After a decade of spam-free SMS/MMS service with T-Mo, today suddenly I was deluged with seven spam MMSes, all of the OrganEnlargement/Vicodin/BluePill variety, all with spoofed (xerox.com) or nefarious-looking (neva.ru) senders, and all using Bcc: addressing for me.
T-Mo (with whom I'm on hold as I write) must be having lots of complaints getting phoned in about this ... I've been waiting a half hour on hold ... and two more spam MMS have arrived in the interim ... ah, an agent:
.... suggesting: cancel text service (unthinkable!); or: change your number (equally unthinkable!). I suggest in turn: how about T-Mobile cancelling the MMS charges if I go over my monthly allotment this month on the basis of these (now) nine unsolicited and unwanted spam MMSes, and the ones that are likely to follow now that T-Mo has evidently opened the floodgates? Response: "I'll transfer you to the next level, please hold ... ."
At the next level, agent suggested introducing filters blocking any messages with my address *not* in To: line. OK by me, but ... ah, but the emailfilters.aspx page barfed on her, and she's starting another HelpDesk ticket on that score (it'll be something like the tenth I've opened on that same problem!). We'll see how long it takes before it's called "resolved", without actually having changed anything at all ... .
In <op.vl1gpdcaitl47o@acer250.gateway.2wire.net> tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com> writes:
>After a decade of spam-free SMS/MMS service with T-Mo, today suddenly I was deluged with seven spam MMSes, all of the OrganEnlargement/Vicodin/BluePill variety, all with spoofed (xerox.com) or nefarious-looking (neva.ru) senders, and all using Bcc: addressing for me.
[snip]
Now if only TM would go back to the pricing we had back
in the Omnipoint days, where (depending on when....)
we had either X number of "free" messages, and then
each additional one counted as one minute.
I'd cheerfully opt for "minute per msg" equivalent,
and it would make my part of bookkeeping much simpler.
(i.e. when I find out I've used up 90 percent of my
"minutes" with five days still to go...).
--
__________________________________________________ ___
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 22:50:00 -0500, danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> wrote:
> In <op.vl1gpdcaitl47o@acer250.gateway.2wire.net> tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>> After a decade of spam-free SMS/MMS service with T-Mo, today suddenly I was deluged with seven spam MMSes, all of the OrganEnlargement/Vicodin/BluePill variety, all with spoofed (xerox.com) or nefarious-looking (neva.ru) senders, and all using Bcc: addressing for me.
>
> [snip]
>
> Now if only TM would go back to the pricing we had back
> in the Omnipoint days, where (depending on when....)
> we had either X number of "free" messages, and then
> each additional one counted as one minute.
>
> I'd cheerfully opt for "minute per msg" equivalent,
> and it would make my part of bookkeeping much simpler.
>
> (i.e. when I find out I've used up 90 percent of my
> "minutes" with five days still to go...).
[OT: If you were with T-Mo back in the Omnipoint days, you've been with them longer than I have -- Omnipoint didn't want my custom, back when I approached them, 3-band GSM Moto TimePort P-7389 in hand, for a line and a SIM, shortly before the Labor Day that marked their acquisition by VoiceStream. The day after that Labor Day, though, VoiceStream was more than happy to sell me a SIM and accept me as a new customer :-) .]
Anyway, my current (grandfathered) price plan gives me buckets of 30 (resp. 300) MMS (resp. SMS) messages per billing period, in and/or out, and the last agent I spoke with indicated she'd note my account to *not* be charged for any overages due solely to unsolicited spam xMS messages. We'll see how that goes.
More interesting will be to see whether she can really get Engineering to fix the 18-month-old borked EmailFilters.aspx Active Server Page error that she herself encountered (same as I did as far back as June of 2009) while trying to set up a filter to block messages to us with our address in other than the To: line.
If she can do that, she'll have been a miracle-worker! [She wasn't even put off by finding in my record at least three of my own more recent HelpDesk tickets on that score, all marked "resolved" without ever having actually been *resolved* :-) .]
Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 22:45:03 -0500, tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> After a decade of spam-free SMS/MMS service with T-Mo, today suddenly I was deluged with seven spam MMSes, all of the OrganEnlargement/Vicodin/BluePill variety, all with spoofed (xerox.com) or nefarious-looking (neva.ru) senders, and all using Bcc: addressing for me.
>
> T-Mo (with whom I'm on hold as I write) must be having lots of complaints getting phoned in about this ... I've been waiting a half hour on hold ... and two more spam MMS have arrived in the interim ... ah, an agent:
>
> ... suggesting: cancel text service (unthinkable!); or: change your number (equally unthinkable!). I suggest in turn: how about T-Mobile cancelling the MMS charges if I go over my monthly allotment this month on the basis of these (now) nine unsolicited and unwanted spam MMSes, and the ones that are likely to follow now that T-Mo has evidently opened the floodgates? Response: "I'll transfer you to the next level, please hold ... ."
>
> At the next level, agent suggested introducing filters blocking any messages with my address *not* in To: line. OK by me, but ... ah, but the emailfilters.aspx page barfed on her, and she's starting another HelpDesk ticket on that score (it'll be something like the tenth I've opened on that same problem!). We'll see how long it takes before it's called "resolved", without actually having changed anything at all ... .
Overnight: another dozen or more such spam MMS messages came in. T-Mobile
(after a half-hour on hold) reports they're "aware of the spam problem",
it's "an ongoing issue", and they can only assure me I will not be held
financially responsible for "excess MMS usage". Great! :-{ . As for
blocking the spam, their email filtering system seems broken, with no
estimate when Engineering will have it fixed.
Oh -- and CS reps are now available only until 1 am, time zone not
specified. Time to dump these losers?
Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 12:49:59 -0500
tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Overnight: another dozen or more such spam MMS messages came in. T-Mobile
> (after a half-hour on hold) reports they're "aware of the spam problem",
> it's "an ongoing issue", and they can only assure me I will not be held
> financially responsible for "excess MMS usage". Great! :-{ . As for
> blocking the spam, their email filtering system seems broken, with no
> estimate when Engineering will have it fixed.
Wow, that sucks.
> Oh -- and CS reps are now available only until 1 am, time zone not
> specified. Time to dump these losers?
I don't know; that's your call. You certainly sound VERY frustrated, and if you're that frustrated, maybe it IS time to find another carrier.
Having said that... I'm not experiencing the spam problem, but I did have issues with 3G data for a month or two (earlier this year), and it did take a while before the problem was fixed. I stuck with T-Mo.
On the other hand, my other options are:
** Verizon. I will NEVER go back to Verizon for wireless phone service. For six months they insisted that my dropped-call problems were due to a broken phone, and by the time they finally admitted the problem was their network, I was one month away from the end of my contract, and was already preparing to leave them.
** Sprint. They have a solid network in SoCal, but I got tired of their lack of decent CS. Supposedly it's improved, but...
** AT&T. After AT&T tried to screw me out of $200 worth of DSL and landline charges in Ohio in 2002 (for service that was BROKEN for two months), I vowed never to use them for anything. Their service may be great in this area, but I will never know!!
** MetroPCS. New to the Victor Valley, although they've served Los Angeles for years. An unknown, as far as I'm concerned. Also, the flat-rate prepaid PCS providers tend to have very small footprints.
In spite of T-Mo's recent technical issues, their customer service, in my opinion, has been stellar; their pricing is reasonable; and their network is good enough to meet my needs.
> Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
Really... I understand this, but only because I took French classes in high school. People who don't know the language may have trouble responding to you
In news:20101112133652.6c332ef9.sjsobol@justthe.net Steve Sobol
<sjsobol@justthe.net> wrote:
> ** AT&T. After AT&T tried to screw me out of $200 worth of DSL and
> landline charges in Ohio in 2002 (for service that was BROKEN for two
> months), I vowed never to use them for anything. Their service may be
> great in this area, but I will never know!!
Are AT&T's landline and wireless services related in any other way
beyond sharing a name?
On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 16:36:52 -0500, Steve Sobol <sjsobol@justthe.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 12:49:59 -0500
> tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Overnight: another dozen or more such spam MMS messages came in. T-Mobile
>> (after a half-hour on hold) reports they're "aware of the spam problem",
>> it's "an ongoing issue", and they can only assure me I will not be held
>> financially responsible for "excess MMS usage". Great! :-{ . As for
>> blocking the spam, their email filtering system seems broken, with no
>> estimate when Engineering will have it fixed.
>
> Wow, that sucks.
Agreed. And another ten since last I wrote :-{ ! That's my monthly MMS bucket right there, burned up in a day and a half!
>> ... Time to dump these losers?
>
> I don't know; that's your call....
> On the other hand, my other options are:
>
> ** Verizon. I will NEVER go back to Verizon ...
>
> ** Sprint. They have a solid network in SoCal, but ...
>
> ** AT&T. After AT&T tried to screw me ...
> ** MetroPCS. New to the Victor Valley, ...
All non-starters with me, three for your reasons, the last for serving the wrong coast.
> In spite of T-Mo's recent technical issues, their customer service, in my opinion, has been stellar; their pricing is reasonable; and their network is good enough to meet my needs.
I've been with them for ten years, as the best of a bad lot.
They're getting worse ... and the rest aren't getting any better.
So I may decide cellular telephony just ain't worth it any longer.
>> Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
>
> Really... I understand this, but only because ... .People who don't know the language may have trouble responding to you
Heh ... that's the whole point -- spammers' address-harvesters don't understand it :-) .
Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
On 12 Nov 2010 22:08:16 GMT
Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote:
> Are AT&T's landline and wireless services related in any other way
> beyond sharing a name?
It's the same company. SBC/Southern New England Telephone/Ameritech (in the midwest)/BellSouth - all AT&T now. SBC and BellSouth used to jointly own Cingular, but of course, those two companies were both folded into what eventually became AT&T.
On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 17:30:09 -0500
tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I've been with them for ten years, as the best of a bad lot.
> They're getting worse ... and the rest aren't getting any better.
> So I may decide cellular telephony just ain't worth it any longer.
If you want an answer, here's mine. Give them some time to fix the problem. How much time? You decide. But let them
try to fix the problem first.
On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 17:55:42 -0500, Steve Sobol <sjsobol@justthe.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 17:30:09 -0500
> tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I've been with them for ten years, as the best of a bad lot.
>> They're getting worse ... and the rest aren't getting any better.
>> So I may decide cellular telephony just ain't worth it any longer.
>
> If you want an answer, here's mine. Give them some time to fix the problem.
Been doing that. First time, the EmailFilters.aspx problem that surfaced in Ju/'09, and hasn't been fixed yet despite multiple Problem Tickets, HelpDesk Tickets, and Master Tickets.
Next, phantom data charges while roaming, one day last January, in Israel, for 2^32 Bytes of data; spurious $600 overcharge, appeal not settled yet. Now this. ...
> How much time? You decide. But let them
> try to fix the problem first.
.... Is this going to be their third strike? or just a foul tip? we'll see ... .
Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 19:29:22 -0500, tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 17:55:42 -0500, Steve Sobol <sjsobol@justthe.net> wrote:
>
>> How much time? You decide. But let them
>> try to fix the problem first.
>
> ... Is this going to be their third strike? or just a foul tip? we'll see ... .
Mmm ... 17 hours with no further spam ... a good sign ... maybe it'll have been just a "foul tip", after all. But it's sure an all-star line-up of Russian mal-URLs they want the recipient to visit:
One also proposed a visit to www.rolex.com, this one seemingly sent from no-reply@rolex.com (but the Sender was surely spoofed, and the rolex link was surely a link elsewhere using misleading link-text).
Cheers, -- tlvp
[PS: thanx to all for not pouncing on the "unleased/unleashed" typo in the Subject line of the OP :-) .]
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 22:45:03 -0500, tlvp <tPlOvUpBErLeLsEs@hotmail.com> wrote:
> After a decade of spam-free SMS/MMS service with T-Mo, today suddenly I was deluged with seven spam MMSes, all of the OrganEnlargement/Vicodin/BluePill variety, all with spoofed (xerox.com) or nefarious-looking (neva.ru) senders, and all using Bcc: addressing for me.
>
> T-Mo (with whom I'm on hold as I write) must be having lots of complaints getting phoned in about this ... I've been waiting a half hour on hold ... and two more spam MMS have arrived in the interim ... ah, an agent:
>
> ... suggesting: cancel text service (unthinkable!); or: change your number (equally unthinkable!). I suggest in turn: how about T-Mobile cancelling the MMS charges if I go over my monthly allotment this month on the basis of these (now) nine unsolicited and unwanted spam MMSes, and the ones that are likely to follow now that T-Mo has evidently opened the floodgates? Response: "I'll transfer you to the next level, please hold ... ."
>
> At the next level, agent suggested introducing filters blocking any messages with my address *not* in To: line. OK by me, but ... ah, but the emailfilters.aspx page barfed on her, and she's starting another HelpDesk ticket on that score (it'll be something like the tenth I've opened on that same problem!). We'll see how long it takes before it's called "resolved", without actually having changed anything at all ... .
>
> Aarrrggggh! -- tlvp
For T-Mobile prison^H^H^H^H^H^Hcustomers' view on all this, see
the original poster jinxed me. I received a half dozen
phish/spams this afternoon...
--
__________________________________________________ ___
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 22:33:19 -0500, danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> wrote:
>
> [snipppp]
>
> the original poster jinxed me. I received a half dozen
> phish/spams this afternoon...
>
Don't blame me, danny -- check out the T-Mo Forums on that matter:
Spam tide unleased on T-Mo today 
Linear Mode
