There has been rather a lot of blather in the meantime, but the original message was pretty important. To go back to that, I dug up a posting from the responsible party at ATT from the IETF list. If abuse@att.net is not working, then we (and he) should know about it! Did you try abuse, Alex? Did they identify the culprit? Has ngti.com been added to the RBL for relaying faked spam?

From: alex@nac.net Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 16:53:26 -0500 (EST) ... Received: from mailme.com (146.st-louis-71-72rs.mo.dial-access.att.net [12.75.28.146]) by atom.ntgi.net (8.8.8/8.8.7) with SMTP id XAA23473; Sat, 19 Dec 1998 23:27:18 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from You4Me2C@mailme.com) ... AT&T's security dept is non-existent, as far as I am concerned.

< From: "Jonathan Clark" <jhc@wnmail.wndev.att.com> < Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 00:46:23 -0500 < Subject: Re: Last Call: Anti-Spam Requirements on an SMTP MTA to BCP < < ... < And as far as I am aware AT&T Worldnet has not < been accused with any evidence of spamming the Internet. Plenty of our users < have been, and when we identify them, we take appropriate action. < < For over a year now I have had requests out on various anti-spam lists, < and I make the same offer in this forum, that if anyone receives mail with < forged headers which appear to implicate AT&T Worldnet for them to please < send it to me, or to our abuse desk. To date I have received exactly two < examples. So I don't know whose headers are being forged, but I have no < evidence that it's ours. < < Also please note that it is a violation of AT&T Worldnet's AUP to use a < mailbox on our service as a response address for a spam, even if the mailing < did not originate with us. < < Sascha (or anyone else), if you feel you have a genuine complaint, please < feel free to contact me directly. However, routine abuse matters should < go directly to abuse@att.net, since all I'll do is send them there anyway. < WSimpson@UMich.edu Key fingerprint = 17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26 DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32