Lenz and all,
I am sorry you take the view you do regarding my suggestion.
Very unfortunate. None the less, with the amount of spam
and Yahoo.de sems to allow is a huge waste of bandwidth
which effects directly the stability of the Internet not to mention
irritates unsuspecting users. Hence in part my suggestion. Unless
there is a bonified threat of some sort, expecting mass spammers
like Yahoo and AOL to curtail their network traffic accordingly,
will never occur.
However our members routienly block all AOL traffic/Email and
all Yahoo.de traffic/Email currently, and have for some time.
I suspect they will continue to do so for the forseeable future.
Sent: Oct 22, 2007 4:39 PM
Subject: Re: [nznog] Re Yahoo and Spam...
i see IMHO no use in spamming ICANN for things that that far away from
their responsibilities like this issue. drop the server in blacklists,
try to raise awarenes for the problem at the companies (spam the board
of yahoo/aol) or do something alike. ICANN has nothing to do with
mailservers and ICANN can not take down any address because they
manage the root not the respective second level domains.yahoo.com
registered via markmonitor but i am pretty shure that they will not
take down the domain as well.
the approach you suggest is a bit kindergarden like and shows very
little knowledge of the different responsibilities in the internet.
> Yahoo and AOL are famous for not addressing Spam or
> any abuse complaints. I have in the recent past suggested
> to ICANN that these sites be taken down unless or until
> they actually address abuse concerns in a direct and meaningful
> way and not with "Canned Email responses". Of course
> ICANN has refused to address this situation with Yahoo or
> AOL as well as Google, simply because of the presence in
> which these Domain names represent, which is IMHO besides
> the point. So I would suggest that every time you get
> one of the "Canned Email responses" you direct it to
> the ICANN bod or vint Cerf at the Email addresses I
> CC'ed this response to, until a ligitimate solution is
> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Mark Foster <blakjak(a)blakjak.net>
>> Sent: Oct 19, 2007 6:49 PM
>> To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz
>> Subject: [nznog] Re Yahoo and Spam...
>> Learned NZNOGrs,
>> Some advice, please.
>> Recently an email address that comes to me was sent some Unsolicited
>> Commercial Email from (apparently) a UK based outfit that sells (print)
>> magazine subscriptions.
>> The headers contain this:
>> Received: from smtp107.biz.mail.re2.yahoo.com
>> by mx.blakjak.net
(Postfix) with SMTP id 8C508500D4
>> for <dest@address>; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 12:02:52 +1300 (NZDT)
>> They contain additional Received: headers which would imply that Yahoo
>> themselves received the message via SMTP from an AOL IP address that
>> Traceroute implies is likely in the UK as well.
>> So I took a full-headers copy of the message and forwarded the complaint
>> to the relevant abuse contacts for both Yahoo and AOL.
>> AOL, i've heard nothing (unsuprising). Yahoo, I had a response within 2-3
>> days which basically absolved them of responsibility, as follows:
>> Thank you for writing to Yahoo! Mail.
>> I understand your frustration in receiving unsolicited email. While we
>> investigate all reported violations against the Yahoo! Terms of Service
>> (TOS), in this particular case the message you received was not sent
>> through the Yahoo! Mail system.
>> Yahoo! has no control over activities outside its service, and therefore
>> we cannot take action. You may try contacting the sender's email
>> provider, by identifying the sender's domain and contacting the
>> administrator of that domain. The sender's provider should be in a
>> better position to take appropriate action against the sender's account.
>> The email message itself does contain some information relating to the
>> sender's identity. Yahoo! includes the originating Internet Protocol
>> (IP) address in the full Internet headers of all messages sent through
>> Yahoo! Mail, so that we will have information regarding the origin of
>> messages sent through our system. The originating IP address should be
>> located in the very last "Received" line of the full Internet headers
>> and corresponds to the sender's Internet Service Provider (ISP).
>> Please see the following URL for more assistance:
>> Once you have identified the IP address, you can conduct an IP lookup to
>> determine which ISP provides this person with Internet access. One such
>> lookup tool you may want to try is:
>> You can then attempt to contact that ISP to report any abuse activities
>> occurring within their service.
>> Please let us know if you still need assistance so I may assist you
>> Your patience during this process is greatly appreciated.
>> Thank you again for contacting Yahoo! Mail.
>> I responded back indicating my understanding as being:
>> - That my MTA received it from Yahoo, thus they relayed it...
>> - That headers below the line where my MTA actually is involved, are often
>> I got a very-slightly-reworded version of exactly the same canned response
>> So despite the fact that the sender is very clearly using Yahoo for SMTP
>> (which, one would hope, would establish the sender as a Yahoo! Mail
>> customer), they're pleading ignorance and/or innocence.
>> Any other players had similar dealings with Yahoo (or other free mail
>> providers) ? At what point can the provider realistically abdicate from
>> responsibility when it comes to spam?
>> And the obvious question: Is it fair to expect more from them? Or am I
>> resigned to accept either periodic junk relayed by Yahoo because they
>> can't be held responsible for what individual customers do? (And because
>> in this example, the collateral damage of blackholing them is probably
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!)
> "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
> Abraham Lincoln
> "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
> often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt
> "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
> depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
> P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
> United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
> Updated 1/26/04
> CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
> Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.
> ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt
"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com