Re: Comcast Response

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

________________________________________
From: Simon Higgs [simon () higgs com]
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2008 3:53 AM
To: David Farber
Subject: Re: [IP] Comcast Response

My experience with Comcast was slightly different to the one Declan
describes. I'm still waiting on my notification email. But I'll probably
never get it now that I'm a Time Warner customer (don't get me started
there).

He is correct in that individual user accounts are blocked on an
individual basis. The blocking takes place inside the cable modem after
the cable modem pulls down an updated config file.

If the situation is resolved, and if port 25 is unblocked for the
customer, it usually requires a reboot of the cable modem to download a
config file with unblocked settings.

What is disturbing, and has been a problem for years, is that accounts
are often automatically blocked simply by matching an automated spam
complaint email to the ISP to the forged domain name in the spam's
header and matching that to originating IP addresses of legitimate mail
for that domain. The completely wrecks legitimate home business-based
email servers hosted on residential broadband accounts.


David Farber wrote:
> ________________________________________
> From: Forde, Declan [Declan_Forde () cable comcast com]
> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 10:29 PM
> To: David Farber
> Subject: Comcast Response
>
> Dave,
>
>
>
> We have seen the flurry of posts about Comcast and e-mail blocking and customer communications.  I would like to take 
> this opportunity to provide Comcast's position on these comments.
>
>
>
> As part our ongoing efforts to reduce spam, Comcast blocks Port 25 on those computers that have been identified as a 
> spam relay and are being exploited by spammers to send large volumes of unwanted email. The comments in the thread 
> suggest that we do not communicate with customers when we block Port 25. In fact, we send an email to the impacted 
> customer to let them know what has happened and provide instructions on how to easily switch to the more secure Port 
> 587. In many cases, our customers are appreciative of this proactive approach to securing their computer.
>
>
>
> It is also suggested that we do not provide any information on Comcast.net to assist customers with this issue. 
> Please take a look at the following FAQ which answers anticipated customer questions and provides a One Click Fix for 
> our customers to easily switch to Port 587: http://www.comcast.net/help/faq/index.jsp?faq=Email118989#25
>
>
>
> Blocking of Port 25 is a common practice among ISP's and it is endorsed by the FTC as an effective means to reduce 
> spam generated by zombies. Please see: http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/edcams/spam/zombie/index.htm
>
>
>
> We are targeting only known infected computers and do not block Port 25 for all customers. Blocking of port 25 is not 
> new for Comcast. We have been using this targeted approach for about 4 years and it continues to help reduce spam 
> while also minimizing the impact on our customers.
>
>
>
> I hope these comments are helpful.
>
>
>
> Declan
>
>
> Declan Forde
> Snr. Director of Security
> Comcast
>
>
> This message and any attachments to it contain information exclusively for intended recipients. If you are not an 
> intended recipient, please contact the sender to report the error and then delete all copies of this message from 
> your system.
>
> -------------------------------------------
> Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
> RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
> Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com


--
Best Regards,

Simon Higgs

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com