Re: [mailop] Hotmail, green SNDS and junk folder placement

2017-11-02 Thread Michael Wise via mailop 

I have not received a confirmation that I consider authoritative at this point 
in time.
There's a lot going on at the moment, and I'm still trying to find out who can 
speak to this authoritatively.

Apologies for the delay.

Aloha,
Michael.
--
Michael J Wise
Microsoft Corporation| Spam Analysis
"Your Spam Specimen Has Been Processed."
Got the Junk Mail Reporting 
Tool<http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=18275> ?

From: Bressier Simon [mailto:bressie...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 2, 2017 6:16 AM
To: Michael Wise <michael.w...@microsoft.com>
Cc: Benjamin BILLON <bbillon...@splio.fr>; mailop@mailop.org
Subject: Re: [mailop] Hotmail, green SNDS and junk folder placement

Hey Michael,

Sorry to bother :) did you have any news regarding these questions ? The point 
is really interesting for all of us here, and as a router to know if we have to 
be more strict with all our customers and "grey" senders, it could helps a lot 
to know if we have to multiply the current spam complaints count by xxx.

Thank you very much in advance !

Simon

2017-10-30 18:49 GMT+01:00 Michael Wise via mailop 
<mailop@mailop.org<mailto:mailop@mailop.org>>:

I'm asking a few people to confirm my understanding and will get back to y'all.

Aloha,
Michael.
--
Michael J Wise
Microsoft Corporation| Spam Analysis
"Your Spam Specimen Has Been Processed."
Got the Junk Mail Reporting 
Tool<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.microsoft.com%2Fen-us%2Fdownload%2Fdetails.aspx%3Fid%3D18275=02%7C01%7CMichael.Wise%40microsoft.com%7C7a673e9c99544880a7f108d521f3f30d%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636452254000743161=TavtTynaDZNYGTYKvs28Xq61KeLHkCx0Uep73bx71SE%3D=0>
 ?

From: Benjamin BILLON [mailto:bbillon...@splio.fr<mailto:bbillon...@splio.fr>]
Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2017 1:13 AM
To: Michael Wise <michael.w...@microsoft.com<mailto:michael.w...@microsoft.com>>

Cc: mailop@mailop.org<mailto:mailop@mailop.org>
Subject: Re: [mailop] Hotmail, green SNDS and junk folder placement

Hi Michael,

> Also, the JMRP doesn't generate 1:1 reports for each piece of traffic 
> reported as spam.
> The ratio is much smaller than that, otherwise senders would use it for List 
> Washing, and that's frowned upon.
Wow, wow wow wow.
This is absolutely new to me.
That would explain why we receive only 1/3 of the volume of ARF from 
Hotmail/Live than from Yahoo, while we send twice more to Hotmail/Live than 
Yahoo.
However, that's not what 
https://mail.live.com/mail/services.aspx<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.live.com%2Fmail%2Fservices.aspx=02%7C01%7CMichael.Wise%40microsoft.com%7Ccb944cd6e3774b90488008d51ddba47d%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636447751559036363=3a0W7hWDKF7thrba%2FZgXXc%2FPROgtnmDeoDgfzPmVOGY%3D=0>
 says: "Returns the full message with headers of *any* email marked as "junk" 
or "phishing""
This is a HUGE change, if potential list washing is the issue, IMHO this is the 
wrong answer. This basically makes JMRP irrelevant for ESPs: we don't have 
reliable metrics, we can not satisfy people complaining as they'll keep getting 
the same message, probably in junk folder, which will probably weight 
negatively in the reputation ...

I'm totally amazed by this information.

That being said, even though the ratio is not 1:1, I _guess_ it's roughly the 
same for everybody. So we have clients that generate more than 9 complains a 
month and still enjoy a low BCL and inbox placement, while this one got an 
inexplicable BCL of 8.

For the record, the ticket is SRX1401741292ID it highlights the discrepancy 
SNDS color / inbox placement (as Terry told me to do), and timidly mention the 
BCL without naming it (I reminded my folks to be more explicit in the tickets).
The last reply we got was "after reviewing the information you provided and in 
compliance with our mail policies, we are unable to offer immediate mitigation 
for your deliverability issue", so I guess we washed off the Support Level 2. I 
wonder how many levels before the final boss!

Cheers,


--


Benjamin

2017-10-28 7:46 GMT+08:00 Michael Wise via mailop 
<mailop@mailop.org<mailto:mailop@mailop.org>>:

There are ways of dealing with BCL, but I'd suggest you point it out when 
opening the ticket.
Also, the JMRP doesn't generate 1:1 reports for each piece of traffic reported 
as spam.
The ratio is much smaller than that, otherwise senders would use it for List 
Washing, and that's frowned upon.

Aloha,
Michael.
--
Michael J Wise
Microsoft Corporation| Spam Analysis
"Your Spam Specimen Has Been Processed."
Got the Junk Mail Reporting 
Tool<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.microsoft.com%2Fen-us%2Fdownload%2Fdetails.aspx%3Fid%3D18275=02%7C01%7CMichael.Wise%40microsof

Re: [mailop] Hotmail, green SNDS and junk folder placement

2017-11-02 Thread Bressier Simon 
Hey Michael,

Sorry to bother :) did you have any news regarding these questions ? The
point is really interesting for all of us here, and as a router to know if
we have to be more strict with all our customers and "grey" senders, it
could helps a lot to know if we have to multiply the current spam
complaints count by xxx.

Thank you very much in advance !

Simon

2017-10-30 18:49 GMT+01:00 Michael Wise via mailop <mailop@mailop.org>:

>
>
> I'm asking a few people to confirm my understanding and will get back to
> y'all.
>
>
>
> Aloha,
>
> Michael.
>
> --
>
> *Michael J Wise*
> Microsoft Corporation| Spam Analysis
>
> "Your Spam Specimen Has Been Processed."
>
> Got the Junk Mail Reporting Tool
> <http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=18275> ?
>
>
>
> *From:* Benjamin BILLON [mailto:bbillon...@splio.fr]
> *Sent:* Saturday, October 28, 2017 1:13 AM
> *To:* Michael Wise <michael.w...@microsoft.com>
>
> *Cc:* mailop@mailop.org
> *Subject:* Re: [mailop] Hotmail, green SNDS and junk folder placement
>
>
>
> Hi Michael,
>
>
>
> > Also, the JMRP doesn't generate 1:1 reports for each piece of traffic
> reported as spam.
>
> > The ratio is much smaller than that, otherwise senders would use it for
> List Washing, and that's frowned upon.
>
> Wow, wow wow wow.
>
> This is absolutely new to me.
>
> That would explain why we receive only 1/3 of the volume of ARF from
> Hotmail/Live than from Yahoo, while we send twice more to Hotmail/Live than
> Yahoo.
>
> However, that's not what https://mail.live.com/mail/services.aspx
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.live.com%2Fmail%2Fservices.aspx=02%7C01%7CMichael.Wise%40microsoft.com%7Ccb944cd6e3774b90488008d51ddba47d%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636447751559036363=3a0W7hWDKF7thrba%2FZgXXc%2FPROgtnmDeoDgfzPmVOGY%3D=0>
> says: "Returns the full message with headers of *any* email marked as
> "junk" or "phishing""
>
> This is a HUGE change, if potential list washing is the issue, IMHO this
> is the wrong answer. This basically makes JMRP irrelevant for ESPs: we
> don't have reliable metrics, we can not satisfy people complaining as
> they'll keep getting the same message, probably in junk folder, which will
> probably weight negatively in the reputation ...
>
>
>
> I'm totally amazed by this information.
>
>
>
> That being said, even though the ratio is not 1:1, I _guess_ it's roughly
> the same for everybody. So we have clients that generate more than 9
> complains a month and still enjoy a low BCL and inbox placement, while this
> one got an inexplicable BCL of 8.
>
>
>
> For the record, the ticket is SRX1401741292ID it highlights the
> discrepancy SNDS color / inbox placement (as Terry told me to do), and
> timidly mention the BCL without naming it (I reminded my folks to be more
> explicit in the tickets).
>
> The last reply we got was "after reviewing the information you provided
> and in compliance with our mail policies, we are unable to offer immediate
> mitigation for your deliverability issue", so I guess we washed off the
> Support Level 2. I wonder how many levels before the final boss!
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
> --
>
> Benjamin
>
>
>
> 2017-10-28 7:46 GMT+08:00 Michael Wise via mailop <mailop@mailop.org>:
>
>
>
> There are ways of dealing with BCL, but I'd suggest you point it out when
> opening the ticket.
>
> Also, the JMRP doesn't generate 1:1 reports for each piece of traffic
> reported as spam.
>
> The ratio is much smaller than that, otherwise senders would use it for
> List Washing, and that's frowned upon.
>
>
>
> Aloha,
>
> Michael.
>
> --
>
> *Michael J Wise*
> Microsoft Corporation| Spam Analysis
>
> "Your Spam Specimen Has Been Processed."
>
> Got the Junk Mail Reporting Tool
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.microsoft.com%2Fen-us%2Fdownload%2Fdetails.aspx%3Fid%3D18275=02%7C01%7CMichael.Wise%40microsoft.com%7Ccb944cd6e3774b90488008d51ddba47d%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636447751559036363=axj8QBuiquHGROCaLZG7WLfc6JK2yj0NH8FwxZT%2Bb7I%3D=0>
> ?
>
>
>
> *From:* mailop [mailto:mailop-boun...@mailop.org] *On Behalf Of *Brett
> Schenker
> *Sent:* Friday, October 27, 2017 8:02 AM
> *To:* Stefano Bagnara <mai...@bago.org>
> *Cc:* mailop@mailop.org
> *Subject:* Re: [mailop] Hotmail, green SNDS and junk folder placement
>
>
>
> My experience too is that BCL is the deciding factor over everything and
> have yet to fi

Re: [mailop] Hotmail, green SNDS and junk folder placement

2017-10-30 Thread Brett Schenker 
Yes, this is very helpful and news to me. I assumed numbers I got back were
1:1.


Virus-free.
www.avast.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 1:56 PM, Anne P. Mitchell Esq. 
wrote:

>
>
> >
> >
> > I'm asking a few people to confirm my understanding and will get back to
> y'all.
> >
> > Aloha,
> > Michael.
> > --
> > Michael J Wise
> > Microsoft Corporation| Spam Analysis
> > "Your Spam Specimen Has Been Processed."
> > Got the Junk Mail Reporting Tool ?
>
> Can I just take a moment to say how very much I appreciate Michael's
> participation (and especially his responsiveness) in this group?
>
> Thank you, Michael!
>
> Anne
>
> Anne P. Mitchell,
> Attorney at Law
> CEO/President,
> SuretyMail Email Reputation Certification and Inbox Delivery Assistance
> http://www.SuretyMail.com/
> http://www.SuretyMail.eu/
>
> Attorney at Law / Legislative Consultant
> Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal anti-spam law)
> Author: The Email Deliverability Handbook
> Legal Counsel: The CyberGreen Institute
> Member, California Bar Cyberspace Law Committee
> Member, Colorado Cybersecurity Consortium
> Member, Board of Directors, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop
> Member, Advisory Board, Cause for Awareness
> Member, Elevations Credit Union Member Council
> Former Chair, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop
> Ret. Professor of Law, Lincoln Law School of San Jose
>
> Available for consultations by special arrangement.
> amitch...@isipp.com | @AnnePMitchell
> Facebook/AnnePMitchell  | LinkedIn/in/annemitchell
>
>
>
>
> ___
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@mailop.org
> https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
>



-- 
Brett Schenker
Man of Many Things, Including
5B Consulting - http://www.5bconsulting.com
Graphic Policy - http://www.graphicpolicy.com

Twitter - http://twitter.com/bhschenker
LinkedIn - http://www.linkedin.com/in/brettschenker
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Hotmail, green SNDS and junk folder placement

2017-10-30 Thread Michael Wise via mailop 




Aloha,
Michael.
--
Michael J Wise
Microsoft Corporation| Spam Analysis
"Your Spam Specimen Has Been Processed."
Got the Junk Mail Reporting 
Tool<http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=18275> ?



-Original Message-
From: mailop [mailto:mailop-boun...@mailop.org] On Behalf Of Anne P. Mitchell 
Esq.
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 10:56 AM
To: Michael Wise via mailop <mailop@mailop.org>
Subject: Re: [mailop] Hotmail, green SNDS and junk folder placement





>

>

> I'm asking a few people to confirm my understanding and will get back to 
> y'all.

>

> Aloha,

> Michael.

> --

> Michael J Wise

> Microsoft Corporation| Spam Analysis

> "Your Spam Specimen Has Been Processed."

> Got the Junk Mail Reporting Tool ?



Can I just take a moment to say how very much I appreciate Michael's 
participation (and especially his responsiveness) in this group?



Thank you, Michael!



Anne



Anne P. Mitchell,

Attorney at Law

CEO/President,

SuretyMail Email Reputation Certification and Inbox Delivery Assistance

https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.SuretyMail.com%2F=02%7C01%7Cmichael.wise%40microsoft.com%7Cd17f3f0691394ad40f9e08d51fc0eea9%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636449835853519057=N0xGYfvaRTl7mi43F%2FxkwtAacxHf7mtEJPen6wXWSZU%3D=0

https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.SuretyMail.eu%2F=02%7C01%7Cmichael.wise%40microsoft.com%7Cd17f3f0691394ad40f9e08d51fc0eea9%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636449835853519057=EmyTeLBKuxCmQSUKzrOddykYA8GpoaMoQy2KpIgLkfY%3D=0



Attorney at Law / Legislative Consultant

Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal anti-spam law)

Author: The Email Deliverability Handbook

Legal Counsel: The CyberGreen Institute

Member, California Bar Cyberspace Law Committee

Member, Colorado Cybersecurity Consortium

Member, Board of Directors, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop

Member, Advisory Board, Cause for Awareness

Member, Elevations Credit Union Member Council

Former Chair, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop

Ret. Professor of Law, Lincoln Law School of San Jose



Available for consultations by special arrangement.

amitch...@isipp.com<mailto:amitch...@isipp.com> | @AnnePMitchell

Facebook/AnnePMitchell  | LinkedIn/in/annemitchell









___

mailop mailing list

mailop@mailop.org<mailto:mailop@mailop.org>

https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fchilli.nosignal.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fmailop=02%7C01%7Cmichael.wise%40microsoft.com%7Cd17f3f0691394ad40f9e08d51fc0eea9%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636449835853519057=Qlp4t0LpoTugwiI8JqpYRoE%2Fv%2BZ6RRT33bWSgtreJb0%3D=0
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Hotmail, green SNDS and junk folder placement

2017-10-30 Thread Anne P. Mitchell Esq. 

 
> 
>  
> I'm asking a few people to confirm my understanding and will get back to 
> y'all.
>  
> Aloha,
> Michael.
> --
> Michael J Wise
> Microsoft Corporation| Spam Analysis
> "Your Spam Specimen Has Been Processed."
> Got the Junk Mail Reporting Tool ?

Can I just take a moment to say how very much I appreciate Michael's 
participation (and especially his responsiveness) in this group?

Thank you, Michael!

Anne

Anne P. Mitchell, 
Attorney at Law
CEO/President, 
SuretyMail Email Reputation Certification and Inbox Delivery Assistance
http://www.SuretyMail.com/
http://www.SuretyMail.eu/

Attorney at Law / Legislative Consultant
Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal anti-spam law)
Author: The Email Deliverability Handbook
Legal Counsel: The CyberGreen Institute
Member, California Bar Cyberspace Law Committee
Member, Colorado Cybersecurity Consortium
Member, Board of Directors, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop
Member, Advisory Board, Cause for Awareness
Member, Elevations Credit Union Member Council
Former Chair, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop
Ret. Professor of Law, Lincoln Law School of San Jose

Available for consultations by special arrangement.
amitch...@isipp.com | @AnnePMitchell
Facebook/AnnePMitchell  | LinkedIn/in/annemitchell




___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Hotmail, green SNDS and junk folder placement

2017-10-30 Thread David Hofstee 
This is also news to me. Wow. I also wondered why Yahoo recipients seemed
so picky but I didn't draw the right conclusion (that recipients are the
same everywhere and something was wrong with the MS metrics).

My question would be: If Microsoft does not want all complaining recipients
removed / listwashed, which I can understand, why not provide anonymous
feedback on bad senders? Provide similar info like Google is providing
(with the Feedback-ID or sender domain). Why then provide FBL at all?

A second question is: What does the 0.3% spam rate limit, as described in
the SNDS FAQ, mean. Given this information that is. Should we multiply our
FBL rates with a number (6?) to get that 0.3%?

Yours,


David

On 30 October 2017 at 01:26, Benjamin BILLON via mailop 
wrote:

> Hi Bill,
>
> Although we try to rationalize as much as possible, I believe most ESPs
> are aware that each ISP is different (if some ESPs aren't aware of that
> they should look at the SMTP replies), there's not one single universal
> metric. There are plenty of metrics, and of course different for ISP. But
> when one of the metrics is totally off chart, or not interpreted as it's
> supposed to do, well, that's never good. Metrics aren't truth, they're just
> indicators that we then have to interpret, so when Michael says something
> which is not what the JMRP page itself says, that changes something.
> Probably if it wasn't an ISP as big as Hotmail it wouldn't be such an issue.
>
>
>
> --
> 
> Benjamin
>
> 2017-10-30 5:22 GMT+08:00 Bill Cole  scconsult.com>:
>
>> On 28 Oct 2017, at 12:03 (-0400), Benjamin BILLON via mailop wrote:
>>
>> Mhh I'm not sure to follow how it's related. Your freemail accounts are
>>> then absolutely not reactive, ok.
>>>
>>
>> None of my addresses are "reactive" to HTML in bulk email. Even when I've
>> affirmatively subscribed to a list or putatively given a sender implicit
>> permission to market at me at a real address, the only URLs in commercial
>> email I've ever used are unsub links that I've sanity-checked.
>>
>> So if the sender was doing things good
>>> enough, he shouldn't be sending to those at the first place (I guess you
>>> don't subscribe your spamtraps to newsletters just for fun or watching
>>> the
>>> world burn),
>>>
>>
>> Right. The only way a sender has any of those addresses is ultimately
>> from mailbox provider breaches, dictionary attacks, and typos in
>> unconfirmed subscriptions.
>>
>> and if he was doing things even better, those would stop
>>> receiving emails at some points anyway as they'll be considered
>>> "inactives", and therefore not targetable anymore. Which is a policy that
>>> senders (not all, definitely not all of them as of today) enforce because
>>> reputation systems take recipients' reactivity into account, not because
>>> the consent is withdrawn or some other direct request from the recipient.
>>>
>>
>> I don't believe I've ever experienced a legitimate sender doing that:
>> seems extreme and a bit unwise. I suppose whether a sender does that is
>> largely dependent on the characteristics of the recipients. The last time I
>> was involved on the sending side of supposedly "tracked" campaigns we had
>> solid evidence that more users reacted "out of band" (jumps in normal
>> logins correlated to campaigns) than supposedly "opened" messages based on
>> image retrieval.
>>
>> What does that have to do with JMRP, and how having even less reliable
>>> metrics is a good thing?
>>>
>>
>> I'm just noting that what ESPs call "metrics" are fundamentally different
>> across different mailbox providers and audiences. Microsoft JMRP numbers
>> are only directly comparable to Microsoft JMRP numbers, NOT to similar
>> feedback from other providers. That should not be news to you. It's not
>> good or bad, it just IS. A faith in ANY feedback metrics being
>> quantitatively accurate reflections of what happened with a piece of email
>> after delivery (beyond simplistic objective facts like URL retrieval) is at
>> odds with reality.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Bill Cole
>> b...@scconsult.com or billc...@apache.org
>> (AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses)
>> Currently Seeking Steady Work: https://linkedin.com/in/billcole
>>
>> ___
>> mailop mailing list
>> mailop@mailop.org
>> https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
>>
>
>
> ___
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@mailop.org
> https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
>
>


-- 
--
My opinion is mine.
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Hotmail, green SNDS and junk folder placement

2017-10-29 Thread Benjamin BILLON via mailop 
Hi Bill,

Although we try to rationalize as much as possible, I believe most ESPs are
aware that each ISP is different (if some ESPs aren't aware of that they
should look at the SMTP replies), there's not one single universal metric.
There are plenty of metrics, and of course different for ISP. But when one
of the metrics is totally off chart, or not interpreted as it's supposed to
do, well, that's never good. Metrics aren't truth, they're just indicators
that we then have to interpret, so when Michael says something which is not
what the JMRP page itself says, that changes something. Probably if it
wasn't an ISP as big as Hotmail it wouldn't be such an issue.



-- 

Benjamin

2017-10-30 5:22 GMT+08:00 Bill Cole 
:

> On 28 Oct 2017, at 12:03 (-0400), Benjamin BILLON via mailop wrote:
>
> Mhh I'm not sure to follow how it's related. Your freemail accounts are
>> then absolutely not reactive, ok.
>>
>
> None of my addresses are "reactive" to HTML in bulk email. Even when I've
> affirmatively subscribed to a list or putatively given a sender implicit
> permission to market at me at a real address, the only URLs in commercial
> email I've ever used are unsub links that I've sanity-checked.
>
> So if the sender was doing things good
>> enough, he shouldn't be sending to those at the first place (I guess you
>> don't subscribe your spamtraps to newsletters just for fun or watching the
>> world burn),
>>
>
> Right. The only way a sender has any of those addresses is ultimately from
> mailbox provider breaches, dictionary attacks, and typos in unconfirmed
> subscriptions.
>
> and if he was doing things even better, those would stop
>> receiving emails at some points anyway as they'll be considered
>> "inactives", and therefore not targetable anymore. Which is a policy that
>> senders (not all, definitely not all of them as of today) enforce because
>> reputation systems take recipients' reactivity into account, not because
>> the consent is withdrawn or some other direct request from the recipient.
>>
>
> I don't believe I've ever experienced a legitimate sender doing that:
> seems extreme and a bit unwise. I suppose whether a sender does that is
> largely dependent on the characteristics of the recipients. The last time I
> was involved on the sending side of supposedly "tracked" campaigns we had
> solid evidence that more users reacted "out of band" (jumps in normal
> logins correlated to campaigns) than supposedly "opened" messages based on
> image retrieval.
>
> What does that have to do with JMRP, and how having even less reliable
>> metrics is a good thing?
>>
>
> I'm just noting that what ESPs call "metrics" are fundamentally different
> across different mailbox providers and audiences. Microsoft JMRP numbers
> are only directly comparable to Microsoft JMRP numbers, NOT to similar
> feedback from other providers. That should not be news to you. It's not
> good or bad, it just IS. A faith in ANY feedback metrics being
> quantitatively accurate reflections of what happened with a piece of email
> after delivery (beyond simplistic objective facts like URL retrieval) is at
> odds with reality.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Bill Cole
> b...@scconsult.com or billc...@apache.org
> (AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses)
> Currently Seeking Steady Work: https://linkedin.com/in/billcole
>
> ___
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@mailop.org
> https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
>
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Re: [mailop] Hotmail, green SNDS and junk folder placement

2017-10-29 Thread Stefano Bagnara 
On 28 October 2017 at 01:46, Michael Wise via mailop <mailop@mailop.org>
wrote:

> There are ways of dealing with BCL, but I'd suggest you point it out when
> opening the ticket.
>
> Also, the JMRP doesn't generate 1:1 reports for each piece of traffic
> reported as spam.
>
> The ratio is much smaller than that, otherwise senders would use it for
> List Washing, and that's frowned upon.
>

Hi Michael,

I have at least 2 tickets from past August where I mentioned BCL but I have
not been able to go past the human powered "autoresponders":
SRX1395376020ID  SRX1396384464ID. Both ended with a detailed response from
me ignored by Microsoft. Next time I'll try to ask a tier 3/4 explicitly.

I didn't want to upset microsoft, so I thought they simply didn't want to
help or are not able to help so I gave up trying.

Unfortunately I have no way to "improve" a shared IP with an high BCL as,
like you said, microsoft doesn't report all of the FBL (in fact it does
report 1 FBL in a month for one of that IPs).
Maybe an aggregated FBL based on X-Feedback header (or simply by From
address) like Gmail would help senders without enabling list-washing.

Or at least SNDS could publish the real number of abuse reported even if
you send only 1/10 of them via FBL.

If we don't receive feedback we have no way to find out which of our
senders are sending unwanted emails: we can only work on data we can
collect on our own (open rate, unsubscribe rates, clic rates) or data we
collect from other providers sending FBLs. In my case we have very low FBL
from other providers and no deliverability issues to them.

I suspected that deploying a feature to stop sending emails to "inactive"
(non reactive) users the abuse/received ratio increased (as inactive users
don't do abuse, neither so abuses were almost steady while sent emails
were almost half than before), and maybe this led smartscreen think we were
doing something bad.. but I'm just speculating as I have no clue how
SmartScreen or BCL computation work. I don't even know if SmartScreen is
really involved in this (it's just what MS helpdesk keeps repeating when
they say that there is nothing wrong with my IP).

Stefano


>
>
> Aloha,
>
> Michael.
>
> --
>
> *Michael J Wise*
> Microsoft Corporation| Spam Analysis
>
> "Your Spam Specimen Has Been Processed."
>
> Got the Junk Mail Reporting Tool
> <http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=18275> ?
>
>
>
> *From:* mailop [mailto:mailop-boun...@mailop.org] *On Behalf Of *Brett
> Schenker
> *Sent:* Friday, October 27, 2017 8:02 AM
> *To:* Stefano Bagnara <mai...@bago.org>
> *Cc:* mailop@mailop.org
> *Subject:* Re: [mailop] Hotmail, green SNDS and junk folder placement
>
>
>
> My experience too is that BCL is the deciding factor over everything and
> have yet to figure out how to really move it towards the positive.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Stefano Bagnara <mai...@bago.org> wrote:
>
> On 24 October 2017 at 17:22, Benjamin BILLON via mailop <mailop@mailop.org>
> wrote:
>
> Following Microsoft's folks recommendations (on this list and in ... a
> Canadian city a few weeks ago), we're going through tickets as usual, but
> we're for now circling around.
>
> I just wonder if other senders witnessed the same as described below:
>
>
>
> - SNDS says green
>
> - given the open rates for Hotmail (vs. other ISPs), seed lists tests and
> other metrics, much less than 90% of emails are delivered in inbox
>
> - Forefront antispam says SFV:NSPM, SCL:1
>
> - Microsoft antispam says BCL:8. That means "The message is from a bulk
> sender that generates a high number of complaints"
>
> - 7 complaints for this sender (from 6 different recipients) this month,
> as provided by JMRP. 7. In 24 days.
>
>
>
> It doesn't happen for many clients fortunately, but it's quite ...
> disturbing.
>
>
>
> I see a similar pattern too.
>
>
>
> SNDS says "no issues" on your IP. Microsoft Support says "no issues with
> your IP", they don't ever mention "BCL" but "SmartScreen" and "Content",
> SNDS paint it Green, JMRP doesn't report FBL.
>
>
>
> Once you got an high BCL for an IP you are "lost". BCL moves very slowly
> (+1/-1 needs one month or even more).
>
>
>
> If the IP is not shared at least you know the BCL have been "built" for
> that very sender, but if your IP is shared then you have no clue why BCL is
> so high.
>
>
>
> Stefano
>
>
>
>
>
> Cheers,
> --
>
> Benjamin
>
>
> ___
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@mailop.org
>

Re: [mailop] Hotmail, green SNDS and junk folder placement

2017-10-28 Thread Benjamin BILLON via mailop 
Hi Michael,

> Also, the JMRP doesn't generate 1:1 reports for each piece of traffic
reported as spam.
> The ratio is much smaller than that, otherwise senders would use it for
List Washing, and that's frowned upon.
Wow, wow wow wow.
This is absolutely new to me.
That would explain why we receive only 1/3 of the volume of ARF from
Hotmail/Live than from Yahoo, while we send twice more to Hotmail/Live than
Yahoo.
However, that's not what https://mail.live.com/mail/services.aspx says:
"Returns the full message with headers of *any* email marked as "junk" or
"phishing""
This is a HUGE change, if potential list washing is the issue, IMHO this is
the wrong answer. This basically makes JMRP irrelevant for ESPs: we don't
have reliable metrics, we can not satisfy people complaining as they'll
keep getting the same message, probably in junk folder, which will probably
weight negatively in the reputation ...

I'm totally amazed by this information.

That being said, even though the ratio is not 1:1, I _guess_ it's roughly
the same for everybody. So we have clients that generate more than 9
complains a month and still enjoy a low BCL and inbox placement, while this
one got an inexplicable BCL of 8.

For the record, the ticket is SRX1401741292ID it highlights the discrepancy
SNDS color / inbox placement (as Terry told me to do), and timidly mention
the BCL without naming it (I reminded my folks to be more explicit in the
tickets).
The last reply we got was "after reviewing the information you provided and
in compliance with our mail policies, we are unable to offer immediate
mitigation for your deliverability issue", so I guess we washed off the
Support Level 2. I wonder how many levels before the final boss!

Cheers,


-- 
<https://www.splio.com>
Benjamin

2017-10-28 7:46 GMT+08:00 Michael Wise via mailop <mailop@mailop.org>:

>
>
> There are ways of dealing with BCL, but I'd suggest you point it out when
> opening the ticket.
>
> Also, the JMRP doesn't generate 1:1 reports for each piece of traffic
> reported as spam.
>
> The ratio is much smaller than that, otherwise senders would use it for
> List Washing, and that's frowned upon.
>
>
>
> Aloha,
>
> Michael.
>
> --
>
> *Michael J Wise*
> Microsoft Corporation| Spam Analysis
>
> "Your Spam Specimen Has Been Processed."
>
> Got the Junk Mail Reporting Tool
> <http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=18275> ?
>
>
>
> *From:* mailop [mailto:mailop-boun...@mailop.org] *On Behalf Of *Brett
> Schenker
> *Sent:* Friday, October 27, 2017 8:02 AM
> *To:* Stefano Bagnara <mai...@bago.org>
> *Cc:* mailop@mailop.org
> *Subject:* Re: [mailop] Hotmail, green SNDS and junk folder placement
>
>
>
> My experience too is that BCL is the deciding factor over everything and
> have yet to figure out how to really move it towards the positive.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Stefano Bagnara <mai...@bago.org> wrote:
>
> On 24 October 2017 at 17:22, Benjamin BILLON via mailop <mailop@mailop.org>
> wrote:
>
> Following Microsoft's folks recommendations (on this list and in ... a
> Canadian city a few weeks ago), we're going through tickets as usual, but
> we're for now circling around.
>
> I just wonder if other senders witnessed the same as described below:
>
>
>
> - SNDS says green
>
> - given the open rates for Hotmail (vs. other ISPs), seed lists tests and
> other metrics, much less than 90% of emails are delivered in inbox
>
> - Forefront antispam says SFV:NSPM, SCL:1
>
> - Microsoft antispam says BCL:8. That means "The message is from a bulk
> sender that generates a high number of complaints"
>
> - 7 complaints for this sender (from 6 different recipients) this month,
> as provided by JMRP. 7. In 24 days.
>
>
>
> It doesn't happen for many clients fortunately, but it's quite ...
> disturbing.
>
>
>
> I see a similar pattern too.
>
>
>
> SNDS says "no issues" on your IP. Microsoft Support says "no issues with
> your IP", they don't ever mention "BCL" but "SmartScreen" and "Content",
> SNDS paint it Green, JMRP doesn't report FBL.
>
>
>
> Once you got an high BCL for an IP you are "lost". BCL moves very slowly
> (+1/-1 needs one month or even more).
>
>
>
> If the IP is not shared at least you know the BCL have been "built" for
> that very sender, but if your IP is shared then you have no clue why BCL is
> so high.
>
>
>
> Stefano
>
>
>
>
>
> Cheers,
> --
>
> Benjamin
>
>
> ___
> mailop mailing list

Re: [mailop] Hotmail, green SNDS and junk folder placement

2017-10-27 Thread Brett Schenker 
My experience too is that BCL is the deciding factor over everything and
have yet to figure out how to really move it towards the positive.

On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Stefano Bagnara  wrote:

> On 24 October 2017 at 17:22, Benjamin BILLON via mailop  > wrote:
>
>> Following Microsoft's folks recommendations (on this list and in ... a
>> Canadian city a few weeks ago), we're going through tickets as usual, but
>> we're for now circling around.
>> I just wonder if other senders witnessed the same as described below:
>>
>> - SNDS says green
>> - given the open rates for Hotmail (vs. other ISPs), seed lists tests and
>> other metrics, much less than 90% of emails are delivered in inbox
>> - Forefront antispam says SFV:NSPM, SCL:1
>> - Microsoft antispam says BCL:8. That means "The message is from a bulk
>> sender that generates a high number of complaints"
>> - 7 complaints for this sender (from 6 different recipients) this month,
>> as provided by JMRP. 7. In 24 days.
>>
>> It doesn't happen for many clients fortunately, but it's quite ...
>> disturbing.
>>
>
> I see a similar pattern too.
>
> SNDS says "no issues" on your IP. Microsoft Support says "no issues with
> your IP", they don't ever mention "BCL" but "SmartScreen" and "Content",
> SNDS paint it Green, JMRP doesn't report FBL.
>
> Once you got an high BCL for an IP you are "lost". BCL moves very slowly
> (+1/-1 needs one month or even more).
>
> If the IP is not shared at least you know the BCL have been "built" for
> that very sender, but if your IP is shared then you have no clue why BCL is
> so high.
>
> Stefano
>
>
>> Cheers,
>> --
>> 
>> Benjamin
>>
>> ___
>> mailop mailing list
>> mailop@mailop.org
>> https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
>>
>>
>
>
> ___
> mailop mailing list
> mailop@mailop.org
> https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
>
>


-- 
Brett Schenker
Man of Many Things, Including
5B Consulting - http://www.5bconsulting.com
Graphic Policy - http://www.graphicpolicy.com

Twitter - http://twitter.com/bhschenker
LinkedIn - http://www.linkedin.com/in/brettschenker
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

[mailop] Hotmail, green SNDS and junk folder placement

2017-10-24 Thread Benjamin BILLON via mailop 
Hello there,

Following Microsoft's folks recommendations (on this list and in ... a
Canadian city a few weeks ago), we're going through tickets as usual, but
we're for now circling around.
I just wonder if other senders witnessed the same as described below:

- SNDS says green
- given the open rates for Hotmail (vs. other ISPs), seed lists tests and
other metrics, much less than 90% of emails are delivered in inbox
- Forefront antispam says SFV:NSPM, SCL:1
- Microsoft antispam says BCL:8. That means "The message is from a bulk
sender that generates a high number of complaints"
- 7 complaints for this sender (from 6 different recipients) this month, as
provided by JMRP. 7. In 24 days.

It doesn't happen for many clients fortunately, but it's quite ...
disturbing.

Cheers,
-- 

Benjamin
___
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop