71.246.215.8 is a static address owned by me which will never be a
source of spam.

I can well believe that some _other_ addresses in the 71.246.192.0/18
range are, though...

Does APEWS even _support_ single IP address exceptions?

Or does spam coming from any of this block of 16000 addresses keep the
whole block listed?

This is not a dynamic address, it is a static address belonging to me.

Is this even the right place to ask this question?

I've not seen this aspect of APEWS operation discussed as yet.

In the old SPEWS days, SPEWS appeared to respect a SWIP that include
abuse contact information and was owned by an organization who took
steps against spammers, even when the upstream was deaf to complaints.
The key question appeared to be "Is this IP address block properly
managed?" If the answer was "Yes", the IP address was not listed. Simple.

The SWIP was part of the formula that got a /24 of mine, SWIPped from
MCI, out of SPEWS. (The main part was getting the spam services out of
that /24 -- one of my dedicated-server customers was providing DNS
service to spammers.)

Looking at some APEWS-listed IP addresses, it appears that APEWS ignores
SWIPs when instituting a block against a larger provider.

The question is, should they honor SWIPS or not?

--
A little learning is a dang'rous thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring;
There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely sobers us again.
-- Alexander Pope, Essay on Criticism

A few days ago, I found that one my email servers was listed in
UCEPROTECT Level 3. I wish to point out that /16's are not (as in our
case) always owned by a single company. The server's address
(190.80.8.17) was not listed in UCEPROTECT-Network Level 1 nor the
network (190.80.8.0/24) listed in UCEPROTECT-Network Level 2.
However, there were many (hundreds of) cases of other addresses
spamming in 190.80.0.0/16, which caused listing at UCEPROTECT-Network
Level 3. 190.80.0.0/16 is not owned by any single company.
We have a good antispam policy, and always track down any reports -
some networks are not even allowed to originate smtp traffic.
Currently, the address is no longer listed - however, it will always
be a posibility of being re-listed.

Why can't the netblocks owners be listed in UCEPROTECT-Network Level 3
instead of arbitrary blocks like /16's ??

We will be happy to track down the 3 ip addresses in our 190.80.0.0/18
block which are spamming - but we can do nothing about the others - we
cannot complain to our ISP's because the addresses are ours, we got
them directly from the registrar.
Why list us for the actions / non-actions of others ?????

On Tuesday morning, our company purchased an 8-block of static IP
addresses from Embarq (nee Sprint). On Tuesday afternoon, I configured
our email server to begin using one of those addresses. On Tuesday
evening, email sent from our server began being rejected from most of
the major email providers. On Wednesday morning, I checked with some
sources to discover that all of the addresses Embarq had assigned to
me were on numerous blacklists, including dnsbl-1.uceprotect.net. That
list's website states that I can either A) wait seven or so days for
our IPs to fall off, or B) pay them some extortion money to have the
addresses removed now.

Is there any recourse for this? Embarq will be glad to let me have a
different block of IPs, but still, this seems very mafia-like.

Hello, My company has been listed in APEWS under the addresses in
range 200.40.32.0/19
Entry matching your Query: E-254548
200.40.32.0/19: CASE: C-352
can anyone as to how to best handle and resolve this issue?

thanks a lot.

We recently found the forms on our commercial hosting server which is
used for over 200 domain blacklisted a APEWS.ORG which I suspect is an
error.

Testresults
Sorry 67.15.57.16 is currently listed in APEWS :-(
Entry matching your Query: E-170095
67.15.0.0/16CASE: C-82
IP space of "hot" UCE/UBE operations per NANAS, NANAE, UCEtraps &
published statisticsSpecial Reason:
per NANAS, NANAE, UCEtraps, MTA headers continued abuse / abuse volume
= escalation ultimately, all your ASN[s] will be listedHistory:
Entry created 2007-05-14

We seem to not be listed in any other blacklist according to
http://private.dnsstuff.com/tools/ip4r.ch?ip=67.15.57.16

I've been trying to find out which client may have caused this issue,
but can't as no abnormal activity has been detected for months and
there have been no formal complaints received.

Hi All,

We are the ISP of the IP range which seems to be listed in APEWS
(refer to below extract)

Sorry 196.22.212.131 is currently listed in APEWS :-(

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Entry matching your Query: E-219281
196.22.0.0/16
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CASE: C-130
One or more bots in ASN / CIDR, unprofessional / negligent owner
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special Reason:
Only the ASN/CIDR owner can solve this listing by actioning FAQ 42
apews.org SHUTDOWN BOTS, ZOMBIES, NET ABUSE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
History:
Entry created 2007-06-26

hi guys,

AS3741 here (hostmaster@is.co.za)

it would seem that you are blocking one of our /15 on your side as can
seen from the informative message below which is assigned to our adsl
users.

--
Sorry 196.211.111.0 is currently listed in APEWS :-(
Entry matching your Query: E-273550
196.210.0.0/15
CASE: C-715
AS3741 ZA, ISP permits abuse and/or ignores criminal activity
Special Reason:
ISP permits abuse and/or ignores criminal activity
History:
Entry created 2007-07-18
-------

Hello,

Our IP numbers (subject line) are blocklisted.

We have a static route from our upstream provider (VSNL) at
203.199.75.235 and have a protected neighbourhood assignment of
203.199.75.232/29

APEWS query refers our IP numbers to a case C-332.

Does anyone here know why we're a part of that mess? I don't think I
should be in it but I am unable to get any thread listing/discussing/
sighting the wrong doings of my big neighbour & service provider.

One of you may know. Pl help me by pointing me in the right direction.

Also, any tip/pointers to get me out of this sticky situation is
welcome too.

Thank you.

regards,
dv
Softcell-IN

Hi,

My company has been listed in APEWS under the addresses in range
82.223.0.0/16

Entry matching your Query: E-260081
82.223.0.0/16CASE: C-130

can anyone as to how to best handle and resolve this issue?

Thanks