|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
To: richard@mandarin.com Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 07:59:00 +0100 (BST) Cc: nanog@merit.edu In-Reply-To: <20030424210134.79F4.RICHARD@mandarin.com> from "Richard Cox" at Apr 24, 2003 09:35:31 PM From: neil@DOMINO.ORG (Neil J. McRae) Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu > SpamCop, for all the criticism it gets, DOES report abused proxies > quickly and with great reliability - far more reliably in the case > of proxies than, say, the human victims of the abuse. It might pay > to set up a special process with Spamcop to get those reports at an > unpublished box, and put them through an automated process to spot > any with the "proxy" keywords. Pity that spamcop spams people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |