Plusnet *ankers and their inability to control spam.

Do any of those dickheads at Plusnet know how to work a spam filter!
Ever since they sold our details to spammers and pretended they had
been hacked, we have been inundated with spam offering viagra,
wondercum, adobe **** and all sorts of other shit, it's incessant and
yet the dickheads at plusnet seem unable to filter on key words, or
probably just unwilling!

WTF is the matter with them!

"David" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Do any of those dickheads at Plusnet know how to work a spam filter!
> Ever since they sold our details to spammers and pretended they had
> been hacked, we have been inundated with spam offering viagra,
> wondercum, adobe **** and all sorts of other shit, it's incessant and
> yet the dickheads at plusnet seem unable to filter on key words, or
> probably just unwilling!
>
> WTF is the matter with them!

Since PlusNet changed their spam delivery rules afew weeks ago, and started
moving all messages that it has flagged as spam into a separate mailbox,
I've had very little spam - no more than about five messages get through out
of a hundred or more that are flagged as spam. So I think it's doing a
pretty good job.

Also, I've not found *any* false-positives: messages that are wrongly
classified as spam but which should have been delivered.

I suppose you want an anti-spam that is 100% perfect - no false negatives at
all, and yet still no false positives.

"Mortimer" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:46813d31$0$8734$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "David" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Do any of those dickheads at Plusnet know how to work a spam filter!
>> Ever since they sold our details to spammers and pretended they had
>> been hacked, we have been inundated with spam offering viagra,
>> wondercum, adobe **** and all sorts of other shit, it's incessant and
>> yet the dickheads at plusnet seem unable to filter on key words, or
>> probably just unwilling!
>>
>> WTF is the matter with them!
>
> Since PlusNet changed their spam delivery rules afew weeks ago, and
> started moving all messages that it has flagged as spam into a separate
> mailbox, I've had very little spam - no more than about five messages get
> through out of a hundred or more that are flagged as spam. So I think it's
> doing a pretty good job.
>
> Also, I've not found *any* false-positives: messages that are wrongly
> classified as spam but which should have been delivered.
>
> I suppose you want an anti-spam that is 100% perfect - no false negatives
> at all, and yet still no false positives.

As I understand it, the Squirrelmail system recently adopted by Plusnet is
only an interim; there's a better one on the way, apparently.
My spam is mostly going into the spam filter now, with only a trickle
finding its way into my inbox.
But, as the OP says, they don't seem to be able to successfully filter out
obvious words like wondercum from message titles.The odd one that gets
through invariably tries to sell me that stuff!
I can't see why this is but no doubt someone will come back with some
unintelligible (to me) stuff about Bayesian and heuristic routines...

George

"George Weston" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> As I understand it, the Squirrelmail system recently adopted by Plusnet is
> only an interim; there's a better one on the way, apparently.

I wonder how they define "better". I think SquirrelMail is fantastic: in
terms of speed and the ability to tag all messages in a mailbox
simultanously, it's miles better than the appalling webmail system that they
had before. I posted a message to this effect in the Plusnet newgroup and
saw one other person agree wholeheartedly with me, but since then there's
been no traffic whatsoever on any subject!

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 17:21:57 +0100, "Mortimer" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>"David" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed).. .
>> Do any of those dickheads at Plusnet know how to work a spam filter!
>> Ever since they sold our details to spammers and pretended they had
>> been hacked, we have been inundated with spam offering viagra,
>> wondercum, adobe **** and all sorts of other shit, it's incessant and
>> yet the dickheads at plusnet seem unable to filter on key words, or
>> probably just unwilling!
>>
>> WTF is the matter with them!
>
>Since PlusNet changed their spam delivery rules afew weeks ago, and started
>moving all messages that it has flagged as spam into a separate mailbox,
>I've had very little spam - no more than about five messages get through out
>of a hundred or more that are flagged as spam. So I think it's doing a
>pretty good job.

That still leaves you to delete/reject what they think is spam. Spam
flooding their networks is obvious and doesn't need to be flagged,
just dumped before it even gets through to the users mail boxes, this
is what they seem unable to do. I agree they are wankers because of
this.

Anything containing wondercum for example should not even reach the
customer, whether it's flagged or not! If Plusnet are allowing 100k
spam messages containing wondercum, or <spam>wondercum it's the same
difference!

David wrote:
> Do any of those dickheads at Plusnet know how to work a spam filter!
> Ever since they sold our details to spammers and pretended they had
> been hacked, we have been inundated with spam offering viagra,
> wondercum, adobe **** and all sorts of other shit, it's incessant and
> yet the dickheads at plusnet seem unable to filter on key words, or
> probably just unwilling!
>
> WTF is the matter with them!

As supported by some of the other posters who've replied to this thread,
the filter is actually detecting quite a lot of this junk. Certainly a
lot more than it has in the past. No spam filter is ever going to be
100% accurate though.

Given the tone of your post I'm not too sure why I'm bothering to offer
my advice, however you might want to consider taking up our offer of a
free .UK domain? If you haven't done this already, you'll find details
of the offer when you next log into our website.

Whilst this won't help the spam situation by itself, we're looking at
allowing customers to turn off all email to the .plus.com virtual
domain. What this allows you to do is change the bit after the @ in your
email address to <something>.co.uk and then turn off the .plus.com
addresses. The result being that you discard the spam-laden .plus.com
address whilst keeping the spam-free .co.uk address. As the domain will
use the same mailboxes you shouldn't have to do anything else apart from
change the 'from' address in your email application and notify your
contacts of the change.

So there you have it. One of a few possible solutions, assuming of
course that you're willing to take advice from one of the lying
'dickheads' that sold your details to a spammer... Please!

Kind Rgds,

--
|Bob Pullen Broadband Solutions for
|Support Home & Business @
|PlusNet plc. www.plus.net
+------ PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet! ------

".......you might want to consider taking up our offer of a
free .UK domain?"


Is this available to Metronet customers? If so, URL please. TIA.

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 20:21:54 +0100, PlusNet Support Team
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>David wrote:
>> Do any of those dickheads at Plusnet know how to work a spam filter!
>> Ever since they sold our details to spammers and pretended they had
>> been hacked, we have been inundated with spam offering viagra,
>> wondercum, adobe **** and all sorts of other shit, it's incessant and
>> yet the dickheads at plusnet seem unable to filter on key words, or
>> probably just unwilling!
>>
>> WTF is the matter with them!
>
>As supported by some of the other posters who've replied to this thread,
>the filter is actually detecting quite a lot of this junk. Certainly a
>lot more than it has in the past. No spam filter is ever going to be
>100% accurate though.
>
>Given the tone of your post I'm not too sure why I'm bothering to offer
>my advice,

Typical Plus response I guess. We get you in the shit, so tough!

>however you might want to consider taking up our offer of a
>free .UK domain? If you haven't done this already, you'll find details
>of the offer when you next log into our website.
>
>Whilst this won't help the spam situation by itself, we're looking at
>allowing customers to turn off all email to the .plus.com virtual
>domain. What this allows you to do is change the bit after the @ in your
>email address to <something>.co.uk and then turn off the .plus.com
>addresses. The result being that you discard the spam-laden .plus.com
>address whilst keeping the spam-free .co.uk address. As the domain will
>use the same mailboxes you shouldn't have to do anything else apart from
>change the 'from' address in your email application and notify your
>contacts of the change.

Better yet just go find another mail provider. Same hassle, but wont
be stuck dealing with stroppy Plus again!

>So there you have it. One of a few possible solutions, assuming of
>course that you're willing to take advice from one of the lying
>'dickheads' that sold your details to a spammer... Please!

Some solution! Go elsewhere mate, these *dickheads* don't care
clearly. If it was me I'd sue the arse off you.

me wrote:
> ".......you might want to consider taking up our offer of a
> free .UK domain?"
>
>
> Is this available to Metronet customers? If so, URL please. TIA.

Hi there,

Hmmm, I'll have to check but TBH I don't think it is because you guys
were using a different webmail database that wasn't compromised.

Will ask about nevertheless.

Kind Rgds,

--
|Bob Pullen Broadband Solutions for
|Support Home & Business @
|PlusNet plc. www.plus.net
+------ PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet! ------

Scot wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 20:21:54 +0100, PlusNet Support Team
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> David wrote:
>>> Do any of those dickheads at Plusnet know how to work a spam filter!
>>> Ever since they sold our details to spammers and pretended they had
>>> been hacked, we have been inundated with spam offering viagra,
>>> wondercum, adobe **** and all sorts of other shit, it's incessant and
>>> yet the dickheads at plusnet seem unable to filter on key words, or
>>> probably just unwilling!
>>>
>>> WTF is the matter with them!
>> As supported by some of the other posters who've replied to this thread,
>> the filter is actually detecting quite a lot of this junk. Certainly a
>> lot more than it has in the past. No spam filter is ever going to be
>> 100% accurate though.
>>
>> Given the tone of your post I'm not too sure why I'm bothering to offer
>> my advice,
>
> Typical Plus response I guess. We get you in the shit, so tough!

Let's be fair, it's not often people get much help hurling obsenities in
the direction of the the people who are there to offer it? Even if it
wasn't directed at me specifically. Besides, did I not go on to offer
what advice I could?

>> however you might want to consider taking up our offer of a
>> free .UK domain? If you haven't done this already, you'll find details
>> of the offer when you next log into our website.
>>
>> Whilst this won't help the spam situation by itself, we're looking at
>> allowing customers to turn off all email to the .plus.com virtual
>> domain. What this allows you to do is change the bit after the @ in your
>> email address to <something>.co.uk and then turn off the .plus.com
>> addresses. The result being that you discard the spam-laden .plus.com
>> address whilst keeping the spam-free .co.uk address. As the domain will
>> use the same mailboxes you shouldn't have to do anything else apart from
>> change the 'from' address in your email application and notify your
>> contacts of the change.
>
> Better yet just go find another mail provider. Same hassle, but wont
> be stuck dealing with stroppy Plus again!

"

>> So there you have it. One of a few possible solutions, assuming of
>> course that you're willing to take advice from one of the lying
>> 'dickheads' that sold your details to a spammer... Please!
>
> Some solution! Go elsewhere mate, these *dickheads* don't care
> clearly. If it was me I'd sue the arse off you.

Although on the other hand that does seem to be directed at me
specifically. Not really necessary is it? I'm sorry but I have to
disagree. If we didn't care we wouldn't have gone to the lengths we did
following the incident. Oh, and I wouldn't be here either!

http://community.plus.net/comms/2007...cident-report/

Rgds,

--
|Bob Pullen Broadband Solutions for
|Support Home & Business @
|PlusNet plc. www.plus.net
+------ PlusNet - The smarter way to Internet! ------