This is not an exclusively Usenet issue though my response to Roadrunner is concerning a Usenet abuse issue.
I have been complaining to Roadrunner about a chronic Usenet spammer AVS-Store.com for many months without any change in their activities. This led me to create a "bitch list" to send reports to which included sending them a fax of the complaint. This is my last complaint [Subject: Roadrunner Still Ignores Spam Reports] ---
> Yet another Usenet spam run from the same customer. > 1,750+ Usenet posts saying the same thing. > Multiple complaints from me alone yet he is still spamming.
> How many complaints must be made before Roadrunner enforces their AUP?
> Sent via fax and to several other addresses at Roadrunner > since ab...@rr.com is completely unresponsive to numerous complaints.
> The oh.* newsgroups are for things pertaining to Ohio. > Not some schmuck in New York with a website.
> This user is spamming every Usenet group he can. > 1,750+ Usenet posts and counting despite numerous complaints > thanks to Roadrunner's complete inaction! See his Usenet > posting history here: http://snipurl.com/4ixg
> Even if the posts were on topic (which they're not) > excessively cross-posting and multi-posting the same message > is the very definition of spam! Kindly discipline your customer.
The spam is snipped, but can be found here: Message-ID: <nm9kc.123388$M3.102549@twister.nyroc.rr.com>
I never received any response at all when I emailed just the Roadrunner abuse address. Since I have started with the "bitch list," I have received the following response two times:
> -----Original Message----- > From: Road Runner Abuse ab...@rr.com > Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2004 12:59 AM > To: x > Subject: Re: Roadrunner Still Ignores Spam Reports
> Hello,
> As stated in our autoresponder, "...although it is not always > possible > for us to provide a direct human response to your complaint, we do > investigate *all* complaints. As such, please do not > interpret a lack of response as a lack of action taken. If we > find that a customer is in > violation of our policies, we will take the necessary action > to stop the activity in question."
> Road Runner is unable to release any specific customer information, > including action taken against an account, without a court > order. Please be aware the depending on the situation, > actions can be up to and > including account termination. Should you require specific > information > on where to send a court order, you may call the Road Runner Network > Operations Center at 703-345-3416.
> Thank you for taking the time to contact Road Runner.
> - Road Runner Abuse [MW]
This is my response to them. I took the liberty of speaking for many of us.
> > please do not > > interpret a lack of response as a lack of action taken > Your inaction is not judged through your lack of personal responses.
> Your inaction is judged by the continued spamming of Roadrunner customers. > Your inaction is judged by the failure to close open relays and proxies. > Your inaction is judged by your inability to handle customers with > compromised computers. > Your inaction is judged by an internet community sick of Roadrunner's > incompetence.
> Your inaction is judged by me because this is the second time you sent me > this same response to my spam complaint for the same infraction from the > same spamming customer.
> Your inaction is costing you your mail being delivered to many places who > have blackholed your entire networks because of the above infractions.
> Your inaction is costing me as a customer, someone who once used Roadrunner > for his broadband needs and someone who could go back to Roadrunner. Your > inaction also keeps me from using Time-Warner cable as well.
> I don't give a damn about a personal "response," and neither does the great > many responsible netizens who are sick of bearing the costs due to your > incompetence, an incompetence that borders on arrogance when coupled with > your overwhelming zeal to sign up even more customers when it is obvious to > all that you cannot handle abuse issues with the load you currently have.
> All we (TINW) give a damn about is that the spamming stops, the proxies are > closed, customers infected with malicious Trojans are shut down until they > are educated about these issues and Roadrunner actually enforces their AUP > in a timely manner. Communication with the victims of your incompetence > would be nice, but really, as long as the abuse stops, nobody cares about a > "personal response" and I for one never asked for one.
> I asked for the spam to stop. It hasn't.
> That's what you are being judged for and all you will ever be judged for. > And you are being judged as ignoring abuse reports. > And that will remain until the spamming stops, the proxies are closed, and > your customers are educated.
> And my spam reports will continue to be "shotgunned" to all of these address > and faxed to your corporate offices - and even more addresses and to more > fax numbers if I find them - until these many problems are addressed.
I would hope that any movements for the UDP, nominations to blacklists or the like would take note of this case in particular and Roadrunner's sorry track record in general. This post is to add to the evidence of their complete incompetence with regard to abuse issues.
In news.admin.net-abuse.email Brian K. O'Neill <d...@spam.me> wrote:
> This is not an exclusively Usenet issue though my response to Roadrunner is > concerning a Usenet abuse issue.
I'm not sure what effect you hoped this would have.. This is nanaEMAIL, not usenet. And we(TINW) already know about roadrunner's roguish behavior.
> I have been complaining to Roadrunner about a chronic Usenet spammer > AVS-Store.com for many months without any change in their activities. This > led me to create a "bitch list" to send reports to which included sending > them a fax of the complaint. This is my last complaint [Subject: Roadrunner > Still Ignores Spam Reports] ---
[snippo]
Roadrunner fails to act on complaints about viruses spewing from their customers, which arguably makes them guilty of knowingly spreading viruses - a federal offense. Yet RR does nothing.
Roadrunner's network is largely made up of zombies that spew spam, viruses and other forms of abuse onto the internet. Yet RR does nothing.
At one point, RR was sending this huge stupid disclaimer about how their mailservers had detected an infected message being sent by one of their users, and how they deleted the virus. However, they then asked that YOU contact the user about this problem because THEY weren't going to be bothered.
I suspect that many on usenet are already aware of rr's problem, and are already canceling said posts. You might do well to use such a server that listens to those cancels.
> This is not an exclusively Usenet issue though my response to Roadrunner is > concerning a Usenet abuse issue.
> I have been complaining to Roadrunner about a chronic Usenet spammer > AVS-Store.com for many months without any change in their activities. This > led me to create a "bitch list" to send reports to which included sending > them a fax of the complaint. This is my last complaint [Subject: Roadrunner > Still Ignores Spam Reports] ---
> > Yet another Usenet spam run from the same customer. > > 1,750+ Usenet posts saying the same thing. > > Multiple complaints from me alone yet he is still spamming.
> > How many complaints must be made before Roadrunner enforces their AUP?
> > Sent via fax and to several other addresses at Roadrunner > > since ab...@rr.com is completely unresponsive to numerous complaints.
> > The oh.* newsgroups are for things pertaining to Ohio. > > Not some schmuck in New York with a website.
> > This user is spamming every Usenet group he can. > > 1,750+ Usenet posts and counting despite numerous complaints > > thanks to Roadrunner's complete inaction! See his Usenet > > posting history here: http://snipurl.com/4ixg
> > Even if the posts were on topic (which they're not) > > excessively cross-posting and multi-posting the same message > > is the very definition of spam! Kindly discipline your customer.
> The spam is snipped, but can be found here: > Message-ID: <nm9kc.123388$M3.102...@twister.nyroc.rr.com>
> I never received any response at all when I emailed just the Roadrunner > abuse address. Since I have started with the "bitch list," I have received > the following response two times:
> > -----Original Message----- > > From: Road Runner Abuse ab...@rr.com > > Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2004 12:59 AM > > To: x > > Subject: Re: Roadrunner Still Ignores Spam Reports
> > Hello,
> > As stated in our autoresponder, "...although it is not always > > possible > > for us to provide a direct human response to your complaint, we do > > investigate *all* complaints. As such, please do not > > interpret a lack of response as a lack of action taken. If we > > find that a customer is in > > violation of our policies, we will take the necessary action > > to stop the activity in question."
> > Road Runner is unable to release any specific customer information, > > including action taken against an account, without a court > > order. Please be aware the depending on the situation, > > actions can be up to and > > including account termination. Should you require specific > > information > > on where to send a court order, you may call the Road Runner Network > > Operations Center at 703-345-3416.
> > Thank you for taking the time to contact Road Runner.
> > - Road Runner Abuse [MW]
> This is my response to them. I took the liberty of speaking for many of us.
> > > please do not > > > interpret a lack of response as a lack of action taken
> > Your inaction is not judged through your lack of personal responses.
> > Your inaction is judged by the continued spamming of Roadrunner customers. > > Your inaction is judged by the failure to close open relays and proxies. > > Your inaction is judged by your inability to handle customers with > > compromised computers. > > Your inaction is judged by an internet community sick of Roadrunner's > > incompetence.
> > Your inaction is judged by me because this is the second time you sent me > > this same response to my spam complaint for the same infraction from the > > same spamming customer.
> > Your inaction is costing you your mail being delivered to many places who > > have blackholed your entire networks because of the above infractions.
> > Your inaction is costing me as a customer, someone who once used > Roadrunner > > for his broadband needs and someone who could go back to Roadrunner. Your > > inaction also keeps me from using Time-Warner cable as well.
> > I don't give a damn about a personal "response," and neither does the > great > > many responsible netizens who are sick of bearing the costs due to your > > incompetence, an incompetence that borders on arrogance when coupled with > > your overwhelming zeal to sign up even more customers when it is obvious > to > > all that you cannot handle abuse issues with the load you currently have.
> > All we (TINW) give a damn about is that the spamming stops, the proxies > are > > closed, customers infected with malicious Trojans are shut down until they > > are educated about these issues and Roadrunner actually enforces their AUP > > in a timely manner. Communication with the victims of your incompetence > > would be nice, but really, as long as the abuse stops, nobody cares about > a > > "personal response" and I for one never asked for one.
> > I asked for the spam to stop. It hasn't.
> > That's what you are being judged for and all you will ever be judged for. > > And you are being judged as ignoring abuse reports. > > And that will remain until the spamming stops, the proxies are closed, and > > your customers are educated.
> > And my spam reports will continue to be "shotgunned" to all of these > address > > and faxed to your corporate offices - and even more addresses and to more > > fax numbers if I find them - until these many problems are addressed.
> I would hope that any movements for the UDP, nominations to blacklists or > the like would take note of this case in particular and Roadrunner's sorry > track record in general. This post is to add to the evidence of their > complete incompetence with regard to abuse issues.
Plasma <m...@privacy.net> wrote: >I think your complaint is about: >IP address: 24.95.159.70 >Host name: mail.avs-store.com >Alias: >rrcs-nys-24-95-159-70.biz.rr.com
>Why don't you just KillFile the return address or create a rule to >automatically delete "avs-store.com"?
We do better than that here. We just block ALL roadrunner traffic. If the ISP is so incompetent as to allow this sort of thing to go on, I don't want packets from them.
I can block this address... then later next week when they have another spammer, I can block another one... then another one. It's a lot easier just to block it all until they get their act together and fix their massive spam problem. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
> I would hope that any movements for the UDP, nominations to blacklists or > the like would take note of this case in particular and Roadrunner's sorry > track record in general. This post is to add to the evidence of their > complete incompetence with regard to abuse issues.
I'd sponsor a UDP for this (and may I suggest Comcast at the same time?). Both networks are permabanned from exchanging ANY packets with mine.
> > I would hope that any movements for the UDP, nominations to blacklists or > > the like would take note of this case in particular and Roadrunner's sorry > > track record in general. This post is to add to the evidence of their > > complete incompetence with regard to abuse issues.
> I'd sponsor a UDP for this (and may I suggest Comcast at the same > time?). Both networks are permabanned from exchanging ANY packets with > mine.
I can only suggest that you are careful in your wide sweeping ban, there are also business accounts on RR that are not infected/spammers - I know of at least 60+ businesses in Ohio that use them for VPN connections between their offices.
-- -- spamfree...@rrohio.com (Remove 999 to reply to me)
> > > I would hope that any movements for the UDP, nominations to blacklists or > > > the like would take note of this case in particular and Roadrunner's sorry > > > track record in general. This post is to add to the evidence of their > > > complete incompetence with regard to abuse issues.
> > I'd sponsor a UDP for this (and may I suggest Comcast at the same > > time?). Both networks are permabanned from exchanging ANY packets with > > mine.
> I can only suggest that you are careful in your wide sweeping ban, there > are also business accounts on RR that are not infected/spammers - I know > of at least 60+ businesses in Ohio that use them for VPN connections > between their offices.
I think he should be careful to include them. RR stinks. I say that as a RR customer. Block me and everyone on RR, it's a worthless company. Maybe if everyone blocked them, they would get off their asses and be a decent netizen.
> I can only suggest that you are careful in your wide sweeping ban, there > are also business accounts on RR that are not infected/spammers - I know > of at least 60+ businesses in Ohio that use them for VPN connections > between their offices.
Maybe those businesses calling up RR and threatening to find a more responsible providers, who aren't being blocked due to ineffective abuse policies, is just what is needed to get the RR admins off their lazy butts.
In article <MPG.1b0092e4e0faab6798a...@news-server.columbus.rr.com>,
Leythos <v...@nowhere.com> wrote: >> I'd sponsor a UDP for this (and may I suggest Comcast at the same >> time?). Both networks are permabanned from exchanging ANY packets with >> mine.
>I can only suggest that you are careful in your wide sweeping ban, there >are also business accounts on RR that are not infected/spammers - I know >of at least 60+ businesses in Ohio that use them for VPN connections >between their offices.
This is a UDP he's talking about, not an IDP. That's USENET Death Penalty, not Internet Death Penalty. It will only affect those customers who post articles on usenet, which is the point -- the bulk of usenet postings coming out of RoadRunner are likely spam, and should be blocked. It won't interfere with business communications or email, just RR's NNTP.
>> > > I would hope that any movements for the UDP, nominations to blacklists >or >> > > the like would take note of this case in particular and Roadrunner's >sorry >> > > track record in general. This post is to add to the evidence of their >> > > complete incompetence with regard to abuse issues.
>> > I'd sponsor a UDP for this (and may I suggest Comcast at the same >> > time?). Both networks are permabanned from exchanging ANY packets with >> > mine.
>> I can only suggest that you are careful in your wide sweeping ban, there >> are also business accounts on RR that are not infected/spammers - I know >> of at least 60+ businesses in Ohio that use them for VPN connections >> between their offices.
>I think he should be careful to include them. >RR stinks. >I say that as a RR customer. >Block me and everyone on RR, it's a worthless company. >Maybe if everyone blocked them, they would get off their asses and be a >decent netizen.
On Mon, 03 May 2004 22:45:29 GMT, Spambo <Spambo83qod...@sneakemail.com> scribbled:
>Leythos wrote:
>> [snip]
>> I can only suggest that you are careful in your wide sweeping ban, there >> are also business accounts on RR that are not infected/spammers - I know >> of at least 60+ businesses in Ohio that use them for VPN connections >> between their offices.
>Maybe those businesses calling up RR and threatening to find a more >responsible providers, who aren't being blocked due to ineffective abuse >policies, is just what is needed to get the RR admins off their lazy >butts.
One problem is the admins that DO act are blathering incompetents. The repeatedly accuse people of doing things they've not done. They can't read headers, often DON'T read headers. I once reported another RR user for spamming and the next day I got an email accusing ME of doing the spamming including the headers with a completely different IP from another region of RR entirely!
-- 'What Profiteth It A Kingdom If The Oxen Be Deflated?' Riddles II, v3 - T. Pratchett
Plasma wrote: > I think your complaint is about: > IP address: 24.95.159.70 > Host name: mail.avs-store.com > Alias: > rrcs-nys-24-95-159-70.biz.rr.com
> Why don't you just KillFile the return address or create a rule to > automatically delete "avs-store.com"?
Because that's not the way you reduce spam. You reduce spam by STOPPING the spam, not by hiding from it.
As a RoadRunner customer, I certainly wish the network security and abuse staff at RoadRunner would start DOING something about the rampant spam and virus/trojan problem within RoadRunner. It's ridiculous, and WAY worse than, for example, on cox.net (the broadband provider I was using just a month and a half back).
-TPP -- Q: "What do the FBI and convicted criminals have in common?" A: "Both don't give a damn about the laws."
> I've been accused of spamming 5 times by RR. I have also been accused > of having an insecure, infected, and otherwise Swiss cheese of a > machine. Let's hypothetically suppose that RR is completely right. > Then why am I still connected?
<usenetjunk2...@yahoo.com> wrote: >I've been accused of spamming 5 times by RR. I have also been accused of >having an insecure, infected, and otherwise Swiss cheese of a machine. >Let's hypothetically suppose that RR is completely right. Then why am I >still connected?
Um ... because you're not a spammer and because your machine is not infected?
I have been accused of spam three times by Road Runner. One time I actually spoke to them, they explained their "system". They got a complaint, traced my IP number, and sent me a warning. But they wouldn't actually cut me off; nobody would actually do anything unless they received more complaints, then at that time, a tech would look at the complaints more closely and decide whether to do the cutoff.
In my case, the first one was a clumsy joe-job, the second was a bitch-list recipient at Level 3 who reported my email as spam, and I never found out what the third one was about.
My impression was that this region (Texas) believed that it was quick to move against spammers and infected machines. However, other parts of the company are not near as fast. These techs knew this and they can't do much about it.
I explained that this is going to create problems because there is a lot of abuse from those other networks, and that it sometimes causes my email to get blocked.
-- Steve M - uns...@houston.rrdirt.com (remove dirt for reply)
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo its use." -- Galileo
Brian K. O'Neill blasphemed and profaned the name of "Bob" in msg-id <chslc.701$dd....@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>:
> This is not an exclusively Usenet issue though my response to Roadrunner > is concerning a Usenet abuse issue.
So, tell us all, what the flying fuck does this have to do with news.admin.net-abuse.EMAIL?? Note, there's a group called news.admin.net-abuse.USENET, where this post would be much more appropriate.
Rich -- "Normally, supporting your company in public is a perfectly respectable pastime, but when you're trying to build a house of cards, the last thing you should do is blow hard and wave your hands like a madman." Rupert Goodwins, ZDNET UK, 4/22/2004, on SCO Group CEO Darl McBride TINLC Unit #2309 - Death to all spammer accounts. - WWSB?
> I can only suggest that you are careful in your wide sweeping ban, there > are also business accounts on RR that are not infected/spammers - I know > of at least 60+ businesses in Ohio that use them for VPN connections > between their offices.
Then those businesses will need to seek other connectivity if they need to connect to networks that won't put up with a company that can't manage their network. I am, quite frankly, FED UP! with RoachRunner and their inabillity to deficate or evacuate the chamber.
I had to spend quite a bit of time Saturday and again Sunday freeing up disk space on my web & mail servers because of RoachRunner virus infected computers. I object to giving up my weekend to clean up a situation that RoachRunner allowed to develop because their profits are more important than properly managing their network.
I don't have a problem with RoachRunner making a profit, just to them making a profit at my expense. They can fully fund managing their network, or the can be blocked on mine.
Their choice.
-- "I got more room in iptables then they got ip allocations :)" Some Bastard, NANAE - 2004.02.13
Brian K. O'Neill wrote: >This is not an exclusively Usenet issue though my response to Roadrunner is >concerning a Usenet abuse issue.
>I have been complaining to Roadrunner about a chronic Usenet spammer >AVS-Store.com for many months without any change in their activities.
Advanced Video Systems has been spamming for longer than months. Try more than 5 years. I've got files on them going back to January of 1999. (They were ADVANCEDVIDEOSYST...@prodigy.net back then.) They started using advancedvideosystems.com by June of that year. They've also used hydef.com, but that appears to be in the hands of a speculator now.
The first complaint to Road Runner about them was back in January of 2001. Road Runner is going to do precisely dick about their pet spammer. I double dog dare them to prove me wrong.
I say IDP them until at least the year 2030, and that's being generous.
-- My name is Inigo Montoya. You spammed my father. Prepare to die.
Everything I need to know about life, I learned from my cats. - Morely Dotes
axlq in California wrote: >This is a UDP he's talking about, not an IDP. That's USENET Death >Penalty, not Internet Death Penalty. It will only affect those >customers who post articles on usenet, which is the point -- >the bulk of usenet postings coming out of RoadRunner are likely >spam, and should be blocked. It won't interfere with business >communications or email, just RR's NNTP.
Of course, if such businesses wanted reliable connectivity they'd get the hell off RR anyway.
-- My name is Inigo Montoya. You spammed my father. Prepare to die.
Everything I need to know about life, I learned from my cats. - Morely Dotes
While still snuggled in a 'spider hole', Inigo.Mont...@The.Princess.Bride (Inigo Montoya) scribbled:
>>I have been complaining to Roadrunner about a chronic Usenet spammer >>AVS-Store.com for many months without any change in their activities.
>Advanced Video Systems has been spamming for longer than months. Try more >than 5 years. I've got files on them going back to January of 1999. (They >were ADVANCEDVIDEOSYST...@prodigy.net back then.) They started using >advancedvideosystems.com by June of that year.
Domain Name: ADVANCEDVIDEOSYSTEMS.COM Registrar: NETWORK SOLUTIONS, INC. Whois Server: whois.networksolutions.com Referral URL: http://www.networksolutions.com Name Server: NS1.BIZ.RR.COM Name Server: NS2.BIZ.RR.COM Status: ACTIVE Updated Date: 28-mar-2002 Creation Date: 20-mar-1998 Expiration Date: 19-mar-2005
To reply by email, remove the XYZ.
Lumber Cartel (tinlc) #2063. Spam this account at your own risk.
This sig censored by the Office of Home and Land Insecurity....
In article <Xns94DEDD95452C4busserroryahoocom...@130.133.1.4>, buss_er...@yahoo.com says...
> I had to spend quite a bit of time Saturday and again Sunday freeing up > disk space on my web & mail servers because of RoachRunner virus infected > computers.
I have a number of web and email servers on a RR connection and I'm not sure about the web server part - what could they do that caused you to use Web space? As for email, are you not using a RBL or at least something like Symantec SBE with Exchange Filter (there are non-ms filters out there). We get about 2500 spams a day and filter over 99.9% of them without a problem. I'm still unsure about your web problem, what happened?
-- -- spamfree...@rrohio.com (Remove 999 to reply to me)
In article <109eien9licb...@news20.forteinc.com>, Inigo.Mont...@The.Princess.Bride says...
> Of course, if such businesses wanted reliable connectivity they'd get the > hell off RR anyway.
5 years with only 1 instance of down time, over 3mbps down (even during peak hours, 1.5mpbs up (even during peak) and under $250/month. Sounds reliable to me.
-- -- spamfree...@rrohio.com (Remove 999 to reply to me)
On Mon, 03 May 2004 22:26:42 +0000, Leythos wrote: >> I'd sponsor a UDP for this (and may I suggest Comcast at the same >> time?). Both networks are permabanned from exchanging ANY packets with >> mine.
> I can only suggest that you are careful in your wide sweeping ban, there > are also business accounts on RR that are not infected/spammers
So? Unless RR/COmcats feel the pain of accounts being closed they won't take any action.
> - I know > of at least 60+ businesses in Ohio that use them for VPN connections > between their offices.
On Tue, 04 May 2004 11:09:10 +0000, Leythos wrote: >> Of course, if such businesses wanted reliable connectivity they'd get the >> hell off RR anyway.
> 5 years with only 1 instance of down time, over 3mbps down (even during > peak hours, 1.5mpbs up (even during peak) and under $250/month. Sounds > reliable to me.
So being widely firewalled is reliable connectivity?
There is far more to reliability than how often your signal's carrier goes down.
In article <pan.2004.05.04.12.23.05.756...@google5.manawatu.net.nz>, alanb+goog...@google5.manawatu.net.nz says...
> On Tue, 04 May 2004 11:09:10 +0000, Leythos wrote:
> >> Of course, if such businesses wanted reliable connectivity they'd get the > >> hell off RR anyway.
> > 5 years with only 1 instance of down time, over 3mbps down (even during > > peak hours, 1.5mpbs up (even during peak) and under $250/month. Sounds > > reliable to me.
> So being widely firewalled is reliable connectivity?
> There is far more to reliability than how often your signal's carrier goes > down.
You said "reliable connectivity" and the connectivity is reliable for Business Class customers. In all of the time I've been on RR I've only found two instances where our email server was blocked - and it was due to a problem with our domain name which we changed.
Services that block ALL connections from an ISP are just lame, it's very easy to tell what IP they come from and block those IP. Most of the RR Biz plans include a fixed IP range for the duration of the contract. On the other hand, blocking from a DHCP group is very advisable as it limits the chance of getting mail from infected users computers.
-- -- spamfree...@rrohio.com (Remove 999 to reply to me)
