E-Mail and Xfinity Connect Help

[Anon311234]

I would like to know what more is Comcast doing to prevent spam. I use the "this is spam" button every single day. Seems the more that I use it the more spam and the same spam I get. What gives?

I feel that Comcast should be at least doing something about the spam that report as spam. Where does the spam go after we click the button "this is spam"???? Is someone not doing their job or what?

Eric

[EarlyOut]

First and foremost, do you have the spam filter enabled? (Go to My Account and look under the email settings.)

The spam filters learn how to spot spam by having lots of people reporting the same kinds of junk. One person reporting a message doesn't accomplish much - it's the cumulative effect that makes a difference.

Some ISPs have more aggressive spam filters than Comcast. The downside is that they sometimes filter out legitimate emails, whereas I've never seen the Comcast filters do that. I'll put up with a few spam messages from time to time, rather than having real emails get lost in the shuffle.

[Mamoo]

It takes a lot of "report as spam" reports from a lot of people for something to be added to the spam filter. Do you have the Spam Filter turned on?

[Anon311234]

I have everything active that I can with Comcast email, it is not a matter of that. It is a matter of I keep reporting this spam as spam and I keep getting it, it is like when I report it as spam it does not good


Eric

[Anon311234]

and why should it take a lot of spam to be reported before comcast does something? That is a bunch of crap. If I report it as spam it should be comcast responsiblity to take care of the customer that is reporting it!

Eric

[Mamoo]

> and why should it take a lot of spam to be reported
> before comcast does something?

The spam filter is for everyone, not just your account. Would you like one accidental report by someone else to keep you from getting an email list that you want?

There's a lot of spam software out there that you can get if you don't think the Comcast filter is doing its job. As for me, I rarely get spam in my screened mail folder, let alone my inbox.

[EarlyOut]

> If I report it as spam it should be comcast
> responsiblity to take care of the customer that is
> reporting it!

You seem to be under the impression that Comcast has thousands upon thousands of employees who do nothing all day but carefully scan all of the email passing through its servers, weeding out things that are "bad." Obviously, this can only be done by an automated system of some sort, because of the sheer volume of mail that comes bouncing across the wires.

So, you get a message about "viagra," so you think every message containing that word should be blocked, right? Well, how about if the spammer spells it "\/iagra?" Or "vi.agra?" What if a friend of yours sends you a message in which he tells you a joke about "viagra?" Do you want that message to be filtered out?

Maybe you want all messages from a certain sender blocked. But of course, spammers don't use the same return addresses for more than a few hours, so that's not going to work.

If you know of some way to filter out spam better than it's being done now, propose it. And get rich.

[Barmar]

> and why should it take a lot of spam to be reported
> before comcast does something? That is a bunch of
> crap. If I report it as spam it should be comcast
> responsiblity to take care of the customer that is
> reporting it!

Every spam message is different -- spammers intentionally throw lots of random words into them just to ensure that it's hard to match them exactly. That's why the Subject lines are frequently nonsense phrases. Sometimes you can't even see the random words, as they like to hide them in white text on white backgrounds (you'll see them if you view the raw source of the message).

So the spam filter is looking for patterns that are common to lots of messages. For this to work, it has to get lots of samples.

[Animal]

> and why should it take a lot of spam to be reported
> before comcast does something? That is a bunch of
> crap. If I report it as spam it should be comcast
> responsibility to take care of the customer that is
> reporting it!
>
> Eric


The fast answer to that is, you are one person. What if what is spam to you isn't spam to 50 people. So you don't like it, but 50 do. Is that fair? Works the other way, too. I don't like what you get as email and I report it as spam, now you're denied. And making comcast more stringent has the possibilities of denying thousands of legitimate mail.

This subject has be debated for years and no one has the fix all silver bullet. And as soon as one is invented the spam scum will find another way to defeat it. And the argument will rage again. As long as an ISP serves millions everybody will not be happy. Some will love it and some will hate whatever is put in place. Thats the nature of humans.

Be (spam) Safe

Da Animale'

[EarlyOut]

By the way, if you want to see a real-world example of what can happen when a spam filter responds too quickly to users reporting things as spam, check out the notice on the login page of my bank. Classic.

[Barmar]

> By the way, if you want to see a real-world example
> of what can happen when a spam filter responds too
> quickly to users reporting things as spam, check out
> the notice on the
> > HB/Signon.cgi>login page of my bank. Classic.

My guess is that the bank's problem is more of an anti-phishing issue than anti-spam. The phishers have gotten very good at making their messages look just like the real messages that eBay, PayPal, and most banks send out, so it's not uncommon for legitimate messages from these institutions to be misconstrued as phishing. The phishers have become the "boy who cried wolf".

[madylarian]

> My guess is that the bank's problem is more of an
> anti-phishing issue than anti-spam.

Actually, it's a very real antispam problem and AOL is known for having a hair trigger when it comes to blocking spam these days. It's one of the P-I-T-A problems that abuse desks have to deal with; erroneous spam complaints due to overactive filtering.

For the original poster, though, it shows just why one person's reports (or a few person's reports) cannot be used to filter spam. Were this not so, one or a few people could block legitimate email just by sending in false complaints.

mady

[oldmike1]

The best spam device is your delete button.

[madylarian]

> The best spam device is your delete button.


I strongly disagree. The best is the "Report As Spam" button. If you just delete it the filters will never "learn".

mady

[Mamoo]

The best anti-spam device is a dot in your username.

[three4]

Have used Comcast 6 months, love the speed. Hate the spam and lack of protection. The posts and originator are RIGHT.
Comcast rep is WRONG.
No one sits and counts adds up potential spam at Comcast, if they do you are wasting subscribers time and money. You have an AUTOMATIC filtering system. Computer determines who for EACH SUBSCRIBER is spam. Jump to AOL and find out. Two areas, one for favorite folks, one for dum dums that reply with trash.
The subscriber taylors EACH for his demands and his browsing.
IF Comcast has a global spam system fine.
BUT THE SUBSCRIBER needs to have a personal spam option within his Mailbox. Do not have so is a head in the sand attitude by the Service Provider.
As others, I report spam and there is an INCREASE in number of spams by some stupid dork in Kentucky who changes one letter in their fake name and here comes another batch.
WAKE UP COMCAST. If this garbage keeps up I may return to AOL high speed, and also then cancel my COMCAST phone service.

Unhappy in Grand Rapids Michigan USA

PS WHERE is the option for me to send myself a copy of this message????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

[FishMan]

> BUT THE SUBSCRIBER needs to have a personal spam
> option within his Mailbox.

You do have a pesonal option. All you need to do is use an email client like Outlook Express, Thunderbird, Pegasus (all free). Set up your spam preferrences and be happy.

>
> PS WHERE is the option for me to send myself a copy
> of this
> message???????????????????????????????????????????????
> ?????????????????????

I think all email clients, at least the more popular ones, have this option. Just configure your client to send yoursef a copy.

[CWH803]

larsINmichigan posted "PS WHERE is the option for me to send myself a copy of this message?"

This is a forum, not an e-mail function. You can read your post and edit it if you desire by clicking about this thread.

[Barmar]

> Have used Comcast 6 months, love the speed. Hate the
> spam and lack of protection. The posts and
> originator are RIGHT.
> Comcast rep is WRONG.

No Comcast reps have posted in this thread, so what are you referring to?

[three4]

Too bad 'NO comcast replied...." Just ASSUMED this was like many other mfg and supplier sites where they are concerned bout their product and give intelligent answers. apparently its the blind leading the blind, every person grumbling to everyone else.
Apologies. Thought Comcast the unapproachable was actually alive here. Hence its as bad as their non local contacts for service.

Bye all.

[Michael]

larsINmichigan,

Thank you very much for your feedback. I am sorry to hear that you do not find our SPAM filtering to be effective.

Based on user feedback, we have tried to provide the best balance of protection. The Brightmail system does provide a high level filtering capability, which has the capacity to learn. The filtering is set at a level which will capture the majority of SPAM without the likelihood of false positives.

In addition, we give the customer the freedom to use their own filtering system. As mentioned in this thread, many of the standard e-mail clients (Outlook, Outlook Express, Eudora, Thunderbird) have this feature built in. In addition, many people recommend a server side solution, such as Mail Washer, which filters the SPAM before it is downloaded.

In the past, many customers have stated that they do not want a restrictive or overly sensitive filtering system. The main concern is that legitimate mail may be filtered. We have had many recommendations that we should allow the customer to use the software and methods that work best for them. Clearly, there is no "one size fits all" solution.

[Uncle George]

Comcast still has not addressed the original user’s question.

I feel that Comcast should be at least doing something about the spam that report as spam. Where does the spam go after we click the button "this is spam"???? Is someone not doing their job or what? – Anon311234

Comcast’s response, after twenty other entries had been posted, was addressed to larsINMichigan.

Lars is right, and, if one searches this email forum one will see the reoccurring theme, “Where’s Comcast?” Thanks, Lars, for the vindication, and again, pointing out the obvious.

This email forum is out of hand. If more than one user is confused by Comcast’s advertised “top technical experts” advice instead being a free-for-all for whoever wants to opinionate, then this section needs a gander from Comcast’s top management.

Finally, this user votes for a tightening up of the filter. My constant and unrelenting efforts towards “training” the filter still does not appear to be working at acceptable levels.

Regards, UncleG.

[Barmar]

> Finally, this user votes for a tightening up of the
> filter. My constant and unrelenting efforts towards
> “training” the filter still does not appear to be
> working at acceptable levels.

I'm just curious. How many spams do you receive, and how many end up in Screened Mail? I'm trying to understand the magnitude of the problem you're having, since it doesn't seem to match my experience, and I get lots of spam.

For me it's 10-20 in my inbox and 100 in Screened Mail each day. I just glanced at today's screened mail, and it's full of spam about ED remedies, online pharmacies, and stock alerts. My inbox has a few 419 scams.

[Jason1]

Uncle George,

When using the Report As Spam feature, this sends a copy of that email to the Brightmail spam filtering system where it is processed by a program that uses the collected data to improve the spam filtering process. The Brightmail filtering is used by numerous other ISPs and companies to filter unsolicited emails. Please review their website (http://www.brightmail.com) for more details on the Brightmail Spam Filtering technology utilized by Comcast.

Additionally, Comcast is continually working with other technologies to fight against spam. We are also constantly implementing new techniques to help fight against spam while ensureing that legitimate emails are delivered to you. As many can attest, it is much easier to delete unsolicited emails from your inbox than to reverse filtering technologies to keep your legitimate emails in your inbox instead of the screened folder.

Lastly, to address your "where's Comcast?" question, as others have stated, these forums are largely a user-to-user forum with some Comcast interaction. There are a few Comcast moderators and many Comcast customers participating here so the Comcast moderators may not always have the opportunity to respond to every post made to these forums. Also, the definition of "top technical experts" is inclusive of Comcast customers and Comcast employees. As you search these forums, you will find some Comcast customers who are computer security experts by day and forum posters in their free-time. There are also computer programmers; grandmothers; engineers; web-designers; students; and many other fields represented here in these forums. The combination of everyone here makes this the "top technical experts" you make reference to.

As for Comcast's top management needs to gander at these forums, they actually do. A large job of the forum moderators is to give daily reports on issues identified in the forums. As new or recurring issues appear in the forums, the moderators bring the information collected from the forums to the appropriate Comcast team to investigate and resolve issues. In regards to Spam, we regularly report to the abuse and email admins to inform them of the customer's feedback on the current spam issues.

Hope this helps to explain many of the questions you have asked here and in other threads regarding Spam and Comcast's presence on these forum boards. Please let us know if you have any additional questions.

Thanks

[Uncle George]

> Uncle George,
>
> When using the Report As Spam feature, this sends a
> copy of that email to the Brightmail spam filtering
> system where it is processed by a program that uses
> the collected data to improve the spam filtering
> process. The Brightmail filtering is used by
> numerous other ISPs and companies to filter
> unsolicited emails. Please review their website
> (http://www.brightmail.com) for more details on the
> Brightmail Spam Filtering technology utilized by
> Comcast.

I understand the technology, as if that's really a requirement. It's Comcast's application of that technology that is at question. As aforementioned, I am personally responsible for a site's spam filter.
>
> Additionally, Comcast is continually working with
> other technologies to fight against spam. We are
> also constantly implementing new techniques to help
> fight against spam while ensureing that legitimate
> emails are delivered to you. As many can attest, it
> is much easier to delete unsolicited emails from your
> inbox than to reverse filtering technologies to keep
> your legitimate emails in your inbox instead of the
> screened folder.

I await the new technology, and appreciate your understanding of the need.

I see many testaments. There are many, many forum comparisons to other email providers, who are, by the way, free of charge. When I'm paying, I want an acceptable level of performance. I must add, because some "technical experts" have incorrectly branded this as a request for perfection, my complaint is that "training" seems useless at reducing spam levels. How many "RE:HEY"s does it take? Don't pick, there are other examples.
>
> Lastly, to address your "where's Comcast?" question,
> as others have stated, these forums are largely a
> user-to-user forum with some Comcast interaction.
> There are a few Comcast moderators and many Comcast
> t customers participating here so the Comcast
> moderators may not always have the opportunity to
> respond to every post made to these forums. Also,
> the definition of "top technical experts" is
> inclusive of Comcast customers and Comcast employees.
> As you search these forums, you will find some
> e Comcast customers who are computer security experts
> by day and forum posters in their free-time. There
> are also computer programmers; grandmothers;
> engineers; web-designers; students; and many other
> fields represented here in these forums. The
> combination of everyone here makes this the "top
> technical experts" you make reference to.

I'll put "top Comcast technical expert" on my next resume then. I do pay for Comcast's service. Your staffing problem, not the customer's. Don't try and "sell" this as help. User group advice in no way constitutes "top technical experts" and I'm quite surprised that this commercial enterprise, and you Jason, are attempting to pull this one off. Change the Forum header, it is misleading for myself and others.

And to all those Grandmothers, engineers, kids and dogs, this isn't a thread condemning you at all -- good help is appreciated. I have noted very thoughtful feedback, but (mostly) in other Forums. This forum has not been technically helpful.

>
> As for Comcast's top management needs to gander at
> these forums, they actually do. A large job of the
> forum moderators is to give daily reports on issues
> identified in the forums. As new or recurring issues
> appear in the forums, the moderators bring the
> information collected from the forums to the
> appropriate Comcast team to investigate and resolve
> issues. In regards to Spam, we regularly report to
> the abuse and email admins to inform them of the
> customer's feedback on the current spam issues.

Who? And have them get in touch. I would like a personal conversation with any top level manager, especially PR, at Comcast who has read every spam thread in this email forum.
>
> Hope this helps to explain many of the questions you
> have asked here and in other threads regarding Spam
> and Comcast's presence on these forum boards. Please
> let us know if you have any additional questions.

I have noted an increase in actual Comcast staff responses in the email forum. That's somewhat gratifying and certainly timely.

I have *not* noticed a decrease in spam on my account, nor have I noticed any effect whatsoever in my attempts at "training". I have noticed others in this forum with continuing, similar experiences.

As a "top technical expert", I'll continue to monitor this forum. Most of my posts have been responses and reinforcement of other's. I have originated one, maybe two, threads. One of those threads was a detailed trouble-ticket style report. The "top technical" response to this request for help was not delivered by Comcast.

If others continue to report similar problems to my own, it has now seems incumbent upon me, drafted a member of Comcast's "top technical expert" team, to also contribute observations concerning my own account. This is a public forum, and members of the public certainly can, and should, commiserate about similar maladies.

>
> Thanks

You're welcome.

I appreciate the official response. I, and others, still await some improvement.

Best, UncleG.

you ask of numismatics insulin
As cut my manipulate demagnetize
hey there
A think at disposal ordinary
Holly, wants to take the dog
Re: To stand at tablespoonful invivility
Fw:
Fw:
Re:
Re:
Re:He hear my relationship
Re:Re:
Re: A cut an sacrilegious unparliamentary
Yo

andonandonandon...

[Barmar]

> I have *not* noticed a decrease in spam on my
> account, nor have I noticed any effect whatsoever in
> my attempts at "training". I have noticed others in
> this forum with continuing, similar experiences.

As has been pointed out numerous times, a message has to be forwarded by lots of customers before the software will learn that it's spam. Since you're responsible for spam filters at your site, you must know that every one of those messages is different, so it takes many copies for the filter to detect the common factors.

Furthermore, even if the filters are improving, spam volume is also increasing. So if the filters get 10% better, while spam increases by 20%, you should expect to see a 10% increase in spam that makes it through the filters.

BTW, are you going to answer my question about how much spam is making it through versus how much is being blocked? I've been seeing consistent 80-90% filtering for as long as I can recall. How does this compare with your experience? You complain over and over about how bad the filters are, but never provide any concrete facts.

[Uncle George]

> > I have *not* noticed a decrease in spam on my
> > account, nor have I noticed any effect whatsoever
> in
> > my attempts at "training". I have noticed others
> in
> > this forum with continuing, similar experiences.
>
> As has been pointed out numerous times, a message has
> to be forwarded by lots of customers before the
> software will learn that it's spam. Since you're
> responsible for spam filters at your site, you must
> know that every one of those messages is different,
> so it takes many copies for the filter to detect the
> common factors.

Oh really? When? I note yet another outraged customer just today.
>
> Furthermore, even if the filters are improving, spam
> volume is also increasing. So if the filters get 10%
> better, while spam increases by 20%, you should
> expect to see a 10% increase in spam that makes it
> through the filters.
>
> BTW, are you going to answer my question about how
> much spam is making it through versus how much is
> being blocked? I've been seeing consistent 80-90%
> filtering for as long as I can recall. How does this
> compare with your experience? You complain over and
> over about how bad the filters are, but never provide
> any concrete facts.

Humm, where's Comcast's Brightmail reports? As aforementioned, I do run a spam buster for about 10,000 accounts. Modest, I know, but it does have good reporting. As often stated here, one person's (or two or five or twenty-five) experience is somewhat subjective, but surely Brightmail's statistical pages can provide a much better view into the efficiency of the Brightmail scanner as implemented by Comcast. Where are those stats published?

Both the most recent spam post to this forum and myself have provided title after title to the "trainer" and to this forum. I'd refer you there. Note the titles, many of which should never pass through once, let alone need "training". Emails with "Re:" and a content of Viagra (or viiagra, or viagar, or vaagra) should not pass, and do not pass with hotmail or yahoo.

It used to be that "the Customer is always right." Apparently, not at Comcast, or in the vocal opinions of their "top technical experts."

Regards, UncleG.

[Barmar]

> > > I have *not* noticed a decrease in spam on my
> > > account, nor have I noticed any effect
> whatsoever
> > in
> > > my attempts at "training". I have noticed
> others
> > in
> > > this forum with continuing, similar experiences.
> >
> > As has been pointed out numerous times, a message
> has
> > to be forwarded by lots of customers before the
> > software will learn that it's spam. Since you're
> > responsible for spam filters at your site, you
> must
> > know that every one of those messages is
> different,
> > so it takes many copies for the filter to detect
> the
> > common factors.
>
> Oh really? When? I note yet another outraged
> customer just today.

When what?

> >
> > Furthermore, even if the filters are improving,
> spam
> > volume is also increasing. So if the filters get
> 10%
> > better, while spam increases by 20%, you should
> > expect to see a 10% increase in spam that makes it
> > through the filters.
> >
> > BTW, are you going to answer my question about how
> > much spam is making it through versus how much is
> > being blocked? I've been seeing consistent 80-90%
> > filtering for as long as I can recall. How does
> this
> > compare with your experience? You complain over
> and
> > over about how bad the filters are, but never
> provide
> > any concrete facts.
>
> Humm, where's Comcast's Brightmail reports? As

They're available to Comcast engineers, I presume. Where would you expect them to be?

> aforementioned, I do run a spam buster for about
> 10,000 accounts. Modest, I know, but it does have
> good reporting. As often stated here, one person's
> (or two or five or twenty-five) experience is
> somewhat subjective, but surely Brightmail's
> statistical pages can provide a much better view into
> the efficiency of the Brightmail scanner as
> implemented by Comcast. Where are those stats
> published?

They're not. Are they supposed to be?

>
> Both the most recent spam post to this forum and
> myself have provided title after title to the
> "trainer" and to this forum. I'd refer you there.
> Note the titles, many of which should never pass
> s through once, let alone need "training". Emails
> with "Re:" and a content of Viagra (or viiagra, or
> viagar, or vaagra) should not pass, and do not pass
> with hotmail or yahoo.

Mail isn't filtered by subject lines, it's filtered by statistical analysis of the content. There are just too many ways for the spammers to fake out the spelling of Viagra and Cialis for a filter to recognize them all.

>
> It used to be that "the Customer is always right."
> Apparently, not at Comcast, or in the vocal opinions
> s of their "top technical experts."

The customer may be right, but you can't always get what you want. E.g. a McDonalds customer can't get a steak, no matter how much he complains.

[Uncle George]

Barmar, et. al.

I've read your respnse twice now, and will let other readers enjoy and evaluate it for themselves.

Regards, UncleG.

"The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously." - Hubert Humphrey

[Anon1401113]

I am an experienced email user -- so please don't ask me if I have tried xyz. The last two weeks have been spam-terrible on Comcast. I am using everything in my arsenal except purchasing a separate filter software.

I understand Brightmail. Looks like the filters haven't been updated in weeks, as opposed to the supposed 10 minutes max.

My recent experience: on average 5 spams get through the Brightmail filter for every 2 that get caught, 0 false positive, to about 20 real mails.
Whereas on my *free* yahoo account, it's more like 1 missed/100 caught/0 false+/25 real. My work email is 1missed/?caught/?false+/1000real. My yahoo and work accounts have been around since the dawn of email-time. Comcast is the newest account, the least public, and the worst.

Comcast -- I understand that you are concerned about false positives. I don't expect Comcast to enforce the same levels of filtering as my company, but I do expect *at least* the same level of service as Yahoo's free mail. Please give the users a checkbox that allows us to crank up the filters for our mail. <~IE high security>. I don't care if you have to route my email to a special "zealous" server in Timbuktu; the BW$/delay will be inconsequential compared with the bandwidth chewed up with all the spam.

Bottom line -- if I have to give up my comcast email account and switch everything to Yahoo!, I will also give up comcast "digital" cable service and save $220+/year even after paying for DSL/Dish/Yahoo! POP3 access.
Comcast -- do you hear me now?

[Uncle George]

Hi Anon1401113!

Thanks! I needed that post.

barmar, the stats quoted are similar to my own.

Comcast: When were the filters updated for my region?

I hope Sophos and Frontbridge are listening. Can we make sure they are somehow?

>Bottom line -- if I have to give up my comcast email account and switch everything to Yahoo!, I will also give up comcast "digital" cable service and save $220+/year even after paying for DSL/Dish/Yahoo! POP3 access.
Comcast -- do you hear me now?

Comcast might not hear you, but I sure do!

Very best, UncleG.

[madylarian]

> I am an experienced email user -- so please don't ask
> me if I have tried xyz. The last two weeks
> have been spam-terrible on Comcast. I am using
> everything in my arsenal except

Actually, I've noticed an increase in spam to ALL of my addresses, not just the Comcast ones. I never used to see any spam getting past the filters on my Yahoo and Hotmail accounts, but it's doing so now. On my most-used (and non-Comcast) address, where I have the filtering level set very high, I am now seeing spam getting by where none did previously. Personally, I think that spammers have devised a new way to get around most filtering methods and it's going to take some time and work on the part of many for the filters to catch up.

At any rate, the sudden increase has seemed to affect a lot more email providers than just Comcast. Admins of a number of corporate, private and ISP mail servers have noted this as well.

mady

[Anon1253544]

Comcast spam filters suck. Comcast also wants us to buy the software that tracks the offenders IPS, so that we do their work and send them all the info needed to stop it.
I have complained and forwarded all spam to the abuse@comcast.net address and all I receive is THE PROCEDURE TO FOLLOW.

[Barmar]

> Comcast spam filters suck. Comcast also wants us to
> buy the software that tracks the offenders IPS, so
> that we do their work and send them all the info
> needed to stop it.

What software are they trying to make you buy? I've seen recommendations that you augment their spam filter with client-based filters if the server filters aren't good enough. Client filters can learn your specific needs much better than server filters. I've never seen anything about tracking IPs (spammer IPs change all the time, it's a waste of time to try tracking them).

> I have complained and forwarded all spam to the
> abuse@comcast.net address and all I receive is THE
> PROCEDURE TO FOLLOW.

You're supposed to forward spam to missed-spam@comcast.net, not abuse@comcast.net. Or if you use webmail, click on the "Report as Spam" button.

[Uncle George]

Hi Anon1401113!
>
> I understand Brightmail. Looks like the filters
> haven't been updated in weeks, as opposed to the
> supposed 10 minutes max. >
>

I'm compiling some information and would ask how you arrived at the above conclusion?

Very best, UncleG.

"Progress isn't made by early risers. It's made by lazy men trying to find easier ways to do something." -- Robert Heinlein

[Welcome_to_Post]

>
> "Progress isn't made by early risers. It's made by
> lazy men trying to find easier ways to do something."
> -- Robert Heinlein


"The Man Who Was Too Lazy to Fail"! One of my few heros. Naturally, he'd be fictional.

[Uncle George]

Hi!

OT, but, well...

> >
> > "Progress isn't made by early risers. It's made by
> > lazy men trying to find easier ways to do
> something."
> > -- Robert Heinlein
>
>
> "The Man Who Was Too Lazy to Fail"! One of my few
> heros. Naturally, he'd be fictional.

One of my favorites, also, is 1969's "The Man Who Learned Loving" by Theodore Sturgeon. I read it when it first came out, and it has had significant effect on my life.

Very best, UncleG.

[Welcome_to_Post]

Sturgeon is another of my favorite authors, but I haven't read this. So, before someone quite rightly accuses me of hijacking a thread, I'm heading over to my two favorite on-line bookstores (Amazon and eBay) to see if I can score a copy. Thanks, UG.

[davej]

For weeks now I have been following Comcast instructions and forwarding spam to missed-spam@comcast.net.
But the spam just keeps coming and coming.
So my main question is: does the forwarding do any good?
Also, exactly what does Comcast do when it receives the forwarded spam?

[CWH803]

Dave J has raised two salient issues pertinent to our discussions of Comcast vis a vis Spam.

Dave said “For weeks now I have been following Comcast instructions and forward spam to missed-spam@comcast.net. But the spam just keeps coming and coming.”

In several concurrent Spam threads we have criticized posters for not taking responsibility in protecting themselves from Spam and we have criticized Comcast for being closed mouth about their anti-spam mechanisms, leading many to the conclusion that their anti-spam mechanisms are rudimentary or dysfunctional or both.

Dave has raised two salient issues:

“Does the forwarding do any good?” and “Exactly what does Comcast do when it receives the forwarded spam?”

Looking at Comcast Help, where you’d expect some detailed information that might answer Dave’s two questions, I find the following which contains some very detailed requirements and could explain why our submission of sample Spam seems to have no material effect (that is, if submitted incorrectly or too late, submissions are ignored).

How do I report spam to Comcast if I'm using an E-Mail program such as Outlook Express or Netscape? "The missed spam (spam that made it through the filters that reside on the Comcast mail servers) must be sent to missed-spam@comcast.net as RFC-822 MIME encoded attachments. What this means is that in order for our spam filtering software to work effectively, you must send us the spam in a specific format. We have provided instructions below on how to make sure that you're sending us the spam in the required format. Please note that the spam message that you're reporting must be less than 3 (three) days old, otherwise it will not be processed. Spam messages must be submitted one at a time - reporting multiple messages in one E-Mail will result in the messages being ignored."

And I find a fluff-weasel statement that adds nothing to anyone’s understanding.

“What is Comcast High-Speed Internet doing about spam? (not a link)
Comcast is committed to reducing the amount of spam that our customers receive by providing tools and instructions to better manage e-mail. While no current methods can prevent all spam from being delivered, Comcast employs a variety of industry-standard methods and best practices, including the use of a leading anti-spam technology vendor, to help reduce the amount of spam.”

I’d suggest that Comcast add to the Help information with some detailed information about their anti-spam mechanisms. You could start with an answer to Dave’s two questions.

[pittspgh1]

> Dave J has raised two salient issues pertinent to our
> discussions of Comcast vis a vis Spam.
>
> Dave said “For weeks now I have been following
> Comcast instructions and forward spam to
> missed-spam@comcast.net. But the spam just keeps
> coming and coming.”
>
> In several concurrent Spam threads we have criticized
> posters for not taking responsibility in protecting
> themselves from Spam and we have criticized Comcast
> for being closed mouth about their anti-spam
> mechanisms, leading many to the conclusion that their
> anti-spam mechanisms are rudimentary or dysfunctional
> or both.
>
> Dave has raised two salient issues:
>
> “Does the forwarding do any good?” and
> “Exactly what does Comcast do when it receives the
> forwarded spam?”
>
> Looking at Comcast Help, where you’d expect some
> detailed information that might answer Dave’s two
> questions, I find the following which contains some
> very detailed requirements and could explain why our
> submission of sample Spam seems to have no material
> effect (that is, if submitted incorrectly or too
> late, submissions are ignored).
>
> How do I report spam to Comcast if I'm
> using an E-Mail program such as Outlook Express or
> Netscape? "The missed spam (spam that made
> it through the filters that reside on the Comcast
> mail servers) must be sent to missed-spam@comcast.net
> as RFC-822 MIME encoded attachments. What this
> means is that in order for our spam filtering
> software to work effectively, you must send us the
> spam in a specific format. We have provided
> instructions below on how to make sure that you're
> sending us the spam in the required format. Please
> note that the spam message that you're reporting
> must be less than 3 (three) days old,
> otherwise it will not be processed. Spam
> messages must be submitted one at a time - reporting
> multiple messages in one E-Mail will result in the
> messages being ignored."
>
> And I find a fluff-weasel statement that adds nothing
> to anyone’s understanding.
>
> “What is Comcast High-Speed Internet doing about
> spam? (not a link)
> Comcast is committed to reducing the amount of
> spam that our customers receive by providing tools
> and instructions to better manage e-mail. While no
> current methods can prevent all spam from being
> delivered, Comcast employs a variety of
> industry-standard methods and best practices,
> including the use of a leading anti-spam technology
> vendor, to help reduce the amount of spam.”
>
> I’d suggest that Comcast add to the Help information
> with some detailed information about their anti-spam
> mechanisms. You could start with an answer to Dave’s
> two questions.

After 8 months or so of forwarding spam to missed-spam@comcast.net Nothing has changed. Same type for Viarga mostly, misleading subject line.
I'm going to try forwarding them to spam@uce.gov
Here is where I got the link
from a local TV Station www.wtaetv.com

http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/call4action/4834674/detail.html

Lets see if anything happens.

Paul

[madylarian]

> After 8 months or so of forwarding spam to
> missed-spam@comcast.net Nothing has changed. Same
> type for Viarga mostly, misleading subject line.
> I'm going to try forwarding them to spam@uce.gov\


> Lets see if anything happens.


Nothing will happen, I assure you.

mady

[Barmar]

> After 8 months or so of forwarding spam to
> missed-spam@comcast.net Nothing has changed. Same
> type for Viarga mostly, misleading subject line.
> I'm going to try forwarding them to spam@uce.gov

Are the spams you're complaining about identical to the ones you submitted, word-for-word (including all the white-on-white gibberish that spammers throw into their messages)? If not, I'm not sure how you can tell whether the filter is updating. It's an inexact mechanism to begin with.

[Anon1337713]

mandy. when is the last time you received sexually explicit mail? i used to get it all the time. think the gov had anything to do with it? take the time-copy and paste to your elected officials. this is really a major problem and our elected officials will react if people send it to them. fed can hold hearings on drug abuse for million dollar athletes they can do the same for spam.

[madylarian]

> mandy. when is the last time you received sexually
> explicit mail?

It's MADY!!!! Sheesh!

Judging from the subjects quite a lot of the spam I get is sexually explicit. And every single one is reported to both the ISP's spam filters and spam@ftc.gov. Just keep in mind that those "elected officials" are the ones that, under pressure from the DMA, passed the worse-than-useless youCAN SPAMlegally ACT. This act has been shown to be completely useless, with something like 5% or less of spam actually conforming to it. If anything, it has legalized spam. Sorry but I have absolutely no faith in those officials who chose to follow the suggestions of the spam industry over those of the anti-spam industry.

mady

[NewView]

> Just keep in mind that those "elected
> officials" are the ones that, under pressure from the
> DMA, passed the worse-than-useless youCAN SPAMlegally
> ACT. This act has been shown to be completely
> useless, with something like 5% or less of spam
> actually conforming to it. If anything, it has
> legalized spam. Sorry but I have absolutely no faith
> in those officials who chose to follow the
> suggestions of the spam industry over those of the
> anti-spam industry.
>
> mady


AMEN

Yep, our congress-critters have shown that they really don't care about the majority voice of the people (show me ONE poll that shows people actually want unsolicited commercial email), and only care about the lobbying effort$ of "ethikul bidnessmen" in the guise of the DMA.

[Anon1337713]

mady- sorry had mandy on my mind. have to have some kind of excuse. was referring to snail mail- yes i really am that old. how about telemarketing phone calls. used to get couple a week. went on do not call list-now cant remember last one i got. my isp has threatened to cut off my email because i am forwarding the complete spam to elected officials- they are calling me a spammer. still waiting for a reply from them. cant wait for their reply. anonxxxxxx dont know how that happened,dont really care but my name is joe
Message was edited by: Anon1337713

[rtroxel]

It's aug 16, and I'm still getting 4 to 5 spams a day from Comcast. I'm using MailWasher.

[madylarian]

> It's aug 16, and I'm still getting 4 to 5 spams a day
> from Comcast. I'm using MailWasher.


No, you're getting them through Comcast. What, you think Comcast can just snap their corporate fingers and make it go away? Why don't people seem to understand that spam is a universal problem and that if it was as easy to block spam with no false positives as they seem to think, then everyone would do so and spam would no longer be a problem.

And if too much is getting through MailWasher for your own taste, then you'll just have to tweak MailWasher a bit. Oh, and I do hope you are not bouncing spam, because if you are, then YOU are a spammer too.

mady

[pittspgh1]

> > It's aug 16, and I'm still getting 4 to 5 spams
> a day
> > from Comcast. I'm using MailWasher.
>
>
> No, you're getting them through Comcast. What, you
> think Comcast can just snap their corporate fingers
> and make it go away? Why don't people seem to
> understand that spam is a universal problem and that
> if it was as easy to block spam with no false
> positives as they seem to think, then everyone would
> do so and spam would no longer be a problem.
>
> And if too much is getting through MailWasher for
> your own taste, then you'll just have to tweak
> MailWasher a bit. Oh, and I do hope you are not
> bouncing spam, because if you are, then YOU are a
> spammer too.
>
> mady

Verizon has the option as part of thier spam filter to "Block Domain" as well as "Sender"
Comcast only seems to be able to "Block Sender".
There has to be a better way. Since Decemer if Comcast filters haven't learned anything yet from everything being sent to missed-spam@comcast.net Even with the filters on. Maybe they should go to "Special Ed" classes. If they had the option to block IP#'s or a range of IP#'s might make a difference.

Paul