[anti-abuse-wg] Mimecast.com

On Wed, 4 Nov 2015 14:27:42 +0530
Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
> First - I have a great amount of respect for Nat - he was a colleague
> at IBM (where he used to be for years) before he left to join
> Mimecast.
> 
Okay, but maybe he is no longer there, etc. Even though one person is
great, good, ethical, etc. it does not mean that the legacy, new
management, etc is/are following that/those person/s

If Mimecast is now Evil Corp, people need to know and also
people need to become more aware of the powers that offer 
"services" which is actually similar to what the mob offers a bakery in
Chicago...

> That said - I am going to ask him to have someone investigate any
> email you have sent mime cast, and why it bounced - or whether there
> is an unfiltered alias you can resend your email to.
> 

Thank you so much! 

I will update this list with whatever happens, 

This being an abuse group, the various perspectives of the wide
possibilities of abuse, as business models in one area, such as
email, can knock on to others, like ipv4/6 etc.

andre
 
> > On 04-Nov-2015, at 1:59 PM, andre at ox.co.za wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, 4 Nov 2015 13:48:51 +0530
> > Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Mimecast’s chief scientist is Nathaniel Borenstein - who originally
> >> wrote the MIME spec.
> >> They are legit.  I am not sure what is going on here.
> >> 
> > thank you for the reference Mr Ramasubramanian, would you do me the
> > kind favor of asking them:
> > why they are blocking @188.40.114.80 - which is also the ip used to
> > send emails to this list. - and then maybe tell us, in public what
> > is going on?
> > 
> > If they are not extorting money, then I surely must have abused
> > them or their users? Or their system is broken, or what?
> > 
> > but i think that they may not bee that legit? or they have changed
> > their corporate goals? or there are new management, or something?
> > 
> > Just from what you can see here:
> > https://community.mimecast.com/docs/DOC-1369#554
> > 
> > then they are bouncing with 554 to support@
> > 
> > that is clearly not legit.
> > 
> > or it is a serious flaw/broken system?
> > 
> > they could bounce of course any way they like, but bouncing
> > with something that is going to return is basically saying only one
> > thing - there is no way to communicate with them, as when I
> > do that is simply added to their block... 
> > 
> > that is not cool, nice, decent or even fair bahavior?
> > 
> > andre
> > 
> >>> On 04-Nov-2015, at 1:14 PM, andre at ox.co.za wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> Hello,
> >>> 
> >>> Has anyone of you had much/any dealings with this crowd:
> >>> Mimecast.com ?
> >>> 
> >>> Less than 1% of our email volume exchanges with them, and
> >>> yesterday after complaining about abuse/UBE from them and
> >>> receiving no response, escalated to @telstra and then all of a
> >>> sudden they are returning all email in a loop:
> >>> 
> >>> support at mimecast.com
> >>>   host service-alpha-inbound-b.mimecast.com [91.220.42.231]
> >>>   SMTP error from remote mail server after end of data:
> >>>   554 Email rejected due to security policies -
> >>>   https://community.mimecast.com/docs/DOC-1369#554
> >>> 
> >>> Then, when I email them from a different server, it goes through
> >>> the first time and viola, the second email, same block, on the
> >>> "new" server"
> >>> 
> >>> From their website: They provide email filtering services, this
> >>> feels like they are extorting money from me, which I will not pay
> >>> of course.
> >>> 
> >>> But, have any of you had any similar experiences? As they are
> >>> providing this type of "service" to some of our @gov departments
> >>> as well as other large companies, I will have user blowback - what
> >>> do I tell my users? We are blocked because we dared complaining? 
> >>> or we are blocked because we do not pay?
> >>> 
> >>> any advice will be appreciated, obviously this type of behavior
> >>> breaks email and the larger the "protectors" become, the more
> >>> control they have...
> >>> 
> >>> tia
> >>> 
> >>> andre 
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >> 
> > 
> > 
>