BT refuses to block phishing emails

[licquorice]

Not entirely convinced a customer can give BT a final warning to do anything. What sanctions to you intend applying if they ignore the warning?

[FEDUP2016]

If you are an BT employee - Just do your  job and block the phishing emails purporting to come from EE   BT. 

Clearly BT has done so very effectively for other phishing emails purporting to have come from other organisations.

Demonstrating that the screening of phishing emails can be achieved to a very high standard. 

SO    WHAT    IS   THE    PROBLEM    BT  ???                Can't be bothered  ???      Or something to do with official BT emails coming from a myriad sources, rather than from a central secure corporate source, allegedly  ??????

BT's Advertisement of 

'Thank you for choosing the UK’s largest network, trusted for fast, reliable and secure broadband.' IS QUESTIONABLE

How will it be achieved.

In very much the same successful manner as the problems of BT's non performance & non delivery of internet speed against contract specification around  2016.   https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/may/01/empty-promises-bt-broadband-speeds 

So as I say if you are an BT employee - Just do your  job and block the phishing emails purporting to come from EE   BT   If this requires all your customer facing employees / contractors eg rewards, to communicate through a central system, so that ALL other BT EE emails are blocked so be it. 

Just do your  job and block the phishing email it is not a big ask from a premium priced service with an inflation plus price escalator

[gg30340]

@FEDUP2016 

Yes, I would be interested to hear what your final warning consists of.

As has been pointed when you started this thread there are things YOU can do to help your self. Perhaps if you had tried them you may have found that there was no need to make idle threats.  

[gg30340]

This is a BT residential customer to customer forum. Your post does not go to BT. The only BT staff are the forum moderators who do not necessarily read all the posts.

[licquorice]

No, I'm not a BT employee, I'm just a satisfied customer.

[FEDUP2016]

Well I am a highly dissatisfied customer who is not prepared to accept a less than satisfactory, poor quality service for a premium priced product coupled with an arrogant employee.

Actually to give BT their full due, they  stepped in extremely quickly on a previous occasion to resolve a significant series of failures, so they do indeed read these interactions.

However this time BT needs to address their internal company concerns that they might block their own communications to customers from a myriad of BT sources including third party, outsourced workers/contractors.  Or might block any  email referring to BT / EE. 

How do I know this ?   I ask deep searching questions to get to the crux of the issue, just like the attenuation issue and drop off in line speed ten years ago.

[FEDUP2016]

Of course I have, and it works, but can't be used widely in day to day activity, since it will be exploited as soon as the new email address is becomes known by nefarious actors.  So your solution can only be limited by extent of use and time, so  pointless  otherwise multiple addresses have to be monitored.

However as you well know BT has successfully blocked virtually all the other phishing emails or at least sends them to the Spam file, which is excellent.  

BT's PROBLEM IS THAT IT CAN'T DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN a phishing 'BT' email and one arising from a myriad of BT employees and contractors - it is right dog's breakfast.  YET their own internal IT system blocks and protects them from phishing emails carrying harmful attachments forwarded to them, which their system has shoved into my computer, as has been fully acknowledged by an BT/EE manager.

So BT do your job and work harder.

[gg30340]

Isn't it odd how only some people seem to be inundated by phishing and spam emails while others get none or very little.

Could it be that they have brought this on themselves by either responding to the emails, unsubscribing from the emails or how often their personal information has been compromised in data breaches or exposed online and take no action such as deleting the compromised email account.

Generally people who actively protect their contact information by not posting/giving out their email address unless 100% necessary to genuine sites, use protective tools such as antivirus/malware programs with email guards/scanners get significantly less spam of indeed any.

[DISRUPTED]

---

@gg30340wrote:

Isn't it odd how only some people seem to be inundated by phishing and spam emails while others get none or very little.

---

I assume that's intended to be sarcasm. Fact is it isn't "odd" (as in unusual), it's quite typical. What is "odd" is the very poor response of BT's spam filters of late.

---

---

Could it be that they have brought this on themselves by either responding to the emails, unsubscribing from the emails or how often their personal information has been compromised in data breaches or exposed online and take no action such as deleting the compromised email account.

---

It could be. Or it could not. To suggest that the user is responsible to 3rd part data breaches is unfair. Huge volumes of 'user' data have been compromised over the years within major corporations, some of which has come to light and much of which has been covered up. There is not always the reasonable possibility for the user to simply delete an email account. Doing so might and can have unforeseen and costly ramifications.

---

Generally people who actively protect their contact information by not posting/giving out their email address unless 100% necessary to genuine sites, use protective tools such as antivirus/malware programs with email guards/scanners get significantly less spam of indeed any.

---

It is nowadays often extremely difficult to register / transact with any website without providing an email address and it often forms part of setup verification procedures. What are "genuine sites" today are not guaranteed to remain so, businesses may change control, ownership or 'fail' and their intellectual property sold on. To the best of my understanding "protective tools such as antivirus/malware programs with email guards/scanners" have no affect on webmail.

What is apparent is that BT have at various times 'reset' their spam filters. This 'reset' normally initially results in a significant amount of spam getting though, reducing over the next few weeks as the system 'learns' (or 're-learns') how to react, then falling off to minimal. It was notable by a sudden huge increase in unfiltered spam arriving that such a 'reset' had occurred earlier this year, however this time around it seems the system is failing to learn with the result that, months later, there is still a huge volume of repetitively styled spam failing to be blocked or even marked as spam. As the o/p reports there copious amounts coming through that is pretending to originate from BT or EE. It is as though the filtration system is just not working.

[gg30340]

@DISRUPTED 

If you are going to have a moan at least get what you post correct. I never suggested that users were responsible for 3rd party data breaches. I said they were responsible if they took no action after learning about their email address being compromised.

It is reasonable to expect them to do something about their email account being compromised. If your house was broken into and the keys stolen would you not bother to change the locks because "Doing so might and can have unforeseen and costly ramifications".

As regards registering with online web sites, I guess you never read message three of this thread that gives more information what to do in those instance as well as how to check if your email account has been compromised.

In any event, as per the other thread about the increased email security 2FA that you had a moan on I will not be responding to any further comments made by you on this thread.