245)
 smtp.mailfrom=********@pacbell.net; dkim=none header.d=pacbell.net;
 x-hmca=none header.id=********@pacbell.net
X-SID-PRA: ********@pacbell.net
X-AUTH-Result: NONE
X-SID-Result: NONE
X-Message-Status: n:n
X-Message-Delivery: Vj0xLjE7dXM9MDtsPTE7YT0wO0Q9MTtHRD0yO1NDTD0w
X-Message-Info: aKlYzGSc+LkUTgn/NDb6wKUDu+dGZ/rp7zkiB1T2nD0JzP6QSeOl/9jjUzho3HmkfIh0G+
 93NcbxQY9cqJGfPccOGdgq1RHR7OT6y29In1B2qkb7rOdNdm/h8yMlQR91kR5tcwtbzxbfaTplHIB
 HOgYUvPLou6Q16BdRQQORwO0=
Received: from a.mail.sonic.net ([64.142.16.245]) by COL0-MC3-F31.Col0.hotmail.com with
 Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4900);
 Wed, 8 May 2013 08:57:40 -0700
Received: from Akari.sonic.net (reki.aosake.net [173.228.7.217])
(authenticated bits=0)
by a.mail.sonic.net (8.13.8.Beta0-Sonic/8.13.7) with ESMTP id r48FvdD5004835
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO)
for <********@outlook.com>; Wed, 8 May 2013 08:57:40 -0700
Message-ID: <518A75F1.3080207@Akari.aosake.net>
Date: Wed, 08 May 2013 08:57:37 -0700
From: "Norman S. Miller" <********@pacbell.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ********@outlook.com
Subject: [TEST] Another POC ...
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-Path: ********@pacbell.net
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 May 2013 15:57:40.0653 (UTC) FILETIME=[C4DA15D0:01CE4C04]
 

--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:11
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
reply to stardotstar

said by stardotstar:

She said that there is nothing they Yahoo can do as the email hosting folks, that this is entirely up to Spamcop!

An apology; I conflated SpamCop with Spamhaus. I reject outright on the advice of Spamhaus because of reliability. I score on the advice of SpamCop; weighting email toward spam, but mitigating with counterweight based on other characteristics of the email; so an SC listing is not rejected outright.

But that decision is, ultimately, made by the receiving mail server operator. The SpamCop FAQ states:
quote:
We recommend that when using any spam filtering method, users be given access to the filtered mail - don't block the mail as documented here, but store it in a separate mailbox. Or tag it and provide users documentation so that they can filter based on the tags in their own MUA. We provide this information only for administrators who cannot use a more subtle approach for whatever reason.

»www.spamcop.net/fom-serve/cache/291.html

Looks like we are in for a long one on this issue and it will be the straw that breaks the camels back for many, to leave ATT!

Since nobody I communicate with has a server blocking on the advice of SpamCop, I am not affected by this brouhaha.

P.S. I left AT&T over their caps. Getting faster service for a lower price was a bonus. Because of the ability to use alternate SMTP servers, even as an AT&T customer, this SpamCop issue would have been much less a reason for me to leave than caps and price.

--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

cramer
Premium
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:8
reply to stardotstar

said by stardotstar:

... ATT says that its not their problem.

She said that there is nothing they Yahoo can do as the email hosting folks, that this is entirely up to Spamcop!

AT&T is correct... it's not their problem. Yahoo! is incorrect... they are the ***hats sending spam; they are the only one who can stop that. SpamCop is 100% correct in listing those servers as spam sources, because they are spam sources and Yahoo! isn't doing jack about it.