silent

There was a fair amount of concern by members here that Surpass was overstepping their authority in controlling spam with global server side filtering. The original thread can be found here: Where has all the Spam gone?

Notwithstanding the fact that I disagree with the entire process of this type of filtering, and Surpass’ explanation for doing so, I certainly understand the need and right Surpass has to protect their servers. However, I believe they are “throwing the baby out with the bath water”.

The most recent thread (Mandatory Spam Filtering - Yea or Nay?) was closed on 11/22/04 with the statement, “We will make an announcement in General Announcements when and if we decide on pressing on with this method of incoming spam control.” What has me most concerned is that my mail has been subject to what I feel is improper filtering since 11/18/04, and not only has Surpass not announced their intentions to implement this process, but even after complaints of this and their statement to make an announcement if it were to continue – which it has – Surpass has been silent on this issue.

Spam is an issue for everyone. However, I know of no other host - including another I use - that implements this type of filtering. Frankly, it is not a proper solution. If other companies can handle this in more appropriate ways, perhaps Surpass should develop a solution base on industry best practices.

This forum and the community of members that participate here help set Surpass above other providers. A key ingredient is communication. While I share several concerns with all the aforementioned filtering issues, it is the lack of communication here that has me troubled the most.

__________________
pass16

fwwebs5

I agree completely.

DeiVid

i agree to....

__________________
Surpass Dedicated

P.D.: My english sucks.., dont blame me for the incoherents words..

sam

the policy hasn't been announced yet.

have you found any instances where legitimate mail is not being received? if so, please contact support so they can investigate.

not trying to shut you down here but nothing's been made official.

silent

No. Actually, I have benefited from this. Of course that could change depending on the type of mail I may receive in the future.

__________________
pass16

silent

With all respect – official or not, it has been implemented and there was no communication regarding that implementation.

__________________
pass16

Kayla

On servers that get so much incoming spam, which of course causes mail problems (email problems make up over 60% of what our support tickets consist of), we will continue to add configurations that filter mail based on the SCBL (spamcop.net) and the SURBL (surbl.org). These are the lists we choose to use based on experience with them. However, no blacklist is perfect.

If someone wrongly loses an important email, they should ask that company or person why their site is hosted on a network thats allowing spam to be sent out. If everyone did that, there would be a lot of great things going on in the fight against spam. But most people don't want to do this. They would rather just receive the spam, get rid of it in their own way, and perhaps never even report the spam they get.

That just goes to show why spam is still such a huge problem.

That shows why this is now an issue at Surpass.

Of course we want everyone to deal with spam in their own way. We aren't trying to control your spam for you, we are more focused on hosting itself, as that is our main service to you. However, what silent said in the first post about us abusing authority- that isn't the case, if he meant it in such a way that it appears. We are trying to protect your services from suffering. Also silent said it is global filtering. That isn't the case either. We are doing this on a server to server basis as issues arise. Some servers are bombed with incoming spam, some are not. If we wanted to control your spam, then we would make this a global change on all servers. We have not done that. We are only configuring servers on a case by case basis. Some will even have the filtering removed after enough time has went by and the incoming spam on that server has had time to drop after certain addresses have got knocked out of spam family loops.

__________________

silent

When you filter an entire server it is a global filter. I don’t think anyone who understands the potential outcome of what you are doing here is going to feel any better knowing you may or may not filter their server, and that filtering may or may not continue. You state you are not trying to control users’ spam. I know that. I think everyone here that understands what you are doing understands you are trying to protect your servers. To that end, I (we?) agree. I don’t recall anyone questioning your motivations. I believe what is at issue here are not your motivations, but your actions.

This is a statement that concerns me. First, you assume the recipient will even be aware of a lost email. Many cases that is not likely. Secondly, by the time someone might discover an important lost email, it may be too late.

The vast majority of users here that are aware of this policy object to it – some vehemently. This is not an industry accepted procedure. I believe it is for good reason. I urge you to revisit your current solution and develop an industry best practices solution. Also, in the future prior to implementing other impacting policies or procedures it would be constructive to notify your customers.

__________________
pass16

Kayla

If this is not a standard procedure, why do companies use blacklists, and why are blacklists created?

__________________