Response from MessageLabs

[jayteeuk]

I recently received a spam mail at my work address, which is filtered by MessageLabs. When I submitted it to SpamCop, abuse[at]messagelabs.com came up as one of the reporting addresses, showing as "Third Party Interested in Message Source".

I previously allowed a report to go to this address and was subsequently told that I should only allow the reports to pass through if the message was not identified as spam, so I have been de-selecting them for the majority of messages. Since this one was not identified as spam, I allowed it to pass through.

After an e-mail from them explaining that they filter my e-mail for spam and that I should complain to the originator of the e-mail rather than them, and a reply from me explaining that I understood this but had been asked to allow the reports through as detailed above, I received the following response:

---

Hi James,

We would appreciate it in the future if you used spamsample[at]messagelabs.com

for sending us spam which our scanners missed.

Thanks,

Paul

---

Since I'm not actually the one sending the mail (and can't do anything about the address it's sent to), I thought I'd better let you guys know. For now I'm just not going to allow any reports to go to MessageLabs.

JT

[Miss Betsy]

If I had time, I would certainly email them back asking why they have asked to be notified as a third party by spamcop. And, tell them that it is a nuisance for me to have uncheck their box every time that I report spam via spamcop, that if they don't want the reports, then withdraw their 'third party' status at spamcop.

Miss Betsy

[Wazoo]

Of course, a Tracking URL would be nice so as to see why they are listed as an interested third-party ... is it based on a URL, an IP, or something else. Possibly either they or the Deputies may need to be notified to verify or remove "their interest" .. but I'd like to see what's going on before I send out any notes.

[Miss Betsy]

Should have said "If I were you (the OP)..."

Don't think spamcop should do anything. MessageLabs must have asked to be 'interested' so they should not be making it difficult for their customers to report spam via spamcop. IMHO, a rather 'assertive' reply to that email from MessageLabs would be my choice, but the OP may not be a position to make waves since he is an employee not involved with the choice of filters.

Miss Betsy

[jayteeuk]

IMHO, a rather 'assertive' reply to that email from MessageLabs would be my choice,  but the OP may not be a position to make waves since he is an employee not involved with the choice of filters.

13806[/snapback]

That would normally be my response as well, but as you correctly state, I'm not really in a position to send that mail myself. Perhaps I should mention it to our Internal Systems team, but to be honest I'd expect a similar response from them.

JT

[Miss Betsy]

Perhaps I should mention it to our Internal Systems team, but to be honest I'd expect a similar response from them.

Too bad. Guess it is one of those things that one had better find something humorous about or get a sour stomach!

Since you seem to be a careful reporter, it wouldn't be that much trouble to just uncheck Messagelabs every time! And if you miss one and they send you a message, then send them back an abject apology for not remembering they don't want to be notified as a third party or some bureaucratic gobbledygook - whatever strikes your funny bone and won't get you in trouble. If you can figure out how to tell them that they aren't doing their job by letting spam through so that they can't say you said that, so much the better.

Miss Betsy

[StevenUnderwood]

Another option might be to disable third-party reporting as the default. With the new authorization procedures, there are more options available, even to free reporters.