IP Addresses Listed On Spam Database
Jun 24, 2008Is it normal for dedicated server providers to give out IPs that are listed on spam database?
I was under the impression that they would check first before assigning it to new clients.
ADVERTISEMENT
IP Addresses Listed On SORBS
Jul 7, 2007I signed up with a new VPS provider and got three IPs and ordered an additional IPS. It turns out all six IPS were listed by SORBS as spam sources.
So I contact the provider and they give me one clean IP but I have to keep the remaining 5 SORBS marked spam IPs that I am going to use for nameservers and "reseller" account with nameservers.
My quetion is . . . is being marked by SORBS going to have any negative effect on my VPS? Alot of places will mention this when looking up a domain like Domain Tools and DNS Stuff, so is this going to make my web sites come off as spammers?
Hotmail - Email Listed As SPAM
Jul 30, 2008I just got a vps and I realised that all email sent to hotmail automatically goes into the spam box (until i approve an email address as being "safe").
I believe that hotmail's senderid and a spf record is the way to go
I have already submitted the senderid form saying i dont have an spf record
for the "domains to be added to the senderid program", i listed a couple of my domains.
1) do i still need an spf record?
2) in the future, will i need to tell customers to use outgoing mailservers under one of the domains i submitted (in the senderid form)?
Which Spam Blockers Have Blocked My IP Addresses?
Jun 26, 2006A few months back one of my servers got slammed with people uploading scripts/phishing scams/etc (those problems have been fixed). But because of all of that the main IP of my server got blacklisted by a ton of spam blocking services due to the scripts spamming people.
Basically wanting to know how I can find out which services/lists have my IP blacklisted so I can contact them about getting off their list.
How To Deal With Spam When Keeping A Client Database
Jan 1, 2009I am using a email list manager to keep contact of our client and I need to send few thousand emails to my members occationally. Now I have noticed that gmail, hotmail and others consider you as a spammer if you send too many email.
But my contacts are legitemate. How Can it manage this list fairly?
CBL Listed
Dec 1, 20074 times already this month we been listed by CBL
i cant for the life of me figure out why!
IP Address XX.XX.XX.XX was found in the CBL.
It was detected at 2007-11-30 16:00 GMT (+/- 30 minutes), approximately 17 hours, 30 minutes ago.
It has been relisted following a previous removal at 2007-11-25 23:59 GMT
I emailed them and it seems i get an autoresponse which makes no sense they reply me the following:
The IP was detected most recently at:
2007:11:20 ~21:00 UTC+/- 15 minutes (approximately 18 hours ago)
sending email in such a way as to strongly indicate that the IP itself
was operating an open http or socks proxy, or a trojan spam package.
In short, this IP is impersonating being a machine we know it _cannot_
be. No properly configured mail server does this under any circumstances.
You will need to examine the machine for a spam trojan or open
proxy. Up-to-date anti-virus tools are essential.
If the IP is a NAT firewall, we strongly recommend configuring the
firewall to prevent machines on your network connecting to the Internet
on port 25, except for machines that are supposed to be mail servers.
Software notes: If you are running Email Architect, set the
"Masqueraded domain" in SMTP service to be the fully qualified
domain name for the machine.
If you are using an Internet Security Systems firewall (eg:
Proventia M10), please contact ISS and obtain new firmware.
They are aware of issues with the CBL. The firmware version
that fixes this bug is, we believe, "3.5" (at least for
the M10).
Useful links:
[url]
[url](see "Securing your System" and "proxies")
[url]
For more information on securing NAT firewalls/gateways, please
see [url]
This entry has already been delisted from the CBL. Unless otherwise
stated, the CBL will relist this IP if the underlying issues are not
resolved, and the CBL detects the same thing again.
has anyone been in this problem before? ive got myself delisted but its just a pain keep waking up each morning to find this happening
is it possible that someoen who is accessing their email through outlook has a virus on their pc?
Where Are Nameservers Listed
Jul 25, 2008Which file can I find my nameservers listed in?
Godaddy was disallowing me to edit nameservers, so cPanel prevented me from setting up ns1.domain.com and ns2.domain.com, this has meant now I have a major problem: A client paid me to develop his site and he has now gone on holiday, he wanted it finished today but I can't put it online because he set the nameservers to ns1.domain.com ns2.domain.com whereas I have had to set up the nameservers as one.domain.com and two.domain.com due to godaddy disallowing me to create ns1 and ns2.
Now my question is: Is it possible to edit a config file that can set up NS1 and NS2 to work along side ONE and TWO? I'm using cPanel and I have root access.
Repeated CBL Listed
Dec 7, 2007They kindly provided me with timestamp as to when detection was happening and they sent me this description:
Timestamp: 2007-12-02 22:55:32
(ive attached the logs from below for around couople of minutes) If anyone knows how to solve this much appreicate it..or if anyone know what could be the issue!
In a nutshell, your IP is forging a well known domain as theEHLO/HELO - imagine connecting to, say aol.com and having your IPHELO as "apple.com". Understandably, when an IP connects to ourservers and presents such an obvious forgery, we're going to consider ita virus emitter or otherwise compromised.] This is what you need to keep in mind when you're trying to resolvesituations like this: 1) Our detections are based on port 25 SMTP connections your IP makesto one or more of our mail servers. The CBL listing _itself_ is theevidence/"proof"/log of the incident. We generally do not keep samples of CBL detections, because thevolumes are so horrendously high (presently more than 700,000detections per day). They never provide any additional information,because the headers, if any, are all fake anyway. In order to preserve the effectiveness of the CBL, informationbeyond what we've already given you will not be revealed.We can sometimes give additional information (eg: more precisetimestamps) if and only if we know it's necessary to find/fixthe problem. 2) The CBL detects suspicious SMTP activity, NOT spamming per-se. Inother words, the CBL detects email being sent in such a way as toindicate that the sender is compromised in some fashion into sendingviruses or spam.
As such, the CBL focuses on identifying how to prevent the behavior infuture, instead of, for example, identifying spammers that need to beterminated. Indeed, in the case of NAT firewalls, it is almost always impossiblefor us to precisely identify which machine behind your NAT is infected. Only your NAT logs (if you keep any and know what to look for) knowwhich machine is infected. In the case of NATs, our focus is on blocking the malicioustraffic getting to the Internet. We can give tips/pointers on howyou can identify specific infected machines behind a NAT, but ourpriority is to prevent _any_ infected machine behind your NATspewing junk to the Internet, because we know that for everyinfected machine you fix, another one (or more) will eventuallyspring up in its place, and we (and we suspect you) don't likeplaying a never-ending game of whack-a-mole. 3) The viruses we detect carry their own SMTP clients with them, and donot attempt to relay through your mail servers. Hence, email transitfilters (either inbound or outbound) on your mail servers can't help.Only AV scanning the infected machine does.
Similarly, the spamware (open proxy or spam trojan) we detect donot route through your mail servers either. 4) Most AV tools aren't very good at detecting/cleaning out establishedinfections. Especially those resulting from day-zero attacks.Particularly since many of these infections open back doors, and theoriginal infection vector downloads many pieces of software that _may_not be in themselves malware, just used in a malicious fashion. 5) The headers don't help at all. Since the virus/spamware has its ownclient, and doesn't pass through your server[s], the only thing knowableabout the virus/spamware is the peer (connection) address at therecipient's mail server - which is what we've listed - your NAT firewallif you have a NAT... Only your NAT firewall logs can tell you anydifferent. Short of AV scanning the infected machine, the only useable informationabout which machine is infected is in your NAT firewall logs - ifyou actually make any logs and keep them long enough. For the most part, then, a CBL listing of an IP means that the IPneeds to be fixed. If it's a NAT IP - port 25 blocking (and youcan find/fix the infected machine[s] at your leisure), if it's nota NAT - virus/malware eradication. 6) Outbound port 25 connection blocking on NAT firewalls (permittingonly your authorized mail servers) is the best solution for NATs. 7) If you have a NAT, once you've implemented port 25 blocking, younot only contain the viruses, your NAT firewall logs will immediatelytell you who is infected or is compromised with a spam trojan oropen proxy. 8) As far as we're aware, once port 25 blocking is instituted in ANAT, the only times people have continued to have trouble with CBLlistings is when the blocking wasn't working for some reason. Itwould be a good idea to test whether the blocking is in fact working.We have suggested procedures for this if you want - ask us.
2007-12-02 22:55:05 [19907] list matching forced to fail: failed to find host name for 201.58.9.244
2007-12-02 22:55:05 [9913] SMTP connection from [81.129.182.181]:60329 I=[69.16.237.199]:25 (TCP/IP connection count = 3)
2007-12-02 22:55:06 [9913] SMTP connection from [85.177.218.230]:9468 I=[69.16.237.199]:25 (TCP/IP connection count = 4)
2007-12-02 22:55:06 [19907] H=(20158009244.user.veloxzone.com.br) [201.58.9.244]:61429 I=[69.16.237.199]:25 F=<vash989@lfcc.edu> rejected RCP$
2007-12-02 22:55:06 [19907] SMTP connection from (20158009244.user.veloxzone.com.br) [201.58.9.244]:61429 I=[69.16.237.199]:25 closed by DROP$
2007-12-02 22:55:07 [19908] ident connection to 71.217.38.129 timed out
2007-12-02 22:55:07 [19909] ident connection to 81.129.182.181 timed out
2007-12-02 22:55:08 [9913] SMTP connection from [213.36.8.1]:3542 I=[69.16.237.199]:25 (TCP/IP connection count = 4)
2007-12-02 22:55:08 [19909] H=host81-129-182-181.range81-129.btcentralplus.com [81.129.182.181]:60329 I=[69.16.237.199]:25 F=<markhuu.Fabris@$
2007-12-02 22:55:08 [19909] SMTP connection from host81-129-182-181.range81-129.btcentralplus.com [81.129.182.181]:60329 I=[69.16.237.199]:25$
2007-12-02 22:55:09 [19910] H=e177218230.adsl.alicedsl.de [85.177.218.230]:9468 I=[69.16.237.199]:25 F=<Vesterinenowao@jcel.com> rejected RCP$
2007-12-02 22:55:09 [19910] SMTP connection from e177218230.adsl.alicedsl.de [85.177.218.230]:9468 I=[69.16.237.199]:25 closed by DROP in ACL
2007-12-02 22:55:09 [19908] H=71-217-38-129.tukw.qwest.net [71.217.38.129]:63507 I=[69.16.237.199]:25 F=<0agwampler@rapidreply.net> rejected $
2007-12-02 22:55:09 [19908] SMTP connection from 71-217-38-129.tukw.qwest.net [71.217.38.129]:63507 I=[69.16.237.199]:25 closed by DROP in ACL
2007-12-02 22:55:09 [19911] H=dyn-213-36-8-1.ppp.tiscali.fr (dyn-213-36-8-129.ppp.tiscali.fr) [213.36.8.1]:3542 I=[69.16.237.199]:25 F=<Norbe$
2007-12-02 22:55:09 [19911] SMTP connection from dyn-213-36-8-1.ppp.tiscali.fr (dyn-213-36-8-129.ppp.tiscali.fr) [213.36.8.1]:3542 I=[69.16.2$
2007-12-02 22:55:13 [9913] SMTP connection from [201.212.156.23]:51905 I=[69.16.237.199]:25 (TCP/IP connection count = 1)
2007-12-02 22:55:13 [9913] SMTP connection from [200.122.38.174]:1152 I=[69.16.237.199]:25 (TCP/IP connection count = 2)
2007-12-02 22:55:14 [9913] SMTP connection from [201.233.222.43]:2980 I=[69.16.237.199]:25 (TCP/IP connection count = 3)
2007-12-02 22:55:16 [19915] ident connection to 201.233.222.43 timed out
2007-12-02 22:55:17 [19915] H=cable201-233-222-43.epm.net.co (castellanos.une.net.co) [201.233.222.43]:2980 I=[69.16.237.199]:25 F=<Chasityse$
2007-12-02 22:55:17 [19915] SMTP connection from cable201-233-222-43.epm.net.co (castellanos.une.net.co) [201.233.222.43]:2980 I=[69.16.237.1$
2007-12-02 22:55:18 [19920] cwd=/home/annajwa/public_html/forum 2 args: /usr/sbin/sendmail bloochunc@bk.ru
2007-12-02 22:55:18 [19920] 1IyxiY-0005BI-5f <= annajwa@host.mpadc.com U=annajwa P=local S=747 T="Welcome to An- Najwa" from <annajwa@host.mp$
2007-12-02 22:55:18 [19921] cwd=/var/spool/exim 3 args: /usr/sbin/exim -Mc 1IyxiY-0005BI-5f
Keep Getting Listed At DSBL
Aug 27, 2007I have a server that keeps getting listed by DSBL. It is RHEL 3 running Plesk and Qmail. In the MAIL config SMTP relay is set to "Authorization is Required" and the SMTP box is checked. I have a couple other very similar server setups and they have never been listed, so I dont know why this one is. I suspect it may be a bug.
As for the last listing (yesterday) here is the exerpt from the maillog showing the SMTP relay
===================
Aug 26 13:36:48 slv3 qmail-queue[426]: scan: the message(drweb.tmp.0PW0bG) sent by nobody@cor.neva.ru to listme@listme.dsbl.org should be passed without checks, because contains uncheckable addresses
Aug 26 13:36:48 slv3 qmail-queue-handlers[428]: to=listme@listme.dsbl.org
Aug 26 13:36:48 slv3 qmail-queue-handlers[428]: recipient[3] = 'listme@listme.dsbl.org'
Aug 26 13:36:48 slv3 qmail-queue-handlers[428]: handlers dir = '/var/qmail//handlers/before-queue/recipient/listme@listme.dsbl.org'
Aug 26 13:36:48 slv3 qmail: 1188153408.989183 starting delivery 7244: msg 2327042 to remote listme@listme.dsbl.org
Aug 26 13:36:48 slv3 qmail-remote-handlers[430]: to=listme@listme.dsbl.org
===================
why my server is relaying?
Server's IP Black Listed On CBL
Jul 19, 2007my server's Ip adresse was found listed at the CBL list.
check this out :
[url]
i think i'm listed for naming issue as they referred me to this page to solve the problem.
what should i do to correct the probleme i made some changes on /etc/hostname and etc/hosts and requested delisting but without positive results.
I'm On debian SARGE.
Google UK: Getting .com Sites Listed? Better To Host In The UK?
Jun 8, 2007I did a site for a UK company that has a .com address, and for various reasons the site is hosted in the US. Unfortunately the site doesn't appear under the google search for pages in the UK.
One reason I chose the US hosting company is that they provide ColdFusion hosting, and my plan is to upgrade the site to use ColdFusion in the near future.
They do also have the .co.uk address registered, which is currently set to forward to the .com address, and that doesn't show up in google at all.
I'm thinking the solutions might be:
1) Move the .com hosting to the UK
2) Get additional hosting for the .co.uk address (uk mirror)
3) Both?
The company is based in the UK, and provides holidays in Montenegro, primarily aiming at the UK market.
When I originally looked into it I could not find a UK host that provided ColdFusion and mySQL 5 - and those that had ColdFusion and other database applicaitons were far more expensive than the US one we're using currently.
What would be the best way forward?
Is My Mail Server Black Listed
Jan 25, 2009we have a dedicatd linux server. we use to send daily newsletters to our customers but for last few days, it looks like our mail server is sending out email to client's spam folder.
Is there any way to diagnose our mail server and find out if there is anything wrong or if our mail server has been black listed?
Is There Any Public Listed Web Hosting Companies
May 19, 2009I would like to know there is any.
View 14 Replies View RelatedCsf Firewall? Error: IP [ipaddress] Is Listed Twice In Ifconfig
Oct 27, 2006I installed chirpy's csf / lfd firewall and when starting firewall I get this
Error: IP [ipaddress] is listed twice in ifconfig!, at line 657
How do I fix this?
My IP Is Listed At Block.blars.org // Spammers.v6net.org
Jul 26, 2007My IP 69.65.102.49 seems to have been listed in this set of RBLs
(block.blars.org, spammers.v6net.org) any ideas on how to get off them?
I have been told that these blacklists are not mainstream however
it is really a mess that they are used by hotmail.com for instance...
Plesk 12.x / Windows :: Drop Unused Listed Databases
Feb 24, 2015Plesk12 has been installed on Windows2012R2. In the Tools and Settings/Database Servers list we have
· Local MySQL server (default for MySQL)
· .MSSQLSERVER2012
· sql-db-1 (default for MS SQL)
We only expect to use the remote sql-db-1 database for user databases.
Can we delete the other 2 databases and is this recommended? Does the Local MySQL server contain the Plesk Management database/schema?
Plesk 11.x / Linux :: Report / List / Statistics Of Top Domains Continuously Gray-listed?
Oct 15, 2014I'm looking for a way to get a report of the top domains that are continuously greylisted so I can determine which ones need to be put on the "domains- whitelist" because they use different IPs when resending, causing very long delays (hours/days/never) for each message sent.We're using Plesk11 on CentOS 6.4 with Postfix and the Plesk built-in Greylisting option enabled.
# /usr/local/psa/bin/grey_listing --info-server
Grey listing configuration.
Grey listing checking enabled
Grey interval 5 minutes
Expire interval 51840 minutes
Penalty interval 2 minutes
Penalty disabled
Personal grey listing
configuration allowed
[code]....
Black domains patterns list:
SUCCESS: Gathering of server wide information complete.Click to expand...
Plesk 11.x / Windows :: Move Spam To Spam Folder Not Available?
Oct 17, 2013Microsoft Windows Server 2008 R2 Service Pack 1
Panel version 11.0.9 Update #59, last updated at Oct 3, 2013 02:06 AM
MailEnable version 5
I see in the plesk documentation that the screen to enable SPAM filtering for an individual there is an option to "Move spam to the Spam folder". I don't see that option so I am wondering if it is only available on some versions of Plesk, or in combination with certain mail servers. How to make that option available?