"Automatic complaints are sent when a filter whose action is set to Kill after complaining is triggered. For each filter, you can configure who
complaint should be sent to. ... The message body is also scanned for e-mail and website addresses. If any addresses are found, they're added to
lists mentioned above." Source: http://www.spamkiller.com/Features.htmlSpamKiller is spam filtering software. Its purpose is to scan incoming email for spam and take appropriate action in response to those messages that are identified as spam, such as automatic deletion. Another handy function is that
software allows
user to generate automatic and manual complaint emails which
user then sends to
webmaster of
offending domain as well as any number of other recipients such as spam-reporting "authorities" and
webhost and/or ISP of
person sending
offending mail.
Good idea, you say? Fair enough, you say? Well ... maybe. Note
quote above: "... The message body is also scanned for e-mail and website addresses ... [and] added to
lists mentioned above", i.e.
list of recipients of
complaint.
Now, imagine this. Let's say you're a paying advertiser in my ezine. Your ad contains your URL and email address. I spam mail my ezine or send it to someone who forgets they subscribed and they think it's spam.
Imagine further that
recipient of my so-called spam uses SpamKiller software (or some similar program). The software scans
message header and extracts
relevant information about
person who sent
email (me). Fair enough. Assuming that it IS spam, of course.
But
capability of
software doesn't stop there. As mentioned in
above quote, it also scans
message BODY, which contains your ad, and adds your URL and email address to
list of recipients of
complaint. The ever-diligent big-spam-hunter also makes sure that one or more spam-reporting "authorities" is copied on
complaint.
WeStopSpam.net*, diligent, professional organization that it is, immediately and automatically forwards
complaint to abuse@yourdomain.com and your webhost, an equally diligent, professional organization shuts your site down for three days for spamming.
You, of course, learn about all of this AFTER
event.
Think it can't happen to you? Think again. It happened to me. This week. Except I wasn't a paying advertiser in
offending ezine. The publisher of
ezine reprinted one of my articles. The article contained my resource box. The resource box contained my website URL. SpamKiller added my URL to
list of recipients of
email complaining of
"spam", copied WeStopSpam.net and WeStopSpam.net forwarded
email to abuse@ahbbo.com with
result that my webhost, DumbHost*, shut down my site for what was to be three days.
The actual downtime was two hours. By that time I had threatened to sue and they finally got around to actually READING
offending email and realizing that I, in fact, was just an innocent bystander.
There is so much that is wrong in this whole scenario that it's hard to know where to begin.
THE PERSON WHO GENERATED THE COMPLAINT
Let's start with
individual who generated
complaint in
first place. This is
person using
SpamKiller software. His email to me (which was auto-generated by SpamKiller) contained
following subject line:
"UCE Complaint (So-and-So Newsletter*)"
The body started out:
"I have received
attached unsolicited e-mail from someone at your domain. [He had not.]
"I do not wish to receive such messages in
future, so please take
appropriate measures to ensure that this unsolicited e-mail is not repeated.
"--- This message was intercepted by SpamKiller (www.spamkiller.com) ---"
The full text of
intercepted message followed.
The header of
offending email clearly showed that
sender of
email was someone from so-and-so.com*. Unfortunately,
newsletter concerned contained virtually nothing but my article interrupted by what I assume were paid ads.
I'm sure that
paid advertisers in this particular ezine also received a complaint and that WeStopSpam.net received a copy and automatically forwarded it to
advertiser's ISP and/or webhost who may or may not have shut them down, at least temporarily. (Hopefully not all webhosts are of
calibre of DumbHost when it comes to this sort of thing.)
So, this individual, in his zealousness to rid
Internet of spam, blithely dragged
names and reputations of at least half a dozen perfectly innocent bystanders through
mud.