[SpamCop-List] Re: Subject: Want to make EASY Money? TeamAaronShara will show you how!

[Steven Maesslein]

On Mon, 5 Dec 2005 01:18:26 +0100, Philippe Verdy coughed into spamcop 
and left this in <dn011t$mvp$1 at news.spamcop.net>:

>> There's no such thing as a "reasonably intelligent" life form in the
>> whole organisation of his ISP: Wanadoo.fr.
>
> Stop ranting. This is clearly not the purpose of my report and you are out 
> of topic.
>
> There are MUCH MUCH more worse ISPs than Wanadoo in the world.

And your point is?  FWIW they get blocked, too. Just because wanadoo is 
the lesser of two evils doesn't mean that everything's peachy again.

> Wanadoo is acting reasonnably well given its size, and acts quite fast 
> to spam reports, although it's not perfect.

Doesn't look like it from here. Until I blocked them outright I was 
being spammed by the same spammer THROUGH WANADOO'S OFFICIAL SMTP 
CHANNEL (not trojanned windows machines) for months on end. From 
spamcop's POV, abuse at wanadoo.fr is wired to /dev/null and postmaster 
bounces.

> I have still never received any spam from Wanadoo customers,

90% of the mail I used to see from wanadoo customers was spam.

> Today, most Wanadoo customers use a external device (named "LiveBox") that 
> is acting as a NAT router, a basic firewall that blocks outgoing SMTP 
> connections, offers a VoIP decoder, a digital TV router over ATM 
> connections, and so on. The effective spams that remain from Wanadoo 
> customers is constantly going down. Also the spam/mail ratio is extremely 
> low.

This is inaccurate. I happen to live in France and use a FreeBox myself.

*New* wanadoodoo subscribers are being issued a LiveBox, but existing 
customers are still using their old SpeedTouch, HiFocus or Sagem F at st900 
modem. Furthermore, the LiveBox is "usually" connected as a layer-2 
bridge over a USB connection, meaning that it is acting as anything but 
a NAT/firewall even though it can. Your average cluetard using a Windows 
machine wouldn't know a network card if they saw one (last time I had 
any contact with that species it was because they connected the phone 
line to the NIC), but a USB plug is something they can neither stick in 
the wrong hole, nor in the right hole but the wrong way round.

> Note that Wanadoo has been listed in the past for issues that it could not 
> resolve itself (for example regarding reported emails for which the sender 
> is no longer the customer, and for which Wanadoo and already dropped the 
> account; there are still reports persisting in reporting those sites despite 
> they are no longer in use since long by the spamming customer.)

What does this have to do with the multiple *real* causes for listing?

> Note that French law still limits the time under which email relying logs 
> can be kept by the ISP;

If (whatever masquerades as) the wanadoo abuse desk acted *promptly* on 
abuse comnplaints then there wouldn't be any need for logs going back 
for months. And wanadoo wouldn't have the reputation it now has either.

> this time has been recently extended by law, and these extended logs 
> are now required for justice investigation, and a French ISP is now 
> directly responsible for the illegal content it can help transfering, 
> but is allowed now to act preemptively, a recent law against which 
> several groups for the defense of freedom of expression and privacy 
> are protesting, because it requires the ISP monitoring email that is 
> no longer consider like private snail mail;

It never was. Anyone thinking that e-mail offers any form of privacy 
whatsoever (short of encryption) needs their head looked at.

Furthermore, there have been content filters on outbound mail chez 
wanadoo for years, literally. I was one of their unfortunate clients 
until 2 years ago and there were cases of mail of mine being rejected at 
the SMTP level by their content filters. I was therefore unable to send 
mail with certain keywords and when I enquired about it with the 
hotline, I was told to double-check my Outlook Express settings, despite 
the fact that I use Linux and despite the fact that it was obviously 
something fishy going on their end.

> the French law is insprired and was in fact required by the European 
> EUDC Act, which is also a reponse to the US sollicitation to help 
> secure the net against abuses and criminal or terrorist actions.

Maybe so. However, it neither explains nor cancels out the persistent, 
corporate lack of $clue within wanadoo/FT/orange/whatever_they_call_
themselves_today.

-- 
Steve

Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him
how to fish, and he will sit in a boat and drink beer
all day.