Re: How not to do business: Why insult a smart Comcast customer?

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Randall Webmail <rvh40 () insightbb com>
Date: February 26, 2009 5:11:23 AM EST
To: dave () farber net
Cc: dpreed () reed com
Subject: Re: [IP] How not to do business: Why insult a smart Comcast  
customer?

Gee, who xxxx in YOUR Corn Flakes?

Yes, Comcast's arbitrary port-blocking is inconvenient at best and not  
at all likely to stop 100% of UCE sent by botted computers belonging  
to Comcast customers.   That much is Given, and exactly every clueful  
person on the planet is aware of that fact.

Have you ever been the Monkey With a Headset, answering calls from ISP  
customers?

I have, for two years.

Around 10 - 15% of the calls are from customers who have RF on their  
lines and will require a personal visit from a Monkey With a  
Toolbelt.  (If the caller is from Slidell, Louisiana, this increases  
to 70-80%).

Around 50% of the calls are from people like those who get the Blue  
Screen Of Death and call their ISP, because Microsoft will charge them  
cash money to tell them their 1990-vintage PS JR needs to be replaced.

A few percent are calling because they were promised speeds "Up to X  
megabits per second" and they're not getting more than 1/2 X when they  
test on the laptop, though they're getting 80% of X on the desktop and  
the laptop is wirelessly connecting to the neighbor's unsecured router.

A few percent are calling because they've been making millions of  
dollars selling widgets on ebay and a tornado took out the cable lines  
to their house so they're not able to make that money and they will be  
filing suit against their ISP Right Away unless the ISP gets somebody  
out there RIGHT NOW to replace those cable lines.  (Those people NEVER  
have Commercial Accounts, for some reason.  They think for fifty bucks  
a month they're gonna get an ISP that promises and delivers nine nines  
of reliability and three hour turnaround.  I think for five bucks  
worth of PowerBall tickets I'm gonna get a hundred fifty million  
dollars, We each are equally likely to be disappointed.)

> From: "David P. Reed" <dpreed () reed com>
> Date: February 25, 2009 9:53:39 PM EST
> To: dave () farber net
> Cc: ip <ip () v2 listbox com>, "Livingood, Jason"
> <Jason_Livingood () cable comcast com
>  >, John Levine <johnl () iecc com>, Dave Crocker
> <dhc2 () dcrocker net>Subject: How not to do business: Why
> insult a smart Comcast customer?
>
> I have a simple question: why can't Comcast notify its
> subscribers
> when it chooses unilaterally to "block a port"?  And if
> that customer
> is intelligent, why not let them choose whether to be treated
> like an
> idiot by default?  Do you call all of your users "losers"?
>
> And if it is "blocking the port" because of the fear that
> particular
> subscribers are *stupid*, why not express your attitude
> accurately in
> the notice as follows:
>
>    "we know you're an idiot, so to help you in our
> infinite wisdom, we
> are blocking your port.  Self-proclaimed experts such as
> John Levine
> (who wrote the first "for Dummies" book, by the way) know that
> you are
> a stupid idiot.  Other somewhat more expert people like
> Dave Crocker
> also think that *all* users are too stupid to know what they
> are
> doing, so they will also support our treating every customer as
> an
> idiot.  And Comcast knows that you don't know what we know,
> so we will
> just damage your service and then let you hope that you can call
> our
> help desk and if you can get through, and talk to the idiots
> there,
> perhaps you can ask to reinstate the service you originally
> contracted
> for.
>
>    Sincerely, you silly infant, you "Dummie",
>    Comcast, your paternalistic protector (of course we
> have other
> agendas, but we prefer to stand behind our claim that people
> are
> stupid)."
>
> That would express the RUDE, INSULTING, AND DEMEAN ING attitudes
> I
> have read so far in this silly colloquy.  The author of the
> original
> note is not an idiot, seems quite knowledgable to me, and I
> think
> might have a few technical things to teach to Brian Roberts,
> who,
> according to Wired, is trying to show Comcast's more sensible
> face to
> the world.  I have met several times with Brian, by the
> way, and he is
> a lot smarter and perspicacious than the people on this discussion.
>
> I know that Levine thinks he is the smartest person ever to talk
> to
> dummies, who apparently include everyone but himself.  But
> why does
> Comcast want to continue to dig itself into this hole of
> insulting the
> intelligence of its customers?  Give them some credit.
>
> David Farber wrote:
> > Begin forwarded message:
> >
> > From: "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood () cable comcast com>
> > Date: February 24, 2009 8:57:23 PM EST
> > To: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>, ip
> <ip () v2 listbox com>, Paula
> > Keezer <paula_ke () yahoo com>
> > Subject: Re: [IP] Port 25 inbound blocking
> >
> > Hi Paula -
> >
> > See my replies inline below.
> >
> > > Please reconsider the decision to block inbound port
> 25.  I
> > > understand
> > > the spam fighting efforts for outbound port 25.
> Creating alternate
> > > outbound paths for legitimate email users is fairly easy and
> does not
> > > stifle innovative uses of the web.
> >
> > Port 25 blocking, as was noted on IP last week, is
> increasingly
> > being used
> > by ISPs around the world to combat the problem of spam.
> Comcast
> > does not
> > currently block port 25 for all residential subscribers; this
> is
> > done on a
> > case-by-case basis, generally in response to abuse complaints, spam
> > detection, or other spam indicators.  We have a special
> team in our
> > Customer
> > Security Assurance group that can help you understand if there
> is a
> > port 25
> > block in place or not, and you can ask them to consider
> lifting that
> > block.
> > Their contact info is at
> > http://security.comcast.net/get-help/contact-comcast-security.aspx
> >
> > > However, blocking inbound port 25
> > > is erroneous and will stifle innovation amongst legitimate
> users.  As
> > > more computers infiltrate the home and servers (media, game and
> > > otherwise) become powerful facilities in the home, it will become
> > > natural for users to make use of email and other
> communications ports
> > > to contact their home servers.
> >
> > I'm not aware of any legitimate use of inbound port 25 other
> than for
> > running an email server.  (see additional note
> below)  I do not
> > believe this
> > in any way, shape, or form stifles innovation.
> >
> > > An example of such a use is a personal use photo gallery
> system I
> > > have
> > > on my media server.  I have several ways to load photos
> into my
> > > gallery which I enjoy on my locally connected hi def
> televisions (no
> > > need to plog up the net moving medium or low def pictures
> from
> > > flicker
> > > or other net based architectures, I have my own little
> personal cloud
> > > which is much faster thank you).  Recently I have built
> an email
> > > server that just recieves mail from my cell phone.  I
> send images
> > > through my cell phone ISP as mail attachements with a simple
> category>> message and my media server recieves the images and
> puts them into my
> > > gallery.  This is for my personal use and I believe it
> to be quite
> > > legitimate.
> >
> > Sounds like you may have developed this software yourself, but
> I'm
> > not sure.
> > If that is *not* the case, I'm curious what software you
> used.
> > Either way,
> > perhaps you can use an alternative such as a POP client on the
> media
> > server
> > that checks a special mailbox for just such pictures on a
> periodic
> > basis.
> > You can of course copy the photos locally onto your media
> server,
> > and you
> > could also leave a copy on the server as a backup in the network.
> >
> > > Due to Comcast port blocking of inbound port 25, my little gallery
> > > project no longer works.  Sadly, I believe I did some
> inovative work
> > > and am being stiffled by Comcast's inbound port 25 policy.
> > >
> > > As my server does not send mail at all, there is no way it
> can become
> > > a port 25 zombi for spammers.
> >
> > Never say never.  ;-)  You'd be quite surprised what
> is possible and
> > I've
> > had many folks even say they work in network security and so
> on, and
> > there's
> > no way the could have been infested with a bot, when it turns
> out
> > that they
> > were just as vulnerable to these things (or nearly so) as most
> people.>
> > > I have a legitimate use.  I am a long
> > > time paying customer of the Comcast ISP but find that the ISP in
> > > Comcast is becoming more of a CPS  (couch potatoe surfer).
> >
> > As I noted above, you may wish to contact our Customer
> Security
> > Assurance
> > team to request a removal of the block.  But, in my
> personal
> > opinion, that
> > is a short-term tactic.  In the long-term, since more and
> more ISPs
> > are
> > blocking port 25 across-the-board and since port 25 is subject
> to such
> > massive abuse, you'd be smart to figure out an alternative
> method for
> > getting your photos onto your media server.
> >
> > Along those lines, you may also want to participate in our
> user
> > forums at
> > http://forums.comcast.net (there is one entire forum on just
> email
> > topics),
> > and share ideas about how your app works and how to improve
> it, etc.
> > > Please reconsider your policy of blocking inbound port 25.
> This does
> > > not solve the spam problem (please continue to block outgoing
> port 25
> > > as this does solve the spam problem)  Forcing inovators
> such as my
> > > self to contract an outside email relay port hopping service
> is not a
> > > 'fair use' strategy and not a customer centric focus.
> > >
> > > Thank you for your time,
> > >
> > > Paula Keezer
> > > 149 Nw 75th St
> > > Seattle, WA, 98117
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Jason
> >
> > Jason Livingood
> > National Engineering & Technical Operations
> > Comcast Cable Communications
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------
> > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
> > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
> > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------
> Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
> RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
> Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com




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