Salon article on excessive spam blocking at RR

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 01:33:34 -0400
From: Baratunde R Thurston



Hey Dave,

This new Salon piece seems relevant to the ongoing spam discussion. If you
post, please remove my email address.

Thanks,

\baratunde rafiq thurston
 comedian & writer
 www.baratunde.com
 gigs, writing, multimedia & more...

----------------------


>From http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2003/06/19/spamblockers/print.html


When spam filters go bad
Trying to block junk mail, my cable modem company installed a system that
prevented me from getting my REAL mail -- and when I complained, insisted it
was all for the good of the System.

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Laura Miller



June 19, 2003  |  "The equivalent of treating dandruff by decapitation":
That's what Frank Zappa, testifying before a Senate committee in 1985,
called the censorship plans of the Parents Music Resource Center. In the
annals of overreaction, draconian measures tend to spring from mind-muddling
passions -- in the case of the PMRC, parental desire to protect the young
from nastiness. But when it comes to passion, even our darkest, most primal
instincts can hardly compare to the raw fury that people have come to feel
toward spam. So e-mail users, beware: It's time to watch your head. I can
testify from personal experience that the cure has finally become worse than
the disease.

In June, the company that provides my cable modem service, Road Runner,
installed a superaggressive new set of spam blockers on its e-mail servers.
Late in the first day of the blockers' activation, I suddenly noticed that I
hadn't gotten any e-mail at all in nearly three hours. No e-mail from Salon
colleagues or from friends and, most puzzling of all, no e-mail from the
editor at the New York Times with whom I'd been corresponding all morning
about a freelance piece I was writing for her. I gave her a call.

Turns out I'd never received several e-mails that she and other Times
staffers had sent me. A few tests proved that I was still receiving e-mail
from Salon addresses and a trickle of other messages, but not getting Times
e-mail wasn't going to fly. So I poked around a bit more and found the
e-mail address for Road Runner's security department. And that's when I fell
down a rabbit hole into spam-blocker hell.

My e-mail of complaint to Road Runner security elicited an autoreply that
could have been composed by the Red Queen from "Alice in Wonderland":

"ATTENTION

PLEASE READ THIS ENTIRE AUTORESPONSE IF YOU HAVE NEVER SENT MAIL HERE
BEFORE, OR EVEN IF YOU HAVE. THIS MESSAGE DETAILS INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR
US TO PROCESS YOUR REQUEST. IF YOU DID NOT INCLUDE THE INFORMATION THAT WE
REQUIRE, YOUR MESSAGE WILL BE DELETED WITHOUT FURTHER REVIEW. YOU WILL NOT
RECEIVE FURTHER COMMUNICATION FROM US ASKING FOR INFORMATION."

The message went on to explain in somewhat confusing terms exactly what this
imperious personage demanded to see in order to deem my existence worthy of
notice. The upshot, though, was that anyone whose e-mail to my Road Runner
address was being blocked had to contact Road Runner Security directly,
sending a copy of the error message they'd received when their e-mails to me
bounced back.

I wasn't about to ask a busy newspaper editor to hassle with the technical
staff at my service provider, and I had a copy of the "bounce" message from
the spam blocker that she'd sent to my Salon address. So I sent that off to
Security with a note, hoping to correct the situation without having to
involve the Times.

But that's all I could do: hope. Suppose Security found the bounce message I
had sent insufficiently informative? What if the message was adequate but
the fact that it had been forwarded by me and not by the original sender met
with the disapproval of these faceless, nameless, ALL-CAPS-spouting
authorities? Off with its head! And I'd never know that my message had been
summarily executed. I would "NOT RECEIVE FURTHER COMMUNICATION." My e-mail
had gone to Camp X-Ray.

I began to fret. Were there other people who'd sent me legitimate e-mail
that couldn't get through Road Runner's fascistic new spam blockers? If they
didn't have my phone number or one of my alternate e-mail addresses, how
could they let me know about it? What if someone sent me an e-mail, got the
bounce message in response, and then decided that tracking me down was too
much trouble? What if that message was really, really important -- to me at
least?

A couple of persistent souls managed to get word to me that their e-mails
had bounced back. Those e-mails were sent by 1) a venerable publisher of
trade magazines and 2) an even more venerable publisher of books. Along with
the New York Times, neither struck me as likely culprits of spam abuse, but
Salon's own tech staff explained that they might seem to be, on account of
something called relays used by crafty spam perps looking to cover their
tracks. So that meant that anybody -- anybody -- might have their domain
name hijacked by spammers, then blocked by my service provider. And this
could happen at any time. Geez.

Several pleasant but not very effective Road Runner customer service people
explained to me that my only recourse was to ask these senders to petition
Road Runner for the removal of the scarlet S. That meant asking the various
senders for the names of their in-house network administrators (providing
they actually knew who this was, not a given in large organizations), making
sure each sender forwarded a copy of Road Runner's bounce message to the
administrator, then contacting the administrator to ask that s/he ask Road
Runner to be taken off the spammer list.

Needless to say, this was a massive time suck. As the week drew to a close,
it seemed I'd frittered away almost half my work hours trying to correct the
mess and taking phone calls from Road Runner's customer service people, who
kept ringing up to ask if my concern had been addressed, listen to my nth
rant about the situation, and then politely explain that they couldn't
address my concern. This was taking a whole lot more time than the simple
act of deleting unwanted spam -- and believe me, I get a lot of spam. And I
still couldn't be sure that I was getting all my legitimate mail.

No matter whom I managed to contact, I received robotically identical
responses explaining the necessity of spam filters and reiterating that only
Security could lift a block and only the sender's network administrator
could negotiate the unblocking. One rep did slip me a special customer
service address where I sent a complaint about the inconvenience of the
whole thing and suggested that Road Runner's spam blockers might be a tad
excessive. Someone wrote back: "Our system has spam filters in place to
protect our network from being overloaded by bulk unsolicited e-mail. The
end result benefits our subscribers, who can expect less downtime and higher
service levels." When I suggested that the willy-nilly blocking of perfectly
legitimate e-mail necessary to one's livelihood didn't really seem like a
"higher service level" to me, he replied that I shouldn't be using my e-mail
account for "commercial, or revenue generating purposes."

Somehow, my cheerful, speedy, efficient cable modem service had morphed into
evasive, officious martinets; Road Runner had turned into Ari Fleischer. I
was trying to speak up on behalf of the unjustly stigmatized, but I was
treated as if I were some kind of soft-headed liberal spam lover. Didn't I
understand how important it was to protect the network? What were a few
abused messages when the greater good was at stake? And what was I doing
getting that kind of message, anyway? Broken, I reverted to using my
Salon.com address as my main account.

I have to admit that the policy of eradicating spam by blocking nearly every
message has a breathtaking ambition to it, even if it pretty much eliminates
the usefulness of e-mail altogether. Even so, it doesn't work. There's still
a handful of messages coming through on my Road Runner address every day.
And they're almost all spam.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

About the writer
Laura Miller is a senior writer for Salon.
Sound Off
Send us a Letter to the Editor

Related stories
A spam fighter's work is never done
Suresh Ramasubramanian's job is to stop junk e-mail from ever getting to
your in box. But for every spammer he blocks, a dozen more rise up.
By Michelle Delio
03/27/03

Political spam: Get used to it
An outraged constituent is suing Elizabeth Dole's campaign for sending junk
e-mail. Is spam from politicians a crime -- or a vital First Amendment
right?
By Katharine Mieszkowski
11/20/02

Spam vs. spam
The only way to stem the flood of unwanted e-mail may be to harness a
million eyeballs and an army of open-source hackers.
By Andrew Leonard
06/24/02






Salon.com >> Technology











Salon  Search  About Salon  Table Talk  Advertise in Salon  Investor
Relations


News & Politics | Opinion | Tech & Business | Arts & Entertainment
Indie film | Books | Life | Sex | Comics | Audio | Dialogue
Letters | Columnists | Salon Gear


Reproduction of material from any Salon pages without written permission is
strictly prohibited
Copyright 2003 Salon.com
Salon, 22 4th Street, 16th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94103
Telephone 415 645-9200 | Fax 415 645-9204
E-mail | Salon.com Privacy Policy | Terms of Service



-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/