How do I stop Junk Mail (Spam) ?

I used to know this, but do not remember anymore.
I can't get the filter to work.
Using SM 2.33.1.

Suddenly getting "Pandora Outlet" adverts and 
unsubscribing must not be in the Chinese Lexicon !

DoctorBill
0
DoctorBill
1/10/2017 12:19:23 AM
mozilla.support.seamonkey 12341 articles. 0 followers. Post Follow

27 Replies
109 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 35

DoctorBill wrote:

> I used to know this, but do not remember anymore. I can't get the filter
> to work. Using SM 2.33.1.
> 
> Suddenly getting "Pandora Outlet" adverts and unsubscribing must not be
> in the Chinese Lexicon !

All unsubscribing will do is alert the spammer you have a valid email 
address so he will send you a whole lot *more* spam. He will also sell 
your address as "good and verified" to other spammers.

In the source of the message, read the link you clicked and see the 
personal trackers that you sent back to the spammer.

Go to the options and make sure you have the filtering turned on.
0
Richard
1/10/2017 1:21:49 AM
DoctorBill wrote:
> I used to know this, but do not remember anymore. I can't get the
> filter to work. Using SM 2.33.1.
>
> Suddenly getting "Pandora Outlet" adverts and unsubscribing must not
> be in the Chinese Lexicon !
>
> DoctorBill

As noted separately, it's not a good idea to unsubscribe from something 
that you didn't subscribe to. The spammer likely harvested your address 
somehow, and once they have it, there's no way of getting them to 
discard it.

For this kind of spam, it's difficult to build filters to discard -- 
spammers routinely vary both From: and Subject: lines to try to foil 
filters, and unless you have a spammer that's uncommonly stupid, you'll 
spend far more time trying to construct and maintain rules than you will 
in actually discarding the stuff.

Your better bet is using the spam filters provided in Seamonkey. Those 
are what are called "Bayesian" filters -- if you mark something as Junk, 
then every message that is similar (and that's not just From: or 
Subject: but the full collection of headers, body, and attachments) will 
also be considered to be Junk. To be really effective, a Bayesian filter 
needs to be given at least 100 samples of both spam and ham, and the 
Bayesian filters done by Mozilla don't really allow for an "unknown" 
condition.  However, after you see three or four of these, and mark as 
Junk, subsequent messages are likely to be automatically marked as Junk.

There's more than one way of designating a message as Junk or Not Junk, 
when viewing the folder list pane:

- Use lower case "j" to mark as junk, capital "J" to mark as not junk
- Right click on the message, go to "Mark", then select either "junk" or 
"not junk"
- If your folder summary is set to show message junk status, click on 
that column -- a junk message will show a flame icon.

I believe that the default handling for junk mail is that if the filter 
finds something that is evaluated as junk, or that you specifically mark 
something as junk, then the message is immediately moved to the 
account's Junk folder.  That's how I have mine set, but there's a number 
personal preferences that you can get to, by going to the account 
settings, and checking options in Junk Settings.

When you're playing with this, you need to pay attention to your Junk 
folder (to make sure that you're not getting legitimate messages thrown 
in). If you get a legit message that turns up in the Junk folder, then 
you need to make sure you mark that as Not Junk.  Doing so will move the 
message back to your inbox, as well as train the filter better 
differentiate between junk and non-junk.

Smith
0
NFN
1/10/2017 4:28:55 PM
NFN Smith composed on 2017-01-10 09:28 (UTC-0700):

> There's more than one way of designating a message as Junk or Not Junk,
> when viewing the folder list pane:

> - Use lower case "j" to mark as junk, capital "J" to mark as not junk
> - Right click on the message, go to "Mark", then select either "junk" or
> "not junk"
> - If your folder summary is set to show message junk status, click on
> that column -- a junk message will show a flame icon.

Or use customize toolbar to include a junk button. Mine is placed between 
forward and stop, with two flexible spaces on each side of it to minimize 
likelihood of an accidental click on it.
-- 
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

  Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/
0
Felix
1/10/2017 4:51:59 PM
DoctorBill wrote:
> I used to know this, but do not remember anymore.
> I can't get the filter to work.
> Using SM 2.33.1.
> 
> Suddenly getting "Pandora Outlet" adverts and unsubscribing must not be 
> in the Chinese Lexicon !
> 
> DoctorBill

funny, I was just on the line with our ISP (freaking cox.net) about a 
flood of new spam from  (AT)onmicrosoft.com... doesn't seem to matter 
how many times I mark their whole domain as spam, I seem to be getting 
exponentially more...

as other have said, never unsubscribe from something you never 
subscribed to in the first place. Also don't allow images to open 
automatically in your e'mail.

This is a fresh install of Seamonkey on  my elderly laptop, so I'll be 
doing the spam filtering from zero once again.

oh, BTW, cox.net's home internet support is useless...

sean
-- 
"The Purpose of Life is to be happy"
    ~ Dalai Lama XIV
0
sean
1/10/2017 11:50:54 PM
sean wrote:

> funny, I was just on the line with our ISP (freaking cox.net) about a
> flood of new spam from  (AT)onmicrosoft.com... doesn't seem to matter
> how many times I mark their whole domain as spam, I seem to be getting
> exponentially more...

A WHOIS lookup indicates that onmicrosoft.com is owned by Microsoft. Of 
course, it is entirely possible that a professional spammer is simply 
using that domain name in his spew.

What is the nature of these emails that you are classifying as spam? 
0
Richard
1/11/2017 1:06:31 AM
Richard Alan wrote:
> sean wrote:
>
>> funny, I was just on the line with our ISP (freaking cox.net) about
>> a flood of new spam from  (AT)onmicrosoft.com... doesn't seem to
>> matter how many times I mark their whole domain as spam, I seem to
>> be getting exponentially more...
>
> A WHOIS lookup indicates that onmicrosoft.com is owned by Microsoft.
> Of course, it is entirely possible that a professional spammer is
> simply using that domain name in his spew.
>
> What is the nature of these emails that you are classifying as spam?

If the domain is owned by Microsoft, then chances are high that the 
content is forged. A check of the Received: headers (ctrl-U) is likely 
to show one or more servers prior to Cox that are unrelated, either 
servers that are owned by spammers, or exploited servers (either 
dedicated servers, or end-user computers with rogue mail servers installed).

I doubt that the content is coming from Microsoft.

At server level (i.e., Cox), there are a variety of tools available for 
fighting this kind of stuff. The most prominent is with DNS blacklists, 
and/or use of content-filtering tools such as SpamAssassin, but it takes 
an admin that's really focused on that kind of thing, who knows what 
he's doing, and can give it sufficient attention. And the most effective 
DNSBL, spamhaus.org, isn't free, for a large provider, such as Cox.

 From my own history with Cox (I've been a customer of theirs in the 
past), I don't think they're particularly serious about being a mail 
service provider. As with most connectivity providers, they'll provide 
email, but it's mostly an add-on service, especially in the consumer 
space. For consumers, they're far more focused on connectivity, 
especially in trying to get you to sign up for their most profitable 
offerings, bundling with their television and phone products, and maybe 
even convincing you to let them be the reseller for your cell phone service.

Several years ago, when I left Cox, my new provider provided me an email 
account. I don't remember even what the address is, and I don't think I 
ever activated the account, because for years, I've done my mail through 
a dedicated mail service provider.

In my view, if you simply want mail, you're fine with getting it from 
your connectivity provider. If you want more than that, then you need to 
be using a dedicated mail service provider (including more advanced spam 
filtering). And if you want to avoid having your content being exploited 
by your provider (e.g., gmail, hotmail, yahoo, etc.) consider the option 
of moving to a paid service, where the provider is serving you, as a 
paid customer. The other benefit of using a provider that's not your 
connectivity provider is that if you change connectivity providers, then 
you don't have to make a corresponding change in your email address.

Smith


0
NFN
1/11/2017 3:51:00 PM
NFN Smith wrote:
> Richard Alan wrote:
>> sean wrote:
>>
>>> funny, I was just on the line with our ISP
>>> (freaking cox.net) about
>>> a flood of new spam from
>>> (AT)onmicrosoft.com... doesn't seem to
>>> matter how many times I mark their whole domain
>>> as spam, I seem to
>>> be getting exponentially more...
>>
>> A WHOIS lookup indicates that onmicrosoft.com is
>> owned by Microsoft.
>> Of course, it is entirely possible that a
>> professional spammer is
>> simply using that domain name in his spew.
>>
>> What is the nature of these emails that you are
>> classifying as spam?
>
> If the domain is owned by Microsoft, then chances
> are high that the content is forged. A check of
> the Received: headers (ctrl-U) is likely to show
> one or more servers prior to Cox that are
> unrelated, either servers that are owned by
> spammers, or exploited servers (either dedicated
> servers, or end-user computers with rogue mail
> servers installed).
>
> I doubt that the content is coming from Microsoft.
>
> At server level (i.e., Cox), there are a variety
> of tools available for fighting this kind of
> stuff. The most prominent is with DNS blacklists,
> and/or use of content-filtering tools such as
> SpamAssassin, but it takes an admin that's really
> focused on that kind of thing, who knows what he's
> doing, and can give it sufficient attention. And
> the most effective DNSBL, spamhaus.org, isn't
> free, for a large provider, such as Cox.
>
>  From my own history with Cox (I've been a
> customer of theirs in the past), I don't think
> they're particularly serious about being a mail
> service provider. As with most connectivity
> providers, they'll provide email, but it's mostly
> an add-on service, especially in the consumer
> space. For consumers, they're far more focused on
> connectivity, especially in trying to get you to
> sign up for their most profitable offerings,
> bundling with their television and phone products,
> and maybe even convincing you to let them be the
> reseller for your cell phone service.
>
> Several years ago, when I left Cox, my new
> provider provided me an email account. I don't
> remember even what the address is, and I don't
> think I ever activated the account, because for
> years, I've done my mail through a dedicated mail
> service provider.
>
> In my view, if you simply want mail, you're fine
> with getting it from your connectivity provider.
> If you want more than that, then you need to be
> using a dedicated mail service provider (including
> more advanced spam filtering). And if you want to
> avoid having your content being exploited by your
> provider (e.g., gmail, hotmail, yahoo, etc.)
> consider the option of moving to a paid service,
> where the provider is serving you, as a paid
> customer. The other benefit of using a provider
> that's not your connectivity provider is that if
> you change connectivity providers, then you don't
> have to make a corresponding change in your email
> address.
>
> Smith
>
>

I ordered some machine stuff out of China on the 
Internet and have gotten the items quickly and w/o 
BS (Spam).  But just lately I think the last one 
sold my address to spammers.
COACH Outlet
Pandora Store
If I understood what to do with the SM Filter(s),
maybe I could at least get those dumped as they 
come in.
My problem is that if I don't work with these 
tools on a constant basis, I forget all the 
details - one cannot keep up with all the myriad
details of today's digital world !  Not possible -
- especially if you are a senior (74).
I can't remember what I ate for dinner last night!

Right wise guys - so go tell me to live in a 
"Home" and be fed pablum by a 22 year old fat male 
nurse !

DoctorBill

0
DoctorBill
1/11/2017 4:41:10 PM
On 1/11/2017 9:51 AM, NFN Smith wrote:
>[snip]
>
> Several years ago, when I left Cox, my new provider provided me
> an email account. I don't remember even what the address is, and
> I don't think I ever activated the account, because for years,
> I've done my mail through a dedicated mail service provider.
>
> In my view, if you simply want mail, you're fine with getting it
> from your connectivity provider. If you want more than that, then
> you need to be using a dedicated mail service provider (including
> more advanced spam filtering). And if you want to avoid having
> your content being exploited by your provider (e.g., gmail,
> hotmail, yahoo, etc.) consider the option of moving to a paid
> service, where the provider is serving you, as a paid customer.
> The other benefit of using a provider that's not your
> connectivity provider is that if you change connectivity
> providers, then you don't have to make a corresponding change in
> your email address.
>

I've agree with the above.
I have used paid email and news servers for years for that reason.
I find it particularly beneficial that my mail provider is a 
local company.


0
Richard
1/11/2017 4:51:00 PM
DoctorBill wrote:

>
> I ordered some machine stuff out of China on the Internet and have
> gotten the items quickly and w/o BS (Spam).  But just lately I think
> the last one sold my address to spammers. COACH Outlet Pandora Store

It's possible that the merchant sold your address, but there's some 
number of possible ways that it could have been leaked, as well.  My own 
experience with spam for knock-off luxury goods is that the operations 
who do those tend to be aggressive about harvesting, including scraping 
from web pages, dumps of address books from hacked email accounts, even 
hacking of merchants, etc.  Once those guys have your address, they'll 
never get rid of it, and they may also sell to other spamming operations.

This is a place where it's wise not to rely on a single email address, 
but have several that you use, for different purposes and different 
audiences. One of the things that I've always done is that I keep an 
address with one of the big free providers. When I'm doing purchasing, I 
almost always use that address, rather than my primary working and 
personal addresses. I consider that account to be a throw-away address, 
and normally, I check that inbox only if I'm explicitly expecting 
something to be sent there. The spam filtering on that provider is 
decent, and I don't see a lot of spam there.

> If I understood what to do with the SM Filter(s), maybe I could at
> least get those dumped as they come in. My problem is that if I don't
> work with these tools on a constant basis,

Filtering can be of those places where it's easy to forget the details 
of the mechanics, if you don't interact with them regularly.  Thus, my 
previous advice to rely on the junk mail filter as your first line of 
defense.

Building and maintaining filters can be easier, if you keep in mind that 
a filter has two parts: the logic portion, and the action portion.  The 
logic portion is a matter of identifying messages, and the action 
portion is what you do with the messages you find.

The logic portion tends to take the most work, and something that helps 
is that you don't try to do too much with a single filtering rule. To 
me, one of the weaknesses of the filtering structure is that it doesn't 
support more advanced Boolean logic -- in a single rule, if you have 
multiple conditions, you're limited to "all match" (i.e., AND) or "any 
match" (i.e. "OR), and I like the ability to do things like "X AND (Y OR 
Z)", but that's more of an advanced construct.

Something that can help you on crafting your rules logic is to make use 
of the Seamonkey search tool (SHIFT-Ctrl-S) . If you have a bunch of 
samples of the stuff that you want to filter, you can put into a 
temporary folder. Then use the search tool to create the necessary 
conditions that will find all the messages in that folder that you want 
to get rid of. If you want to make sure that you're not hitting messages 
that you want to keep, you can copy a bunch of legit messages into that 
folder, as well.

Once you have conditions that work for you, then you can use those to 
create a filter.

One other suggestion -- as you're debugging a filter (or multiple 
filters), it's worth enabling the filtering log, as that will allow you 
to see which which filters are processing which messages.

Smith

0
NFN
1/11/2017 5:40:25 PM
DoctorBill wrote:

> If I understood what to do with the SM Filter(s),
> maybe I could at least get those dumped as they come in.

If you haven't yet .. start with the Bayesian filter tool which is a part 
of SeaMonkey. You have to train it.

> My problem is that if I don't work with these tools on a constant basis,
> I forget all the details - one cannot keep up with all the myriad
> details of today's digital world !  Not possible -
> - especially if you are a senior (74).

Hey, you're a youngster! You're way too young to play the age card.  :-)

> I can't remember what I ate for dinner last night!

I had Mexican lasagna.

> Right wise guys - so go tell me to live in a "Home" and be fed pablum by
> a 22 year old fat male nurse !

<chortle!>
0
Richard
1/11/2017 5:41:28 PM
DoctorBill wrote:
>
> I ordered some machine stuff out of China on the Internet and have gotten the items
> quickly and w/o BS (Spam).  But just lately I think the last one sold my address to spammers.
> COACH Outlet
> Pandora Store
> If I understood what to do with the SM Filter(s),
> maybe I could at least get those dumped as they come in.
> My problem is that if I don't work with these tools on a constant basis, I forget all the
> details - one cannot keep up with all the myriad
> details of today's digital world !  Not possible -
> - especially if you are a senior (74).
> I can't remember what I ate for dinner last night!

Use gmail for online purchases.  New vendor = new gmail address.
I must have had 30 or 40 gmail addresses by now.
When the spam starts I delete that address from Google.
I never give out my main ISP address.

0
Paul
1/11/2017 10:15:27 PM
Paul in Houston, TX wrote:
> DoctorBill wrote:
>>
>> I ordered some machine stuff out of China on the
>> Internet and have gotten the items
>> quickly and w/o BS (Spam).  But just lately I
>> think the last one sold my address to spammers.
>> COACH Outlet
>> Pandora Store
>> If I understood what to do with the SM Filter(s),
>> maybe I could at least get those dumped as they
>> come in.
>> My problem is that if I don't work with these
>> tools on a constant basis, I forget all the
>> details - one cannot keep up with all the myriad
>> details of today's digital world !  Not possible -
>> - especially if you are a senior (74).
>> I can't remember what I ate for dinner last night!
>
> Use gmail for online purchases.  New vendor = new
> gmail address.
> I must have had 30 or 40 gmail addresses by now.
> When the spam starts I delete that address from
> Google.
> I never give out my main ISP address.
>

Clever !  Wish I had thought of that !  Smart fellow !

I am off to start a new gmail account.

I should make the Username "Don'tSpamMe"

DoctorBill
0
DoctorBill
1/11/2017 10:36:04 PM
DoctorBill wrote:
> Paul in Houston, TX wrote:
>> DoctorBill wrote:
>>>
>>> I ordered some machine stuff out of China on the
>>> Internet and have gotten the items
>>> quickly and w/o BS (Spam).  But just lately I
>>> think the last one sold my address to spammers.
>>> COACH Outlet
>>> Pandora Store
>>> If I understood what to do with the SM Filter(s),
>>> maybe I could at least get those dumped as they
>>> come in.
>>> My problem is that if I don't work with these
>>> tools on a constant basis, I forget all the
>>> details - one cannot keep up with all the myriad
>>> details of today's digital world !  Not possible -
>>> - especially if you are a senior (74).
>>> I can't remember what I ate for dinner last night!
>>
>> Use gmail for online purchases.  New vendor = new
>> gmail address.
>> I must have had 30 or 40 gmail addresses by now.
>> When the spam starts I delete that address from
>> Google.
>> I never give out my main ISP address.
>>
>
> Clever !  Wish I had thought of that !  Smart fellow !
>
> I am off to start a new gmail account.
>
> I should make the Username "Don'tSpamMe"
>
> DoctorBill

I was speaking of web gmail and not pop or imap.
Gmail allows mail forwarding and you can turn that on and off as needed.
I fwd several of the important gmail accts to my main isp mail.
My gmail verification (they will ask) is another gmail account.

0
Paul
1/11/2017 11:39:42 PM
Paul in Houston, TX wrote:
> DoctorBill wrote:
>> Paul in Houston, TX wrote:
>>> DoctorBill wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I ordered some machine stuff out of China on the
>>>> Internet and have gotten the items
>>>> quickly and w/o BS (Spam).  But just lately I
>>>> think the last one sold my address to spammers.
>>>> COACH Outlet
>>>> Pandora Store
>>>> If I understood what to do with the SM Filter(s),
>>>> maybe I could at least get those dumped as they
>>>> come in.
>>>> My problem is that if I don't work with these
>>>> tools on a constant basis, I forget all the
>>>> details - one cannot keep up with all the myriad
>>>> details of today's digital world !  Not
>>>> possible -
>>>> - especially if you are a senior (74).
>>>> I can't remember what I ate for dinner last
>>>> night!
>>>
>>> Use gmail for online purchases.  New vendor = new
>>> gmail address.
>>> I must have had 30 or 40 gmail addresses by now.
>>> When the spam starts I delete that address from
>>> Google.
>>> I never give out my main ISP address.
>>>
>>
>> Clever !  Wish I had thought of that !  Smart
>> fellow !
>>
>> I am off to start a new gmail account.
>>
>> I should make the Username "Don'tSpamMe"
>>
>> DoctorBill
>
> I was speaking of web gmail and not pop or imap.
> Gmail allows mail forwarding and you can turn that
> on and off as needed.
> I fwd several of the important gmail accts to my
> main isp mail.
> My gmail verification (they will ask) is another
> gmail account.
>
Yes - I know.  I always give false information 
when I open an account.
Why in God's name would you open an E-Mail account 
with your real information when the whole world is 
out to screw you !?
It is amazing how one is supposed to bare one's 
life to a world out to crucify you.
It is all a "Ratchet" - it only goes one way 
incrementally against you.  NEVER goes back.

0
DoctorBill
1/12/2017 6:44:14 AM
On 01/10/2017 06:06 PM, Richard Alan wrote:
> sean wrote:
> 
>> funny, I was just on the line with our ISP (freaking cox.net) about a
>> flood of new spam from  (AT)onmicrosoft.com... doesn't seem to matter
>> how many times I mark their whole domain as spam, I seem to be getting
>> exponentially more...
> 
> A WHOIS lookup indicates that onmicrosoft.com is owned by Microsoft. Of
> course, it is entirely possible that a professional spammer is simply
> using that domain name in his spew.
> 
> What is the nature of these emails that you are classifying as spam?
	
pondering... not really sure y'all want me forwarding the headers here...

lots of variation of spam and phishing offers all of which contain 
onmicrosoft.com within the from, but not the reply to:

but I can with some direction about what to obscure or delete...

sean
-- 
The purpose of life is to be happy.
      ~ Dalai Lama
0
sean
1/17/2017 11:49:01 PM
sean wrote:

> On 01/10/2017 06:06 PM, Richard Alan wrote:
>> sean wrote:
>>> funny, I was just on the line with our ISP (freaking cox.net) about a
>>> flood of new spam from  (AT)onmicrosoft.com... doesn't seem to matter
>>> how many times I mark their whole domain as spam, I seem to be getting
>>> exponentially more...
>> 
>> A WHOIS lookup indicates that onmicrosoft.com is owned by Microsoft. Of
>> course, it is entirely possible that a professional spammer is simply
>> using that domain name in his spew.
>> 
>> What is the nature of these emails that you are classifying as spam?
> 	
> pondering... not really sure y'all want me forwarding the headers
> here...

No, not headers. By the "nature" I meant general content.

> lots of variation of spam and phishing offers all of which contain
> onmicrosoft.com within the from, but not the reply to:

You could get the sending IP addresses from the headers and look up where 
they are being sent from.
 
> but I can with some direction about what to obscure or delete...

Probably not worth the time. I don't have time to look them up for you. 
I'd say simply that a spammer found your address, and he uses the 
Microsoft address as his From:.

Train the filter.
0
Richard
1/18/2017 1:06:25 AM
On 01/17/2017 06:06 PM, Richard Alan wrote:
> sean wrote:
> 
>> On 01/10/2017 06:06 PM, Richard Alan wrote:
>>> sean wrote:
>>>> funny, I was just on the line with our ISP (freaking cox.net) about a
>>>> flood of new spam from  (AT)onmicrosoft.com... doesn't seem to matter
>>>> how many times I mark their whole domain as spam, I seem to be getting
>>>> exponentially more...
>>>
>>> A WHOIS lookup indicates that onmicrosoft.com is owned by Microsoft. Of
>>> course, it is entirely possible that a professional spammer is simply
>>> using that domain name in his spew.
>>>
>>> What is the nature of these emails that you are classifying as spam?
>> 	
>> pondering... not really sure y'all want me forwarding the headers
>> here...
> 
> No, not headers. By the "nature" I meant general content.

same sorts of things from back in the olden days, viagra, cialis, 
insurance, rate notices, gift cards for you, $100 amaz0n rwards, this 1 
thing,
> 
>> lots of variation of spam and phishing offers all of which contain
>> onmicrosoft.com within the from, but not the reply to:
> 
> You could get the sending IP addresses from the headers and look up where
> they are being sent from.

originating IPs?  like this [2a02:6ea0:c201:0:9320:90fd:9bec:ab67]
originator.org ?  etyszrt4.onmicrosoft.com is in many of them


>> but I can with some direction about what to obscure or delete...
> 
> Probably not worth the time. I don't have time to look them up for you.
> I'd say simply that a spammer found your address, and he uses the
> Microsoft address as his From:.
> 
> Train the filter.
> 

I have had years of training the filter under my belt... this one is 
eluding the filters... @cox.net techs were of no help... cox's filters 
do not work no matter how many times i mark the whole @onmicrosoft 
domain as spam...

just sorta a personal mission to defeat this one i guess...




-- 
The purpose of life is to be happy.
      ~ Dalai Lama
0
sean
1/18/2017 10:03:50 PM
sean wrote:

> On 01/17/2017 06:06 PM, Richard Alan wrote:
>> [snippage]
>> No, not headers. By the "nature" I meant general content.
> 
> same sorts of things from back in the olden days, viagra, cialis,
> insurance, rate notices, gift cards for you, $100 amaz0n rwards, this 1
> thing,

So then, ordinary spam.

>> You could get the sending IP addresses from the headers and look up
>> where they are being sent from.
> 
> originating IPs?  like this [2a02:6ea0:c201:0:9320:90fd:9bec:ab67]
> originator.org ?

No, that's not an IP address. Find it, and check it at a site like this 
one:

http://whatismyipaddress.com/ip-lookup

>  etyszrt4.onmicrosoft.com is in many of them

Set filter for "From address *contains* onmicrosoft.com"...

>> Train the filter.
> 
> I have had years of training the filter under my belt... this one is
> eluding the filters... @cox.net techs were of no help... cox's filters
> do not work no matter how many times i mark the whole @onmicrosoft
> domain as spam...

Are you using "contains"?
0
Richard
1/18/2017 10:16:29 PM
On 01/18/2017 03:16 PM, Richard Alan wrote:
> sean wrote:
> 
>> On 01/17/2017 06:06 PM, Richard Alan wrote:
>>> [snippage]
>>> No, not headers. By the "nature" I meant general content.
>>
>> same sorts of things from back in the olden days, viagra, cialis,
>> insurance, rate notices, gift cards for you, $100 amaz0n rwards, this 1
>> thing,
> 
> So then, ordinary spam.
> 
>>> You could get the sending IP addresses from the headers and look up
>>> where they are being sent from.
>>
>> originating IPs?  like this [2a02:6ea0:c201:0:9320:90fd:9bec:ab67]
>> originator.org ?
> 
> No, that's not an IP address. Find it, and check it at a site like this
> one:
> 
> http://whatismyipaddress.com/ip-lookup
> 
>>   etyszrt4.onmicrosoft.com is in many of them
> 
> Set filter for "From address *contains* onmicrosoft.com"...
> 
>>> Train the filter.
>>
>> I have had years of training the filter under my belt... this one is
>> eluding the filters... @cox.net techs were of no help... cox's filters
>> do not work no matter how many times i mark the whole @onmicrosoft
>> domain as spam...
> 
> Are you using "contains"?

Yes, I'm using contains... its not that I dunno how to filter it out of 
my inbox, but I like defeating the source. I've had zero spam for a 
number of years... absolutely zero incoming.

Perhaps I'm tilting at windmills, Don Quixote was the first book I 
recollect my father handing me to read in 2nd grade.

Taking this on as a distraction & challenge as I divert my attention 
away from my oh so political mother wanting to be friends on facebook...

IP:	104.47.40.128
Decimal:	1747921024
Hostname:	mail-co1nam03on0128.outbound.protection.outlook.com
ASN:	8075
ISP:	Microsoft Corporation
Organization:	Microsoft Azure
Services:	Likely mail server
Type:	Corporate
Assignment:	Static IP

I'm guessing now though, there's probably no good reason to report it 
back to any of the addresses listed on the whois page for the 
onmicrosoft domain, likely to only get my own self blacklisted

http://www.whois.com/whois/markmonitor.com

sean
-- 
The purpose of life is to be happy.
      ~ Dalai Lama
0
sean
1/19/2017 5:41:17 PM
On 01/19/2017 10:41 AM, sean wrote:
> On 01/18/2017 03:16 PM, Richard Alan wrote:
>> sean wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/17/2017 06:06 PM, Richard Alan wrote:
>>>> [snippage]
>>>> No, not headers. By the "nature" I meant general content.
>>>
>>> same sorts of things from back in the olden days, viagra, cialis,
>>> insurance, rate notices, gift cards for you, $100 amaz0n rwards, this 1
>>> thing,
>>
>> So then, ordinary spam.
>>
>>>> You could get the sending IP addresses from the headers and look up
>>>> where they are being sent from.
>>>
>>> originating IPs?  like this [2a02:6ea0:c201:0:9320:90fd:9bec:ab67]
>>> originator.org ?
>>
>> No, that's not an IP address. Find it, and check it at a site like this
>> one:
>>
>> http://whatismyipaddress.com/ip-lookup
>>
>>>   etyszrt4.onmicrosoft.com is in many of them
>>
>> Set filter for "From address *contains* onmicrosoft.com"...
>>
>>>> Train the filter.
>>>
>>> I have had years of training the filter under my belt... this one is
>>> eluding the filters... @cox.net techs were of no help... cox's filters
>>> do not work no matter how many times i mark the whole @onmicrosoft
>>> domain as spam...
>>
>> Are you using "contains"?
> 
> Yes, I'm using contains... its not that I dunno how to filter it out of 
> my inbox, but I like defeating the source. I've had zero spam for a 
> number of years... absolutely zero incoming.
> 
> Perhaps I'm tilting at windmills, Don Quixote was the first book I 
> recollect my father handing me to read in 2nd grade.
> 
> Taking this on as a distraction & challenge as I divert my attention 
> away from my oh so political mother wanting to be friends on facebook...
> 
> IP:    104.47.40.128
> Decimal:    1747921024
> Hostname:    mail-co1nam03on0128.outbound.protection.outlook.com
> ASN:    8075
> ISP:    Microsoft Corporation
> Organization:    Microsoft Azure
> Services:    Likely mail server
> Type:    Corporate
> Assignment:    Static IP
> 
> I'm guessing now though, there's probably no good reason to report it 
> back to any of the addresses listed on the whois page for the 
> onmicrosoft domain, likely to only get my own self blacklisted
> 
> http://www.whois.com/whois/markmonitor.com
> 
> sean


Rather ironic that the originating server is from a "brand protection 
company" ... ... Is this what Microsoft's Azure morphed into?

https://www.markmonitor.com/

I'm e'mailing all the addresses on that page with a polite  request to 
double check their servers... ;~)


sean
-- 
The purpose of life is to be happy.
      ~ Dalai Lama
0
sean
1/19/2017 6:06:37 PM
sean wrote:

> On 01/19/2017 10:41 AM, sean wrote:
>> On 01/18/2017 03:16 PM, Richard Alan wrote:
[snippage]
>>> Are you using "contains"?
>> 
>> Yes, I'm using contains... its not that I dunno how to filter it out of
>> my inbox, but I like defeating the source. I've had zero spam for a
>> number of years... absolutely zero incoming.

You'll never be able to defeat a true spammer.

>> Perhaps I'm tilting at windmills, Don Quixote was the first book I
>> recollect my father handing me to read in 2nd grade.
>> 
>> Taking this on as a distraction & challenge as I divert my attention
>> away from my oh so political mother wanting to be friends on
>> facebook...
>> 
>> IP:    104.47.40.128   ...

Is that actually the sending address of your spam?


>> I'm guessing now though, there's probably no good reason to report it
>> back to any of the addresses listed on the whois page for the
>> onmicrosoft domain, likely to only get my own self blacklisted
>> 
>> http://www.whois.com/whois/markmonitor.com
>> 
>> sean
> 
> Rather ironic that the originating server is from a "brand protection
> company" ... ... Is this what Microsoft's Azure morphed into?
> 
> https://www.markmonitor.com/

I've no idea what you're getting into there.

> I'm e'mailing all the addresses on that page with a polite  request to
> double check their servers... ;~)

I see your smiley. I also doubt if you will ever be successful in your 
quest. Just figure out a way to filter it or ignore it.
0
Richard
1/19/2017 9:18:29 PM
Richard Alan wrote:
> sean wrote:
> 
>> On 01/19/2017 10:41 AM, sean wrote:
>>> On 01/18/2017 03:16 PM, Richard Alan wrote:
> [snippage]
>>>> Are you using "contains"?
>>>
>>> Yes, I'm using contains... its not that I dunno how to filter it out of
>>> my inbox, but I like defeating the source. I've had zero spam for a
>>> number of years... absolutely zero incoming.
> 
> You'll never be able to defeat a true spammer.
> 
>>> Perhaps I'm tilting at windmills, Don Quixote was the first book I
>>> recollect my father handing me to read in 2nd grade.
>>>
>>> Taking this on as a distraction & challenge as I divert my attention
>>> away from my oh so political mother wanting to be friends on
>>> facebook...
>>>
>>> IP:    104.47.40.128   ...
> 
> Is that actually the sending address of your spam?
> 
> 
>>> I'm guessing now though, there's probably no good reason to report it
>>> back to any of the addresses listed on the whois page for the
>>> onmicrosoft domain, likely to only get my own self blacklisted
>>>
>>> http://www.whois.com/whois/markmonitor.com
>>>
>>> sean
>>
>> Rather ironic that the originating server is from a "brand protection
>> company" ... ... Is this what Microsoft's Azure morphed into?
>>
>> https://www.markmonitor.com/
> 
> I've no idea what you're getting into there.
> 
>> I'm e'mailing all the addresses on that page with a polite  request to
>> double check their servers... ;~)
> 
> I see your smiley. I also doubt if you will ever be successful in your
> quest. Just figure out a way to filter it or ignore it.
> 

Happy to report, its been more than a week since I received any junk 
mail from the previously offending domains attached to markmonitor 
(dot)com. While they denied any cuplability, they must have forwarded it 
to the IT department. Since that page is NOT a person but a company 
which "monitors" the brand reputations of many "marks"

sean
-- 
who still misses Tagzilla...
0
sean
2/2/2017 6:24:07 PM
sean wrote:
> Richard Alan wrote:
>> sean wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/19/2017 10:41 AM, sean wrote:
>>>> On 01/18/2017 03:16 PM, Richard Alan wrote:
>> [snippage]
>>>>> Are you using "contains"?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I'm using contains... its not that I dunno how to filter it out of
>>>> my inbox, but I like defeating the source. I've had zero spam for a
>>>> number of years... absolutely zero incoming.
>>
>> You'll never be able to defeat a true spammer.
>>
>>>> Perhaps I'm tilting at windmills, Don Quixote was the first book I
>>>> recollect my father handing me to read in 2nd grade.
>>>>
>>>> Taking this on as a distraction & challenge as I divert my attention
>>>> away from my oh so political mother wanting to be friends on
>>>> facebook...
>>>>
>>>> IP:    104.47.40.128   ...
>>
>> Is that actually the sending address of your spam?
>>
>>
>>>> I'm guessing now though, there's probably no good reason to report it
>>>> back to any of the addresses listed on the whois page for the
>>>> onmicrosoft domain, likely to only get my own self blacklisted
>>>>
>>>> http://www.whois.com/whois/markmonitor.com
>>>>
>>>> sean
>>>
>>> Rather ironic that the originating server is from a "brand protection
>>> company" ... ... Is this what Microsoft's Azure morphed into?
>>>
>>> https://www.markmonitor.com/
>>
>> I've no idea what you're getting into there.
>>
>>> I'm e'mailing all the addresses on that page with a polite  request to
>>> double check their servers... ;~)
>>
>> I see your smiley. I also doubt if you will ever be successful in your
>> quest. Just figure out a way to filter it or ignore it.
>>
>
> Happy to report, its been more than a week since I received any junk
> mail from the previously offending domains attached to markmonitor
> (dot)com. While they denied any cuplability, they must have forwarded it
> to the IT department. Since that page is NOT a person but a company
> which "monitors" the brand reputations of many "marks"
>
> sean
You don't I've been marking the same sends and subjects on a Particular 
email add res as junk  then delete and I still get the same Identical 
subjects and senders day after day after day.  I thought when you marked 
a subject and sender as spam it was supposed to go automatically to Junk 
or spam Folder. Has worked that way in ages.

-- 
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.      "If it's Fixed, Don't Break it"
http://www.phillipmjones.net    mailto:pjonescet@comcast.net
http://phillipjones-cet.net/
0
PhillipJones
2/3/2017 1:48:57 AM
PhillipJones wrote:

> You don't I've been marking the same sends and subjects on a
> Particular email add res as junk  then delete and I still get the
> same Identical subjects and senders day after day after day.  I
> thought when you marked a subject and sender as spam it was supposed
> to go automatically to Junk or spam Folder. Has worked that way in
> ages.

Check your settings at

Edit | Preferences | Mail & Newsgroups | Junk & Suspect Mail

[x] When I mark messages as junk:
	(•) Move them to the account's "Junk" folder
	(o) Delete them

Mark Messages as read:
	[ ] When SeaMonkey determines that they are junk
	[x] When I manually mark them as junk

You may have inadvertently reset (cleared) the training data, in which 
case SM will have forgotten all it ever learned and started over. If you 
resume training it, it'll eventually learn again, but not in one day.

-- 
War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left.
--
Paul B. Gallagher

0
Paul
2/3/2017 2:28:45 AM
Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
> PhillipJones wrote:
>
>> You don't I've been marking the same sends and subjects on a
>> Particular email add res as junk  then delete and I still get the
>> same Identical subjects and senders day after day after day.  I
>> thought when you marked a subject and sender as spam it was supposed
>> to go automatically to Junk or spam Folder. Has worked that way in
>> ages.
>
> Check your settings at
>
> Edit | Preferences | Mail & Newsgroups | Junk & Suspect Mail
>
> [x] When I mark messages as junk:
>     (•) Move them to the account's "Junk" folder
>     (o) Delete them
>
> Mark Messages as read:
>     [ ] When SeaMonkey determines that they are junk
>     [x] When I manually mark them as junk
>
> You may have inadvertently reset (cleared) the training data, in which
> case SM will have forgotten all it ever learned and started over. If you
> resume training it, it'll eventually learn again, but not in one day.
>
Don't remember ever resetting Training data.  maybe  that's what I need 
to do haven't reset in years maybe I am over the limit.

-- 
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T.      "If it's Fixed, Don't Break it"
http://www.phillipmjones.net    mailto:pjonescet@comcast.net
http://phillipjones-cet.net/
0
PhillipJones
2/3/2017 7:38:17 PM
PhillipJones wrote:

> Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
>>
>> You may have inadvertently reset (cleared) the training data, in
>> which case SM will have forgotten all it ever learned and started
>> over. If you resume training it, it'll eventually learn again, but
>> not in one day.
>>
> Don't remember ever resetting Training data.  maybe  that's what I
> need to do haven't reset in years maybe I am over the limit.

Wasn't recommending that, have no reason to think there's a "limit." 
Just offering it as a possible reason SM isn't moving spam to the Junk 
folder.

-- 
War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left.
--
Paul B. Gallagher

0
Paul
2/3/2017 8:17:22 PM
On 4/02/2017 7:17 AM, Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
> PhillipJones wrote:
>
>> Paul B. Gallagher wrote:
>>>
>>> You may have inadvertently reset (cleared) the training data, in
>>> which case SM will have forgotten all it ever learned and started
>>> over. If you resume training it, it'll eventually learn again, but
>>> not in one day.
>>>
>> Don't remember ever resetting Training data.  maybe  that's what I
>> need to do haven't reset in years maybe I am over the limit.
>
> Wasn't recommending that, have no reason to think there's a "limit."
> Just offering it as a possible reason SM isn't moving spam to the Junk
> folder.
>
I would have thought if there was a limit it would cause the "oldest 
since used" Junk setting to be deleted/forgotten!

-- 
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:49.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.46 Build identifier: 20161213183751
or
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:41.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.38 Build identifier: 20150903203501
0
Daniel
2/4/2017 9:09:45 AM
Reply: