Bob Lewis
Columnist

MessageLabs update

analysis
Jan 4, 20083 mins

I cheated.After my last post regarding my problems with MessageLabs ("Spam filtering for dummies," Advice Line, 12/26/2007) I notified the company's press contacts that I'd highlighted MessageLabs in Advice Line. (Unlike non-client technical contact information, this contact information was easy to find).A technical support representative contacted me within hours, offering as much help as necessary to resolve t

I cheated.

After my last post regarding my problems with MessageLabs (“Spam filtering for dummies,” Advice Line, 12/26/2007) I notified the company’s press contacts that I’d highlighted MessageLabs in Advice Line. (Unlike non-client technical contact information, this contact information was easy to find).

A technical support representative contacted me within hours, offering as much help as necessary to resolve the situation.

I confess that my cynical side wondered if someone without InfoWorld’s name and a large subscriber list would have received the same attention. This didn’t stop me from taking advantage of the offer.

Here’s what I learned, most of it to MessageLabs’ credit:

  • Keep the Joint Running wasn’t the culprit that triggered MessageLabs’ spam alert system. Another account that had snuck its way onto my hosting service really was a spam source.
  • What MessageLabs does under these circumstances isn’t to tag every message from a spam-sending SMTP server as spam. What it does is to limit the number of connections available to that server. The result is that messages are delayed or blocked because the volume of mail so greatly exceeds the number of available connections.

  • I connected MessageLabs and my hosting service, who quickly identified the offending account and deleted it. It appears the immediate problem is now fixed.
  • According to one of MessageLabs’ press contacts, who also corresponded with me, their intent is that their tech support staff should be as available to any non-clients who are experiencing problems as they were to me. She acknowledged that the phrasing on their website did not make this clear, and tells me this is under review. If you’re curious, here’s the exact phrasing:
Contact Us Technical Support Numbers MessageLabs operates 24×7 support for clients that subscribe to our various security services. Clients can contact our support team on the following numbers:
Followed by a list of contacts and telephone numbers.

So here’s how it’s looking: MessageLabs isn’t evil. It does practice guilt by association. It doesn’t proactively notify ISPs and hosting services that they have a problem. Whether they should is a judgment call. My opinion is that this would be desirable. Whether it would be profitable is another matter, and they do run a for-profit business. I’m not in a position to figure out how this would play out. At the moment, MessageLabs doesn’t clearly explain how a non-client with a problem should contact them, but has promised to fix this. My worst suspicions – that its practices were a deliberate ploy to drive companies to sign up so as to be able to receive this sort of support – turned out not to be the case. And, I am pleased to report, the quality of their support staff was top-notch. They know what they’re doing, quickly diagnose problems, and sincerely and professionally wanted to help. Thought you might want to know, even if it did mean I had to write something nice about someone, which is nowhere near as much fun as the alternative. – Bob

Powered by ScribeFire.