Spam/virus filtering ????

[jonbr]

I'm new to the forum so please forgive me if this has been asked before

I have heard/read/been told that NTL have, or are soon to, introduce spam filtering. Is this correct, and if so, what about virus filtering?

I am fully covered on my PC with my own virus/spam/etc protection but it would be nice to know that NTL are also taking steps if only to reduce the band width being used by this kind of problem....

[luv-snail]

This is a bit of a sensitive issue with a lot of people. The majority of inexperienced users would probably welcome spam and/or virus filtering on their email, but almost all advanced users are strongly opposed to any kind of mail filtering done by the ISP. The job of the ISP's mail servers is to accept the customers' mail and make it available to them, without unnecessarily tampering with it. Some users may *want* to receive spam emails or viruses, for whatever reason, and it is not the place of the ISP to say that they cannot. Also, no mail filtering software is 100% accurate, and you can guarantee that some legitimate email would be filtered out by the system.

Installing spam and virus protection is the responsibility of the user, and the most the ISP can do is educate the user about the need to do so. I run my own mail server, so I don't rely on ntl's mail servers for my main email, but if I did I would have to seriously consider switching ISP if they started filtering email.

That's the way I see it, anyway.

I would disagree re. virus checking - not least because viruses do not just affect the person infected. Spam filtering is a different matter and I believe the eventual intention is to give the users control over this.

AFAIK virus and some level of spam filtering has been in place since the beginning of December, but it seems quite hard to get any details. Certainly I haven't noticed any significant reduction in the amount of SPAM being trapped by Spamcop, but other posters do seem to have noticed a reduction - maybe a phased roll-out?

[Toto]

Originally Posted by luv-snail

This is a bit of a sensitive issue with a lot of people. The majority of inexperienced users would probably welcome spam and/or virus filtering on their email, but almost all advanced users are strongly opposed to any kind of mail filtering done by the ISP. The job of the ISP's mail servers is to accept the customers' mail and make it available to them, without unnecessarily tampering with it. Some users may *want* to receive spam emails or viruses, for whatever reason, and it is not the place of the ISP to say that they cannot. Also, no mail filtering software is 100% accurate, and you can guarantee that some legitimate email would be filtered out by the system.

Installing spam and virus protection is the responsibility of the user, and the most the ISP can do is educate the user about the need to do so. I run my own mail server, so I don't rely on ntl's mail servers for my main email, but if I did I would have to seriously consider switching ISP if they started filtering email.

That's the way I see it, anyway.

Sorry Luv-Snail, it is the responsibility of email serving Internet service providers to ensure they provide a reliable and stable email platform to all subscribers. If you could see the amount of junk email literally targeted at mail servers, and the cost in £M's it takes to process such material, you'd have a different view.

If a user's ISP is filtering spam, and do not offer any user intervention to control such, then users should consider a different email service if they believe that they are being dictated too by their service providers. The fact that BT, Tiscali, AOL, Freeserve and now ntl offer anti spam filtering is evidence that spam is a serious issue. I suspect that most service providers will have some kind of spam filtering service, and in most cases will allow user control at some stage.

ntl may have been slow in the uptake, but they have no choice, better to loose a tiny minority of users to save hundreds and thousands of customers.

ntl are now spam filtering email, and blocking inbound virus infected attachments. Phase two this year will see an increase in spam filtering with the use of a popular third party filtering service, which will have some user control.

You make a valid point though, users should still use their own spam filtering and virus protection, and I'm sure that ntl and other services providers will continue to educate their customers accordingly.

Yes, no anti spam measure is 100% effective, but that should not be a reason to allow spammers through your network. Cut off their source of revenue, and they will go else where. The fact of the matter is that they will limit their attacks to networks that allow spam through., and that could spell disaster to a small network, possibly the one you switch too if you feel ntl are not doing the right thing?

[greencreeper]

I agree with luv-snail. (I can' say I love them, but I do hate treading on them ) I accept the point that spam is crippling networks, but I think that if muppet users, who should never be let near a toaster let alone a PC, didn't respond to spam and effectively filtered it out using something like Spampal, then the spammers would go away - spamming would no longer be profitable.

For me, the issue is that NTL is doing the filtering. Since when did they get anything right first time? They can't even offer a reliable email service. They'll just make a mess of it and many, many customers will find legitimate emails being blocked. Save yourselves - find another ISP now, while there's still time

If NTL is currently filtering spam, then it's not working that well judging by the amount I get.

[Toto]

Originally Posted by greencreeper

I agree with luv-snail. (I can' say I love them, but I do hate treading on them ) I accept the point that spam is crippling networks, but I think that if muppet users, who should never be let near a toaster let alone a PC, didn't respond to spam and effectively filtered it out using something like Spampal, then the spammers would go away - spamming would no longer be profitable.

For me, the issue is that NTL is doing the filtering. Since when did they get anything right first time? They can't even offer a reliable email service. They'll just make a mess of it and many, many customers will find legitimate emails being blocked. Save yourselves - find another ISP now, while there's still time

If NTL is currently filtering spam, then it's not working that well judging by the amount I get.

Much of ntl's problems with their mail service has been because of the millions of spam messages sent to ntl users, and has nothing to do with people responding to spam. Most spam is generated by dictionary attacks against a network, and addresses harvested from virus infected PC's

Oh, and describng millions of Internet users as muppets......not good, its thanks to these millions that we have competition for cheaper and faster services

ntl is blocking spam right now, I've seen a difference, but not enough of a difference to say its effective in the mainstream. I've not yet lost any email I was expecting, so so far so good, but that is not to say it won't happen, and that it may cause me problems in the future.

[greencreeper]

Originally Posted by Toto

Much of ntl's problems with their mail service has been because of the millions of spam messages sent to ntl users, and has nothing to do with people responding to spam. Most spam is generated by dictionary attacks against a network, and addresses harvested from virus infected PC's

I think it had (has) more to do with NTL simply being incapable of delivering on its promises to customers. I think you missed my point regarding responding to spam. It's only because people respond that spammers are still spamming. Oh and the fact that there's no chance of stopping spammers at source because the countries of origin, such as Eastern Europe, don't have, and aren't ever likely to have, the required legislation and couldn't enforce it if they did. Even our own modern, slightly less corrupt police forces are years behind when it comes to cyberspace and crime. Responses to spam have little impact on network traffic compared to the volume of spam itself.

Originally Posted by Toto

Oh, and describng millions of Internet users as muppets......not good, its thanks to these millions that we have competition for cheaper and faster services

I'm so grateful

Originally Posted by Toto

ntl is blocking spam right now, I've seen a difference, but not enough of a difference to say its effective in the mainstream. I've not yet lost any email I was expecting, so so far so good, but that is not to say it won't happen, and that it may cause me problems in the future.

What about the mail you weren't expecting - how do you know you haven't lost any of that? Chances are you will have. That's why I have a non-NTL account for work/professional purposes.

[Toto]

Good comments Greencreeper, however, a couple of observations.

I think it had (has) more to do with NTL simply being incapable of delivering on its promises to customers. I think you missed my point regarding responding to spam. It's only because people respond that spammers are still spamming

You then said:

Responses to spam have little impact on network traffic compared to the volume of spam itself.

So responding to spam does or does not cuase network problems? I hardly think that a handfull of spam responses by ntl customers is responsible for the millions of spams per day that ntl has to handle.

I think it had (has) more to do with NTL simply being incapable of delivering on its promises to customers.

So ntl identifying that Spam has been the major cause of its recent, and well published email problems, then actually starting doing something about it is a break of its promises to its customers?

Oh and the fact that there's no chance of stopping spammers at source because the countries of origin, such as Eastern Europe, don't have, and aren't ever likely to have, the required legislation and couldn't enforce it if they did.

Spot on, so the solution is to block the spam at the server side, it has to be stopped somewhere, the problem cannot be allowed to get out of hand, with no hope of a respite.

What about the mail you weren't expecting - how do you know you haven't lost any of that? Chances are you will have. That's why I have a non-NTL account for work/professional purposes.

Agreed, and I also have a number of email accounts I can use to be certain I get the email I want. Given the fact that so many ntl customers are complaining about the volumes of spam, ntl would be foolish to continue to think there is no problem, that everybody is in the same boat, and that there is not a solution. The truth is there IS a problem, all ISP's suffer from the effects of spam, and there ARE solutions. Filtering is the only way forward until the major networks can agree on a system of email verification and delivery that will ensure a fair and working spam prevention system. Until that time, ntl and the other major ISP's must take drastic measures

It's not a perfect solution, nobody is arguing with you there, but ntl has about 1.2M Broadband subscribers, they dictate what they want, because they are a genuine, and profitable revenue source to ntl, and if they say "We want protection from this onslaught of junk email", ntl will have to give it to them, or they (we) walk , en mass.

Hang on! Is this actually a fact or a rumour.Have NTL instituted spam filtering? Because I've not noticed any reduction at all and Spamnet is still working hard to sort it for me.

Incog

[luv-snail]

Originally Posted by Toto

Sorry Luv-Snail, it is the responsibility of email serving Internet service providers to ensure they provide a reliable and stable email platform to all subscribers.

Well, my definition of a "reliable and stable email platform" would be one that successfully delivers all my mail to me - that is, all mail destined to my address. If messages are dropped, for whatever reason, then it's not doing its job.

If ntl's servers and pipes cannot cope with the volume of mail they are receiving, they need to be upgraded. If users want filtering, they can install their own solution - or, if they prefer to be spoonfed, they can pay someone else to do it for them. To be honest, I find it hard to believe that anyone would want someone else to decide which of their emails they can and cannot read. The only people I can imagine supporting the idea of ISP mail filtering are those who believe that mail filters are "magical" and never make a wrong decision.

[Raistlin]

Originally Posted by jonbr

I'm new to the forum so please forgive me if this has been asked before

Since a whole 3 days have gone by and nobody else has said it.....

to CF.

Sit back, kick off your shoes, relax, and enjoy your stay!

[greencreeper]

Originally Posted by Toto

So responding to spam does or does not cuase network problems? I hardly think that a handfull of spam responses by ntl customers is responsible for the millions of spams per day that ntl has to handle.

The relationship is not direct, but yes - if you give someone hope, they'll keep on trying. Only takes a few responses for the spammers to think there's something in it for them. The volume of spam is simply the spammers casting their net wide.

Originally Posted by Toto

So ntl identifying that Spam has been the major cause of its recent, and well published email problems, then actually starting doing something about it is a break of its promises to its customers?

I was referring to the dire email service, which to be fair is much more stable these days than it's ever been in the past.


I'm not oppose to blocking spam - I am oppose to NTL blocking spam because I don't trust them not to make a mess of it; and if spam has to be blocked, then give people the choice - opt out or opt in to spam filtering.

It annoys the hell out of me that the competent Netizens have to suffer because of a multitude of muppets. Leave me and the services you provide me alone - I know what I'm doing thanks, and don't need my hand held.

[luv-snail]

Originally Posted by luv-snail

The only people I can imagine supporting the idea of ISP mail filtering are those who believe that mail filters are "magical" and never make a wrong decision.

Ironically, the reply notification mail I just received for this thread was incorrectly tagged as spam by my filter. :p I've trained it not to do so in the future, though.

Originally Posted by greencreeper

if spam has to be blocked, then give people the choice - opt out or opt in to spam filtering.

I'd be happy with that...

[Toto]

Originally Posted by Incognitas

Hang on! Is this actually a fact or a rumour.Have NTL instituted spam filtering? Because I've not noticed any reduction at all and Spamnet is still working hard to sort it for me.

Incog

Fact, ntl have introduced the first stage anti spam filtering (since late Nov 2004), which I believe is an agressive use of Realtime Blakck Lists, and also do antivirus scanning on inbound emails, and drop them if they are infected.

http://www.ntlworld.com/help/aup/anti_spam.php

[Toto]

I do understand the real arguments not to block emails, and allow users to deal with spam themselves, but I'm convinced that the bulk of an ISP's customers welcome the fact that their provider is dumping the mail first.

Me, I'm easy about it either way, I use an email client that does some good first stage filtering, and I can then control the rest.