Virgin email - spying or nanny?

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Moldova

No only for supported email clients and webmail which again is in the terms and conditions.

The router at all times remains the property of Virginmedia that is why we offer full technical support.

but you were implying that if it were free you wouldn't offer full technical support? otherwise you wouldn't need to make that point?

Moldova, I refer you to this post sir.

Originally Posted by xocemp

And lets not forget

The same old same old.

[Peter_]

Originally Posted by xocemp

Moldova, I refer you to this post sir.

I know, I know, I should stop but I was bored.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by xocemp

Moldova, I refer you to this post sir.

We all saw your 'Troll Song' already.

I like this song

[graf_von_anonym]

Originally Posted by Gary L

VM are telling 'us' that we can't send them passworded. and are telling us that we can't receive them. whether malware authors distribute them in this fashion or not is irrelevant. because they are telling us that 'we' can't send them.

Through their SMTP servers. There's nothing that stops you from sending them through your Virgin Media connection by other means. They're not doing content scanning on port 25 here, just examining headers submitted through their own equipment. As is their right, as it's their equipment. You do understand this, yes? It is their ball.

Originally Posted by Gary L

If they are to blame for why they have to be blocked, then they are being nanny. they should give you the option to not have your hand held for you. and let you be grown up and over the age of 18 where it's assumed that you might not be a child.

I am having trouble parsing this, but I think that what you are saying is that Virgin's efforts to slow the spread of spam or viruses constitutes 'nanny' behaviour. Which is perhaps the case, in that they are making an effort to protect some of their users, and, indeed, other internet users who are not directly their customers. It is the case, it seems, that Virgin are applying stricter rules than other email providers. What of it? There are other email providers.

Just because one person is King Awesome of Email Town and can happily and safely send executables or password protected compressed files does not mean that everyone can do so, nor, indeed, that it's a good idea. As with most commercial or technical decisions, the issue is not about picking the 'best' course of action (which here would seem to be one where you were given totally unrestricted access) but the least worst. That's the nature of things like email provision, where it'll tend to be one size fits all. If that size doesn't fit you, or you chafe at its restrictive collar, then going elsewhere would seem the best course of action. Do not even think, by the way, of applying the "things have changed" defense - Virgin's customers are offered an internet connection, and as an inducement on top of that email services are offered. Email does not appear as a line item on the bill, nor is a requirement of the provision of services. Indeed, other than the AUP, email isn't a 'product' that Virgin Media supply, just something made available.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by graf_von_anonym

I am having trouble parsing this, but I think that what you are saying is that Virgin's efforts to slow the spread of spam or viruses constitutes 'nanny' behaviour. Which is perhaps the case, in that they are making an effort to protect some of their users, and, indeed, other internet users who are not directly their customers. It is the case, it seems, that Virgin are applying stricter rules than other email providers. What of it?

It means as well as protecting some users, they are not protecting some others. their email will no longer be able to be sent or received as secure as it was or should be by not being able to 'lock' it from others.

Thread moved to Webspace,E-Mail and Browsing issues.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Gary L

Because I can be.

VM are telling 'us' that we can't send them passworded. and are telling us that we can't receive them. whether malware authors distribute them in this fashion or not is irrelevant. because they are telling us that 'we' can't send them.

It's not. The reason that they are blocking sending as well is that the Malware authors don't use nice, centralised servers to send the emails. If they did, they would be easy to control. No, they use the computers of hundreds, if not thousands of innocent people hosted on ISPs such as Virgin.

So, if a major ISP blocks them, then it *will* have an impact on malware being sent, as such malware is relevant.

You can blame something on something, and then something more. until one of them somethings are the accepted reason to why something came in force.

If they are to blame for why they have to be blocked, then they are being nanny. they should give you the option to not have your hand held for you. and let you be grown up and over the age of 18 where it's assumed that you might not be a child.

Children aren't the only ones affected.. They also aren't the only ones that need protection.

I object to Phorm partly it is difficult to avoid with any certainty for a lot of people as many people are stuck with Virgin (for whatever reason) if they want high speed broadbanda and even with the opt out cookie, it is difficult to check that your data is not going through Phorm's servers.

With Email it's different. VM don't offer anything on their email service that is not offered by thousands of other providers. While it is inconveniant to change email providers it *is* possible for every email user.

[graf_von_anonym]

Originally Posted by Gary L

It means as well as protecting some users, they are not protecting some others. their email will no longer be able to be sent or received as secure as it was or should be by not being able to 'lock' it from others.

There are other ways to protect information sent by email other than by password protecting compressed files. Indeed, there are many ways to protect information, and I would suggest that when you are using a consumer ISP's email servers you are already failing to operate at the most secure level. Most people don't encrypt email, never mind password protect their attachments. Those processes are often abused, and Virgin have decided that the security risk to other internet users from their servers being used in such a way is greater than the security benefit to a proportion of their users from allowing them to be used in that way. Again, there are other ways to securely transmit information, and I will be honest, "password protected" email attachments is not one of them.

You're going to keep going round in circles here. This is one of those issues like wearing seatbelts or speeding - there is no point in denying that in some accidents not wearing a seatbelt is beneficial, or that in some cases it is safe (or indeed safer) to go above the statute speed limit. However, in the vast, indeed, overwhelming majority of cases it is better to wear a seatbelt or to obey the speed limit. It's a cost/benefit analysis. The odds of you being in an accident where not wearing a seatbelt is useful are tiny in comparison to those where it would be.

The same is the case here, with these email rules. The features you are rattling on about are offered by some providers, but Virgin are a mass-market ISP. They will endeavour to offer the least complicated solution, to the extent that they will only offer one. They will err on the side of simplicity, and they will tend to value convenience over security, with the further addendum that convenience primarily extends to their efforts in maintaining and operating their network.

So, to reiterate - the feature you want is used more for abuse than security, notwithstanding its utility for either. Virgin are eager to reduce abuse, and there are other means of securing email. One policy for all users reduced administrative headaches, so they turn it off.

Now, as for your argument that there should be a magic switch that Virgin can flick that would allow you to send password protected attachments through their SMTP servers, there is, sort of, but it is not in their interest to use it. How, pray tell, would you determine who could be trusted to use the feature? It's on a par with the "magic technical test" or the "secret formula" that people hope for when they phone technical support - it's a nonsense, a desperate hope that'd ultimately be self-defeating. The easier alternative is to allow customers to use other SMTP servers, which Virgin... do.

You seem to continually attribute to malice, or, indeed, maternal instinct what can most easily be explained by Virgin's unwillingness to extend any more than the minimum effort for what amounts to the maximum profit. I don't think it "nanny" behaviour to suggest that in general it's not a good idea to jump off of bridges. Specific circumstances might mean that it's different, but advising you against behaviours that can cause you and others problems when you are using a service that someone else provides and administers is hardly disenfranchisement.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by graf_von_anonym

I don't think it "nanny" behaviour

Well if the government gets their way of ISP's snooping on us all, then there's not much else VM can do besides what they're already doing. not being able to send encrypted/passworded files deserves a pat on the back in the step to combat crime and terrorism.

[Peter_]

Originally Posted by Gary L

Well if the government gets their way of ISP's snooping on us all, then there's not much else VM can do besides what they're already doing. not being able to send encrypted/passworded files deserves a pat on the back in the step to combat crime and terrorism.

If people have something they want to hide then the easy answer is do not use this type of data transfer, but if you want a free email service that is supplied at no extra cost to yourself by your ISP then continue to use the service.

Anyone truly paranoid about possible email surveillance should take their email requirements elsewhere.

Also just in case anyone is unaware if you decide to go to another ISP your Virginmedia email address will close and you will lose all access to your mailbox when your broadband account closes.

So maybe if you are thinking of leaving this is the time to change your email address to a none ISP based email address.

As you do not use one of these accounts Gary why are you continuing to post about it as people can do as they want with their accounts.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Moldova

As you do not use one of these accounts Gary why are you continuing to post about it as people can do as they want with their accounts.

I've started using it again now. just so I get the right to be able to say something about it.

[BenMcr]

But then if you have only just started using it then you have to abide by the rules already in the place for the account.

And if you don't then it's your choice NOT to use it

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

But then if you have only just started using it then you have to abide by the rules already in the place for the account.

And if you don't then it's your choice NOT to use it

No, it doesn't work like that

[Peter_]

Originally Posted by Gary L

I've started using it now. just so I get the right to be able to say something about it.

They are not going to change anything though as very few people will even be interested with the fact that Virgin scans mail for such items, anyone that requires these type of emails to be sent will already have looked elsewhere for a email provider that meets their requirements.