Actionfraud

[Peter Tomlinson]

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.

Peter

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.*
>
>
> William
> --
> 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
>
>
>
>
>