Spammer accounts not getting nuked.

elvey · 15 May 2003, 10:05 AM

* According to Digital Impact, 85% of Broadcast Email Offers are
responded to within the FIRST 48 HOURS! (And they should know, they send a ton of it.)

There have been many spam reports against debtfreeforever@fastmail.fm, the first is two days old, but the account is still live.

I hope Jeremy gets well and responsiveness improves soon, given the new staff.

Hope http://wiki.fastmail.fm/wiki/index.p...onsImplemented
starts seeing some activity too.

Onno · 15 May 2003, 11:37 AM

Account has been nuked.

elvey · 15 May 2003, 11:53 AM

Good. It seems kind of silly that a post here is needed to get action, and that emails from spamcop don't.

The claim here that

Quote:

At FastMail.FM we observe on average about 30% of reports are correct.

may have been true once, but it is utterly false, at least for the past month. Upwards of 95% of the reports are correct.

Jeremy Howard · 15 May 2003, 04:56 PM

I'll ask Rob and Kurian to watch the abuse folder better - I had been handling it mainly before my RSI.

Thanks for the feedback.

elvey · 16 May 2003, 03:24 AM

Sure. Glad it's (and hopefully my other suggestions are) welcome.

Rob and Kurian: TIA for nuking createabundance@fastmail.fm, subject of reports yesterday and today.

elvey · 18 May 2003, 03:19 AM

Or not. The account is still open and the complaints are pouring in.

elvey · 18 May 2003, 03:21 AM

photoartpress2@jetemail.net needs nuking.

biffbulkie · 18 May 2003, 05:29 AM

Slow response to these matters is sure to tarnish Fastmail's reputation and in turn hurt all of us who are subscribers.

Onno · 18 May 2003, 06:29 AM

The fastest way to get accounts closed is still to email abuse. I cannot see messages for the above accounts in the abuse folder (at the moment), but I have closed them anyway based on the contents of the accounts in question.

elvey · 18 May 2003, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Onno
The fastest way to get accounts closed is still to email abuse. I cannot see messages for the above accounts in the abuse folder (at the moment),

The above example shows an account that remained open for two days after email to abuse, and got closed within an hour or so of posting here.
Clearly there's a major problem with fastmail's abuse handling!!! Cuz abuse WAS emailed repeatedly, and the accounts WERE left open, as I indicated.

Maybe I'm being a bit oversensitive, but it seems that you're saying that I'm not correct (i.e. lying) when I insist that many reports to Fastmail abuse on this issue were filed, and yet not acted on (at the time that I complained here). You should clarify what you are trying to say.

Here is a paste of 8 of the timestamped reports from spamcop regarding createabundance (8 of many more recent reports of fastmail abuse that weren't acted on). If this isn't enough evidence for anyone, post here and I'll respond with the detailed content of each of the reports. I have also checked through spamcop that reports were sent to fastmail abuse (jhoward@, as you know) about these issues.

9k Fri, 16 May ... 247048760ATreports.spamcop.net [SpamCop (createabundance@fastmail...
9k 15 May 13:02 "ANN Network Abuse Desk" <2466... [SpamCop (createabundance@fastmail...
10k 15 May 12:48 "Abuse Dept." <246490383@repor... [SpamCop (createabundance@fastmail...
11k 15 May 12:02 246366433ATreports.spamcop.net [SpamCop (createabundance@fastmail...
9k 15 May 11:43 "Alan Paterson" <246988356@rep... [SpamCop (createabundance@fastmail...
9k 15 May 11:34 "Alan Bellingham (@ Home)" <24... [SpamCop (createabundance@fastmail...
9k 15 May 1:26 245988247ATreports.spamcop.net [SpamCop (createabundance@fastmail...
9k 14 May 23:48 245732296ATreports.spamcop.net [SpamCop (createabundance@fastmail...

Onno · 18 May 2003, 07:36 PM

Quote:

it seems that you're saying that I'm not correct (i.e. lying) when I insist that many reports to Fastmail abuse on this issue were filed, and yet not acted on (at the time that I complained here). You should clarify what you are trying to say.

I'm trying to say that there were, at the time that I checked, no messages in the abuse folder concerning these accounts. For me, personally, I therefore had little reason to close these accounts. Of course, your mention here of the accounts was a pretty good indication that something was up. As I don't like going around closing accounts willy-nilly, I explained that I checked the contents of the accounts and closed them on that basis. Nowhere did I say you were incorrect.

Again, for me personally, since I don't really deal with abuse, the only place I check occasionaly is the abuse folder to weed out the worst of it. I'm afraid that's also all the comment I can really give on this matter, as my knowledge of the systems and policies regarding spam is not sufficient to give you a proper informed answer on the issues you are raising.

mcowger · 18 May 2003, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by elvey
[b]well then there's a major problem with fastmail's abuse handling!!! Cuz abuse WAS emailed repeatedly, and the accounts WERE left open, as I indicated.
Maybe I'm being a bit oversensitive, but it seems that you're saying that I'm not correct (i.e. lying) when I insist that many reports to Fastmail abuse on this issue were filed, and yet not acted on (at the time that I complained here). You should clarify what you are trying to say.

Here is a paste of 8 of the timestamped reports from spamcop regarding createabundance (8 of many more recent reports of fastmail abuse that weren't acted on). If this isn't enough evidence for anyone, post here and I'll respond with the detailed content of each of the reports. I have also checked through spamcop that reports were sent to fastmail abuse (jhoward@, as you know) about these issues.

Slow down there, turbo! No one said you were lying. Onno simply said he did some extra verfication to make sure the accounts were those of spammers! Which is a good thing! What If I reported you, for no good reason, and Onno didn't check. You'd be really angry! What if I had reported someone with a similar address, and mistyped it to yours! Its GOOD that he's doing quick extra checks, don't bite his head off because of it.

I recognize spam prevention from FM is important to you, but being nice about it and recognizing that they work at preventing it will get you further that screaming about the tiniest perceived slight.

elvey · 19 May 2003, 01:28 PM

I'm not complaining that Onno checked on the appropriateness of the cancellation before doing it; I've clarified my previous post by removing the bit where I quoted Onno, so that this is clearer. (OTOH, I can't imagine cancellation of an account named, e.g. debtfreeforever or createabundance is something that should take much effort. It pretty obviously sounds like a spammer dropbox address, so combined with complaints, seems a poor use of time when time is apparently in such short supply that dropboxes aren't getting considered for termination.)

I'm being nice about it. I'm not calling anyone a liar either, I might point out!

I'm not complaing about the tiniest perceived slight, unless you think usually allowing spammers to operate spammer dropboxes that invite mailbomb attacks on fastmail is a tiny slight. I'm not sure if SPEWS entries are created for services that do this, but I don't want to find out the hard way! Is not preventing the volume of spam that I've shown (on other threads) to be emanating from Fastmail (~30,000/SpamCop listing) a tiny slight as well?

I guess I just want to hear some recognition that there are significant flaws that need to be addressed, and a action that shows that it's being prioritized appropriately. I'll just assume that I've heard this, and hope folks don't get really defensive again. I think I'll leave the whole spam issue alone for a couple weeks, and not discuss it further, unless asked.

Onno, I guess it's not clear from my previous posts: abuse reports from SpamCop about fastmail, at Jeremy's request, go to jhoward@fastmail, not abuse@fastmail.

elvey · 6 Jun 2003, 06:05 AM

Well, it's been a couple weeks, and there's good and bad news. It's good news that SpamCop reports against FastMail have gone down a bit. It's bad news that I still don't see recognition that there are significant flaws that need to be addressed.

sjk · 6 Jun 2003, 06:53 AM

Feedback from FastMail regarding many suggestions (old and new) has significantly decreased in parallel with Jeremy's reduced forum participation.

Rob's comments in http://www.emaildiscussions.com/...919#post111919, along with my original and followup posts, are still relevant.

15 May 2003, 10:05 AM	#1
elvey The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: San Francisco Posts: 2,464	Spammer accounts not getting nuked. * According to Digital Impact, 85% of Broadcast Email Offers are responded to within the FIRST 48 HOURS! (And they should know, they send a ton of it.) There have been many spam reports against debtfreeforever@fastmail.fm, the first is two days old, but the account is still live. I hope Jeremy gets well and responsiveness improves soon, given the new staff. Hope http://wiki.fastmail.fm/wiki/index.p...onsImplemented starts seeing some activity too.

15 May 2003, 11:37 AM	#2
Onno Cornerstone of the Community Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Amsterdam Posts: 753	Account has been nuked.

15 May 2003, 04:56 PM	#4
Jeremy Howard Ultimate Contributor Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Australia Posts: 11,501	I'll ask Rob and Kurian to watch the abuse folder better - I had been handling it mainly before my RSI. Thanks for the feedback.

16 May 2003, 03:24 AM	#5
elvey The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: San Francisco Posts: 2,464	Sure. Glad it's (and hopefully my other suggestions are) welcome. Rob and Kurian: TIA for nuking createabundance@fastmail.fm, subject of reports yesterday and today.

18 May 2003, 03:19 AM	#6
elvey The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: San Francisco Posts: 2,464	Or not. The account is still open and the complaints are pouring in.

18 May 2003, 03:21 AM	#7
elvey The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: San Francisco Posts: 2,464	photoartpress2@jetemail.net needs nuking.

18 May 2003, 05:29 AM	#8
biffbulkie Essential Contributor Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: New England Posts: 358	Slow response to these matters is sure to tarnish Fastmail's reputation and in turn hurt all of us who are subscribers.

18 May 2003, 06:29 AM	#9
Onno Cornerstone of the Community Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Amsterdam Posts: 753	The fastest way to get accounts closed is still to email abuse. I cannot see messages for the above accounts in the abuse folder (at the moment), but I have closed them anyway based on the contents of the accounts in question.

19 May 2003, 01:28 PM	#13
elvey The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: San Francisco Posts: 2,464	I'm not complaining that Onno checked on the appropriateness of the cancellation before doing it; I've clarified my previous post by removing the bit where I quoted Onno, so that this is clearer. (OTOH, I can't imagine cancellation of an account named, e.g. debtfreeforever or createabundance is something that should take much effort. It pretty obviously sounds like a spammer dropbox address, so combined with complaints, seems a poor use of time when time is apparently in such short supply that dropboxes aren't getting considered for termination.) I'm being nice about it. I'm not calling anyone a liar either, I might point out! I'm not complaing about the tiniest perceived slight, unless you think usually allowing spammers to operate spammer dropboxes that invite mailbomb attacks on fastmail is a tiny slight. I'm not sure if SPEWS entries are created for services that do this, but I don't want to find out the hard way! Is not preventing the volume of spam that I've shown (on other threads) to be emanating from Fastmail (~30,000/SpamCop listing) a tiny slight as well? I guess I just want to hear some recognition that there are significant flaws that need to be addressed, and a action that shows that it's being prioritized appropriately. I'll just assume that I've heard this, and hope folks don't get really defensive again. I think I'll leave the whole spam issue alone for a couple weeks, and not discuss it further, unless asked. Onno, I guess it's not clear from my previous posts: abuse reports from SpamCop about fastmail, at Jeremy's request, go to jhoward@fastmail, not abuse@fastmail.

6 Jun 2003, 06:05 AM	#14
elvey The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: San Francisco Posts: 2,464	Well, it's been a couple weeks, and there's good and bad news. It's good news that SpamCop reports against FastMail have gone down a bit. It's bad news that I still don't see recognition that there are significant flaws that need to be addressed.

6 Jun 2003, 06:53 AM	#15
sjk Master of the @ Join Date: May 2002 Location: Eugene Posts: 1,975	Feedback from FastMail regarding many suggestions (old and new) has significantly decreased in parallel with Jeremy's reduced forum participation. Rob's comments in http://www.emaildiscussions.com/...919#post111919, along with my original and followup posts, are still relevant.