pwt at iosis.co.uk
Wed Mar 30 10:20:03 BST 2011
So a bounce is here not a bounce but is a reflection. But this seems new
to me, and perhaps coincides with the bounces starting to be labelled as
from their own system:
The following message to <email at actionfraud.org.uk> was undeliverable.
The reason for the problem:
5.3.0 - Other mail system problem 550-'ATLAS(2503): Your email was
detected as spam. (RCPTs:\nemail at actionfraud.org.uk)'
rather than from (as happened at first):
actionfraud at attorneygeneral.gsi.gov.uk
(generated from email at actionfraud.org.uk)
or from (as was happening later):
AdvanceFeeFraud at city-of-london.pnn.police.uk
So its getting better - good.
On 30/03/2011 08:36, William Heath wrote:
> Note the Actionfraud web site says
> *Got an email bounce back? We have still received the scam emails you
> forward to us even if you get a bounce back message. The bounce back
> message just means the email has gone into a holding area for spam,
> which is then released and received by us as usual. You therefore do
> not need to contact us again once you have forwarded your scam emails.*
> ctrl-shift.co.uk <http://ctrl-shift.co.uk>
> mydex.org <http://mydex.org>
> On 30 March 2011 07:23, Roland Perry <lists at internetpolicyagency.com
> <mailto:lists at internetpolicyagency.com>> wrote:
> In article <4D92BBEC.1090706 at iosis.co.uk
> <mailto:4D92BBEC.1090706 at iosis.co.uk>>, Peter Tomlinson
> <pwt at iosis.co.uk <mailto:pwt at iosis.co.uk>> writes
> I, too, have forwarded to them some scam emails - and some of
> those forwarded by me have been bounced as spam by the police
> incoming filter.
> I have forwarded several, and they were *all* bounced back by the
> AF gateway.
> As for the legality of filtering outgoing (or indeed incoming)
> emails; they are either being dropped, or "returned to sender",
> neither of which is interception.
> Roland Perry
More information about the ukcrypto