AOL is scanning INSIDE your emails, blocking any with "unapproved" content

The LangaList ^ | March 22, 2004 | Fred Langa

[Stoat]

This information comes from the LangaList, a GREAT, FREE computer and technology newsletter published by Fred Langa, formerly the Editor of Byte Magazine. This AOL scanning / blocking issue has been covered in two segments so far; here is the first one:

AOL Madness (Warn Your Friends) AOL is at it again. This time, it's reading *inside* its members' emails, and preemptively blocking any messages that contain links to sites that AOL doesn't want you to see.

Note: I'm *not* talking about simple mail blocks, where a mail is discarded if it originates from a "forbidden" address. No: AOL is parsing the content of its members' emails and blocking them even if they merely *mention* a site that AOL disapproves of.

This happened to my last newsletter issue, when I mentioned a perfectly valid and inoffensive link: http://www.codeproject.com/ . It turns out that last summer, in July, AOL put that site on its naughty list for some unexplained reason, and ever since has blocked all emails that even contain a link to that address.

When my list-host ( http://dundee.net ) noticed huge numbers of AOL emails bouncing back, they preemptively sought to find out why, and the folks at AOL then removed the block--- on that one address.

AOL's mail system is just this side of insane. Not only does it read inside member emails for links that AOL doesn't like, but--- as we've reported before--- if AOL members get a little lazy and block a newsletter like this one, instead of unsubscribing, AOL keeps track of the blocks. Last time I looked, if as few as 10 readers took the lazy way out of stopping a mailing, AOL would assume that the mail in question was spam. In my case, if just 10 AOL users out of 160,000 readers--- that's 0.00006 of my readers--- took the lazy way off the list, all AOL subscribers would have their legitimate issues blocked for some time thereafter.

AOL's user-level mail filters are nearly useless because the master filters discard emails before they ever make it to the users' mailboxes and the local filters there. That means AOL members can white-list senders to their heart's content but it will have no effect at all on the pre-filtering that's done by AOL before their mail ever gets delivered. AOL's user-level mail controls are a little like those fake thermostats you sometimes see in office buildings that are meant to give occupants the illusion of local control, when in reality, a central system is making all the real decisions.

Noted tech writer Brian Livingston also has been struggling with this, as he reported in http://briansbuzz.com/w/040408/ . Just look at the jaw-dropping failure rates he found:

I've written many times that Internet service providers (ISPs) are mishandling the growing menace of spam by imposing crude "junk-mail filters" that delete legitimate messages without notifying the intended recipients of that fact.

...AOL "bounced" about 88% of the newsletters that had been sent to subscribers who use aol.com e-mail addresses. The problem was also severe at subsidiaries owned by AOL, including cs.com (which bounced 88%) and netscape.net (96%).

...[AOL's] filter simply deletes huge quantities of mail without ever delivering it... (click link above for full article)

If you have friends on AOL, you may wish to tell them about this ( http://www.langa.com/sendit.htm ) so they'll know why their email is so unreliable. Of course, there's no guarantee they'll see your email, just as there's no guarantee that legitimate subscribers to this newsletter on AOL will get this issue....

But there's a glimmer of hope: For the first time ever, AOL's membership has started to shrink significantly. Users are finally realizing they can get better service at lower costs from other ISPs. Perhaps if enough members vote with their dollars, AOL will wake up and meaningfully change its Big Brother-ish ways.

Here is the second segment of the AOL scanning /blocking story:

Just For Grins Some unintentional humor fell out of the serious discussion of AOL's antispam policies, which we discussed last issue: AOL blocks emails that merely contain a link to sites AOL doesn't approve of. ( http://www.langa.com/newsletters/2004/2004-04-19.htm#2 ) Many AOL subscribers were incensed and asked AOL tech support for an explanation. Reader "Ray" for example, got this immediate reply from AOL:

...I assure you that AOL is not blocking emails of any sort from arriving on your mailbox.... Ray sent that to me, not knowing whom to believe.

But at almost the same moment Ray's mail arrived, I also got this:

Dear Fred, I just thought that I would let you know that I forwarded your [send to a friend] letter to all my friends on aol. Guess what, aol bounced everyone of them. This is the reason they gave: "(reason: 554-: (HVU:B1) The URL contained in your email to AOL members has generated a high volume of complaints... AOL will no longer accept email with the URL contained in your message. 554 TRANSACTION FAILED" ---Kris

Then I got a note from Fred and Anne Weaver:

After reading your recent newsletter on AOL I tried to send it to an AOL friend. Your URL caused it to be rejected by AOL! Why anyone uses AOL is beyond me. ---Fred and Anne

Then a note from Diane H Kuhn:

I tried to email the latest newsletter to 2 of my family members with AOL address. Both were returned to me within minutes of sending...the reason? It contained a link to a Malicious site....hmmmmm. I guess I better print it and mail it!! Thanks, Diane

It went on all day--- notes from AOL members telling me that AOL techs swore that AOL would *never* block email... followed by mail from readers outside of AOL who tried send to AOL members, and got their mail blocked.

The amusing thing, aside from AOL's blatant duplicity in telling its customers one thing while simultaneously doing the opposite (ok, I have a dark sense of humor), is that the only link in the "send to a friend" letter was a link to the current LangaList issue on Langa.Com--- there was no ad link, no spam link, no tracking link, nothing but a link to a newsletter that criticized AOL. But that was enough for AOL to install a block on Langa.Com email. (Or, as AOL might say: "Block? What block? We'd never do that...!" )

[Brytani]

If they do bill you, immediately write a letter to their billing dispute address and send it registered, return, receipt requested. Site your two other letters (dates sent etc) and tell them to immediately remove the charge and close the account. Next move, send a complaint to the FCC.

Years back, DH and I did an AOL free trial and cancelled within the allowed time. Not only did AOL refuse to close the account, they billed us for the service and when we disputed the charges and refused to pay, they sent the "bill" to a collection agency who put it on our credit report.

Talk about a REAL pain in the rear end getting that taken off and fixed.

Learned my lesson quick on billing problems, I don't play games. Our credit is way to important to let some company ruin it.

[Damagro]

send an email to yourself using the link and see if it's true. I have compuserve, which is aol and the email went through just fine

[farfromhome]

AOL is evil. Like Hotel California "You can log off anytime you want, but you can never leave." My opinion, you are much better off using a local ISP. More responsive, often cheaper and the money you spend stays in your community. When traveling, Internet kiosks and cafes are handy to do a quick email.

[Mears]

Thanks to both of you for your most helpful suggestions.

I guess it's a real case of "buyer beware"

[madison10]

AOL is like bloodsucking leech. Why people use it baffles me.

This is bizarre, Mr. Langa is practically my neighbor. Didn't even know his company existed.

[RegT]

Also Remember: AOL Time-Warner = CNN, Time, People Mag, SI, etc. A big Democrat party donor, too.

[taxcontrol]

Simple solution - don't use AOL

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Now, they won't believe me when I say I want to cancel it.

Cancel your credit card instead.

Checkmate.

Just replace it with one of the preaprroved ones you get in the mail every week.

[Stoat]

Madison,
Fred Langa is a near-legend in the computer / tech community. For years he edited Byte Magazine, one of the most influential and respected computer magazines ever.
His free newsletter always contains useful tidbits that are relevant regardless of your level of computer familiarity....highly recommended.

A gentle reminder to readers who may have only read the title or first few lines of the posted articles here...this is not about scanning for viruses or merely blocking spams in the usual way that everyone is accustomed to....this is about scanning the WRITTEN TEXT of the inside of messages for URL's that AOL doesn't like....the URL's that were blocked as documented in Fred Langa's article were either completely innocuous or they linked to sites that had been critical of AOL. Scanning within emails in this manner is unprecedented for an ISP.

Everybody who has more than a passing understanding of computers and the internet knows that AOL is a lousy ISP...that is not what this is all about. This is about AOL taking a step that hasn't been taken before...scanning the CONTENT of your mails, not just the addresses, attachments or headers. This is another step toward Big Brotherism....AOL would be right at home in North Korea (If NK allowed it's citizens to have internet access)

[Alia]

Thank you. This has already happened to several emails I sent out --only those with AOL were "censored". It was an url -- containing material not in synch with Europe's position on WOT.

[PLMerite]

I cancelled my AOL account right before my credit card's "valid thru" date. AOL kept billing me until they got refused and then terminated my account (after calling me endless times trying to get me to re-up). They finally sent me a letter saying I owed them a final month's fee and asking for my new credit card expiration date.

I sent them a money order.

[Overtaxed]

I put up with one charge showing on my credit card after I called to cancel.

I canceled that card and got a new one. Guess I missed out...AOL didn't send me a letter. :)

[mountaineer]

Thanks to all of you for your advice in dealing with AOL's refusal to close our "free trial" account. I plan to call them again (this time, I'll try not to slam down the receiver when they start to annoy me!) and will call my credit card company to warn them that an unauthorized charge may be coming. If all that fails, I'll do some of the other things you all recommended.

The thing is, we just signed up with AOL so we could use a borrowed laptop on our Miami vacation. We have no problem with the internet provider at our home, except that - because it's part of state govt., which employs my husband - there's no out-of-state number to dialup when traveling.

It's really disgusting, and what's funny is that when you call AOL, they seem so shocked that anyone would want to terminate service with them.

[js1138]

MSN deletes email with suspicious attachments. One such suspicious attachment is anything with an htm or html extension.

Delta airlines sends its etickets in html format, so they never arrive for MSN customers.

But MSN isn't alone. Many providers are scanning email.

[Brytani]

Please PLEASE do yourself a favor (to avoid problems in the future) and follow up your call with a letter mails Return, Receipt, Requested.

You have federal laws that protect you from AOL through the Fair Debt Collection Act. A person is only protected from a disputed billing if they put it in writing.

A bit of hassle and $5 will avoid further problems if AOL once again fails to act.

Good Luck!!!!

[JoeFromSidney]

When traveling, Internet kiosks and cafes are handy to do a quick email.

My local ISP has a deal with iPass. I can log on to iPass almost anyplace in the country, and quite a few places overseas, and it's just like using my local ISP. iPass charges $3/hour for that service, and I pay for only the time I actually use. Check to see if your local ISP offers the same deal.