Writing cart00neys also becomes popular in Switzerland nowadays...
Today we got an cart00ney from a person known as Patrick Ramseyer, Romanshorn Thurgau Switzerland.
Before we go on with his cart00ney, we will have a short view to find out who or what Mr. Ramseyer is...
Interesting what we read here:
|Company name||Function and signature||Since||Size|
|CID Concept AG
joint signature at two
|12.05.2010||Show employee and turnover figures|
|08.05.2006||Show employee and turnover figures|
Received: from mail.theram.ch (22.214.171.124), claiming to be "smartermail.theram.ch"
via SMTP by UCEPROTECT Proxy V4.3 at mailgate1.webhost4u.ch, id smtpdY28472; Thu Nov 17 11:56:53 2011
Received: from uttwil.ebsolut.com (207-64.198-178.cust.bluewin.ch [126.96.36.199]) by smartermail.theram.ch with SMTP;
Thu, 17 Nov 2011 11:56:01 +0100
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Subject: [SPAM]backscatterer.org - UCE protect , Bitte von Ihrer RBL entfernen
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 11:55:34 +0100
Thread-Topic: backscatterer.org - UCE protect , Bitte von Ihrer RBL entfernen
From: "P. Ramseyer" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
X-RBL-Warning: WEIGHT10: Weight of 19 reaches or exceeds the limit of 10.
X-Declude-Sender: email@example.com [188.8.131.52]
X-Declude-Note: Scanned by Declude 4.10.58 "http://www.declude.com/x-note.htm"
X-Declude-Scan: Outgoing Score  at 11:56:08 on 17 Nov 2011
X-Declude-Tests: SEM-BL , ZEN , BASE64 , SUBCHARS-55 , SUBCHARS-60 
X-Identity: 184.108.40.206 | 207-64.198-178.cust.bluewin.ch | your-web.ch
|Betreff:||[SPAM]backscatterer.org - UCE protect , Bitte von Ihrer RBL entfernen|
|Datum:||Thu, 17 Nov 2011 11:55:34 +0100|
|Von:||P. Ramseyer <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
To Whom It May Concern:
The company you are sponsoring has several people trying to get together and file a class action lawsuit against this company due to their methods of operation. Listed below is several comments including UCEPROTECT on their methods of operations along with comments on what people think of this company.
From UCEPROTECT themselves.
People that use UCEPROTECT (BACKSCATTERER) go with level 1 or level 2 of filtering because level 3 is to aggressive by blocking out entire IP blocks instead of specific IP addresses as they should do. (http://www.uceprotect.net/en/index.php?m=3&s=5) They themselves gave this warning about level 3. .This blacklist has been created for HARDLINERS. It can, and probably will cause collateral damage to innocent users when used to block email..
Here is a list of IP addresses currently being blocked by them. I pasted them into Microsoft Excel to see how many are black listed and it went way beyond Microsoft Excel.s limit of 65,536. You can find the list here. (http://wget-mirrors.uceprotect.net/rbldnsd-all/ips.backscatterer.org.gz)
Here are some links of people.s comments on BACKSCATTERER along with some quotes about their tactics of extorting money which I myself have paid also. ($74.97, which I found out after paying they want on a monthly basis. I should consider myself lucky because I found out that they used to charge $200 per month) There are people rallying out there to bring up a class action lawsuit against them.
.We used to use uceprotect but we found waaay too many false positives because of very large, blanket listings We had to remove it from our list of used RBLs.
.I actually was using the exact same set of RBL's, but after a while I found out that UCEPROTECT1 repeatedly listed the smtp servers of some major ISP's here (NL). Of the unique hits of this RBL (not in any of the others), about 50% was a false positive, so I removed it. I have not yet encountered similar problems with Zen, Spamcop and PSBL..
.This is an extortion racket along the lines of sorbs.net. This 'anti-spam' service may well be run by spammers - with their strange understanding of legal matters, poor grammar, and payment by PayPal - they sure act like spammers..
.JVF has never heard about UCEPROTECT until now. Their practices are bordering on extortion. Ourselves, as well as others in our same situation, feel that a class action lawsuit should be brought against them. Their method of blocking the entire ISP's IP range just because of a similar users IP is unacceptable and against every rule in the spam book. Below you can see the hoops we have been jumping through to get our IP address removed from their blacklist..
.OK, so we're listed on their blacklist, this is not the first time we have had to remove an IP address we manage that has been incorrectly added to a blacklist, so what is the process? As you can see in the screenshot below, they want us to pay 150.00 . Euro's (EUR) to process our request and remove our IP address. That's almost $200 dollars! This is totally unacceptable, and quite possibly illegal! We are aware that some IP addresses are definitely more suspicious than others, but you wouldn't want to filter mail from them without a little further evidence (like seeing some spam from them)..
.It is borderline extortion. The only people who pay are the admins that dont know any better..
.These people are crooks and probably run by the same people that create spam. No respectable hosting company should use them for blacklists.
They have no legitimate reason for listing an IP and can offer no proof or information for fixing the so called offence (even if you pay 150$ for it).
There are many scams on the Internet and UCEPROTECT is one of them..
http://www.dnsstuff.com/forum/index.php?topic=1366108.0 (This quote came from UCEPROTECT themselves when they visited the forum to defend themselves. If no reasonable person should use level 3 then why offer it???)
.This means no reasonable Person should use Level 3 for BLOCKING..
Here is a comment from my tech support on UCEPROTECT which powers BACKSCATTERER. MIPSPACE also uses BACKSCATTERER.
. . . Hello,
While the server is listed at UCEPROTECT, there is very little we as a company can do. They run their blacklists only as an effort to make money. We've tried to work with them before and it all comes down to them wanting money to do something that is automated in the first place. We have repeatedly asked them for logs/evidence/proof and they adamantly do not provide any. Armed with this information, upper management refuses to deal with such unscrupulous companies. . . .
Thank you for your time,
Follow us on