Cloudmark anti-spam migrations October 2011...

[#1]

I have an idea what your problems may be.
Here is an extract from an exchange I am currently enjoying with your support department regarding the spam I am reporting
"...However, the sheer amount that you are sending is putting a heavy load on our system, causing issues for other mail users, which is why your account has been flagged by our networks department.
Please cease this action or we will be forced to suspend your mail account."
It seems that my sending out a couple of hundred emails a day to spamcop, spamtraining, et al has broken your system. I apologise to you all for this but I am not going to stop. Mainly because I feel the accusation made against me is inaccurate, malicious and tantamount to bullying and I simply will not tolerate that sort of behaviour. 

[#2]

Quote from: essexboy

I have an idea what your problems may be.

Your situation has absolutely nothing to do with the issue being discussed in preceding posts.

Quote from: essexboy

Here is an extract from an exchange I am currently enjoying with your support department regarding the spam I am reporting "...However, the sheer amount that you are sending is putting a heavy load on our system, causing issues for other mail users, which is why your account has been flagged by our networks department. Please cease this action or we will be forced to suspend your mail account."

That's not actually true so apologies for the misinformation. Your account was flagged due to reports we received about spam originating from it earlier in the month (as ironic as it may sound!)

Quote from: essexboy

It seems that my sending out a couple of hundred emails a day to spamcop, spamtraining, et al has broken your system.

That's not true either. Nothing has 'broken our system'. It's the nature of what's been reported to us rather than the volume in which it's happening which is the issue.

Quote from: essexboy

I apologise to you all for this but I am not going to stop. Mainly because I feel the accusation made against me is inaccurate, malicious and tantamount to bullying and I simply will not tolerate that sort of behaviour.

You don't need to stop and we've no problem with you forwarding spam to spam reporting addresses. This particular instance looks to have been an isolated case. I can't be 100% sure why it happened but as long as we receive no further reports then there's nothing to worry about.
Apologies for the confusion.

[#3]

Is this a case of people reporting newsletters etc they've signed up to as spam rather than just unsubscribing?

[#4]

Quote from: godsell4

Is the NotSpam button in Webmail doing anything? I have a few messages moved to the Spam Folder which are not Spam, if I bother to use the NotSpam button is this going to help the improve the accuracy if the system to identify Spam?

Quote from: spraxyt

Earlier in this thread there was mention of an improved spam/notspam feedback loop being built into an updated webmail interface. Hopefully it won't be long before that is released. I think your objective might be better achieved if you could leave the messages where they are until that is made available.

And it's here - http://betawebmail.plus.net with its spam and not spam buttons that send the report directly to Cloudmark (see blog).
It will be interesting to see the effectiveness of such reports.

[#5]

Quote from: spraxyt

It will be interesting to see the effectiveness of such reports.

My guess is nil!
There's a Yahoo groups digest email that I've forwarded as an attachment three times to notspam. I've added the senders email address to my whitelist. Yesterday I received another one which was wrongly identified as spam.
Edit: While I was making this post another digest arrived which was wrongly identified as spam.

[#6]

I suggest trying the Not Spam button from the betawebmail Junk folder. That files the report directly into Cloudmark's systems. Hopefully more effective than going via Spamtraining.

[#7]

How does that help someone who collects their email using POP3 and doesn't have the option to leave email on the server set? When they go in to Cloudmark to report the email it won't be there!

[#8]

I think you answered your own question. Change their email program settings to leave a copy on the server for a short time. This will cover future occurrences, if the current one is an isolated instance not much is lost by writing it off.

[#9]

So you are recommending that Plusnet identify all Plusnet users who use POP3 to access their email and don't leave a copy on the servers and contact them to advise them change their email settings?
Have you also raised the issue with PN that this page is wrong?
[quote=http://www.plus.net/support/security/spam/reporting_spam_emails.shtml]False Positives - An email has been marked as [-SPAM-] but it is legitimate
In the same way that our spam filters can miss spam email, it can sometimes think an email is spam when it's not.
If you have such an email, please forward the email as an attachment to notspam@spamtraining.plus.com.
See our article on how to forward emails as attachments if you need help with this..

[#10]

No to both your questions but I'm sure Plusnet will welcome your feedback that the page you quoted from might need review.

[#11]

Quote from: jelv

Quote from: spraxyt It will be interesting to see the effectiveness of such reports. My guess is nil!

We can get reasonably in depth access to stats/league tables and things like that concerning the reports our customers have sent. If we have this level of visibility then I'd be very surprised if nothing was done with the reports.

Quote from: jelv

There's a Yahoo groups digest email that I've forwarded as an attachment three times to notspam. I've added the senders email address to my whitelist. Yesterday I received another one which was wrongly identified as spam. Edit: While I was making this post another digest arrived which was wrongly identified as spam.

I think I've responded to this point elsewhere?

Quote from: jelv

How does that help someone who collects their email using POP3 and doesn't have the option to leave email on the server set? When they go in to Cloudmark to report the email it won't be there!

False negatives won't be there no. False positives (which I'm more concerned about) will be though assuming the customer has the default spam settings applied to their account (move spam to the 'Spam' folder). As I think I've mentioned in another thread, we still need to make a call on what to do with the forwarding addresses. Also worth considering is the fact that they haven't always been available.

Quote from: jelv

Have you also raised the issue with PN that this page is wrong?

Yes, we're aware of this. There's an item in the Content Team's in-tray to update the pages (although probably won't be until late January time).

[#12]

Quote from: Bob

Quote from: jelv How does that help someone who collects their email using POP3 and doesn't have the option to leave email on the server set? When they go in to Cloudmark to report the email it won't be there! False negatives won't be there no. False positives (which I'm more concerned about) will be though assuming the customer has the default spam settings applied to their account (move spam to the 'Spam' folder). As I think I've mentioned in another thread, we still need to make a call on what to do with the forwarding addresses. Also worth considering is the fact that they haven't always been available.

I agree false positives are more of a concern. But anyone using the default spam settings and POP3 will be blissfully unaware that the email is sitting in the spam folder. I can't recall anywhere where you tell users that they need to log in to webmail regularly for spam. I believe you also purge old emails from the spam folders so if they don't do it often enough the false positives will be totally lost!

[#13]

Quote from: jelv

I agree false positives are more of a concern.

Normally I have no interest at all in false positives as these days my f9 domain is not used for anything except as a spam trap.  However, upon getting no notifications from spamcop today I went to their web site to see what is happening.  Plusnet is bouncing their reports.  Wonderful.
And another thing.  One of the destinations for my spam reports is being rejected because the mails contain spam.  Following the advice given in this forum I raised a ticket asking for this address to be whitelisted (or whatever you do).  It seems this is not possible and raises many questions, one of which is why this is good for some (the reguilar forum posters)  yet not good enough for us less well known customers?

[#14]

Quote from: Bob

We can get reasonably in depth access to stats/league tables and things like that concerning the reports our customers have sent. If we have this level of visibility then I'd be very surprised if nothing was done with the reports. Quote from: jelv How does that help someone who collects their email using POP3 and doesn't have the option to leave email on the server set? When they go in to Cloudmark to report the email it won't be there! False negatives won't be there no. False positives (which I'm more concerned about) will be though assuming the customer has the default spam settings applied to their account (move spam to the 'Spam' folder). As I think I've mentioned in another thread, we still need to make a call on what to do with the forwarding addresses. Also worth considering is the fact that they haven't always been available.

I don't.
I have it prepend the subject line with [SPAM]
How do alias's and redirects work (or not)?
Since I get maybe a couple of spams a day, I consider your use of spam filters to be a bit of a waste of time.

[#15]

You could try turning incoming spam filtering off. I suspect you would receive a lot more spams then.