[Scspamcop] Re: pharm sites not resolving in parser

[mr206]

Fair enough... but not all the IPs these sites are on are blacks or 
bulletproof and the same argument can be made for reporting through 
SpamCop at all.  TTNet has the same IPs that have been used/abused for 
months and they do nothing to cease the spam; same can be said with 
CnC... yet it's more beneficial to do quickreporting to them, than to 
report a spamvertized domain?

I guess I can't make that distinction, because both are equally 
offensive and abusive to the world.

Mike Easter wrote:

> The point I'm arguing is that if the spamvertiser provider is
> nonresponsive or blackhat, that notifying the blackhat/ nonresponder is a
> waste of SC & reporter resources to -1- submit the spam in a manner which
> requires time-consuming oversight by the reporter -2- use lots and lots of
> SC resources to parse the spambody, then resources including 'tying up'
> the resolver with b0rken nameservice belonging to all manner of spammy
> nameservers, then resources to process the IP to determine or not
> determine some kind of useless notify address and then -3- the reporter is
> handing over evidence which may aid the spam generator to the very
> blackhat who is often profiting from the spamgeneration itself.
> 
> That is, the only spam which spamvertiser provider should be notified is
> the pure whitehat provider, not the blackhat, not the grey clueless hat,
> generally not even the 'unknown hat' -- because the whitehat is so rare
> that you can count on unknown hats to be clueless and unresponsive at
> best, blackhat at worst.
> 
> 
>