Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Threeuk is blocking Tutanota

tutanota.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 177 posts

Re: Threeuk is blocking Tutanota

#101

Post by schappim »

newaccount74 wrote: post #95
masklinn wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is one of ratio, and false positives versus false negatives. If 90% of tutanota-orginated emails are fraudulent, tutanota is an excellent fraud indicator, even though it will block legitimate emails. If 10% of gmail-originated emails are fraudulent, gmail is a terrible fraud indicator, even though it will let fraudulent emails pass through, possibly more than the count of fraudulent emails coming from tu…

But if you block Tutanota the fraudsters will just switch to Gmail, and all you accomplished is that you inconvenienced legit Tutanota users. I wonder why so many companies drag their feet when implementing actually useful anti-fraud measures (like supporting Verified-by-Visa) and instead block random email providers.

> drag their feet when implementing actually useful anti-fraud measures (like supporting Verified-by-Visa)

Most ecommerce merchants are non-technical, and utilise 3rd party platforms (Shopify, Bigcommerce etc) that in combination with their Payment Gateway don't support these systems.

I can safely say that every order my business has received with a Tutanota address has turned out to be fraud. It is a really strong indicator for a fraudulent transaction.

There are many other signals, but for some reason this is a really strong one.

We see a similar trend with Aleeas, and Simplelogin.

We still get fraud from Gmail and Outlook addresses, but it is picked up using other indicators, IP, IP owner, Shipping Address, phone number reachability, carrier, Payment Methods, name, useragent, "for lease" or "for sale" status of the delivery address etc etc...

Re: Threeuk is blocking Tutanota

#102

Post by miohtama »

callahad wrote: post #42

I can access Tutanota on Three UK, even with the filter enabled. When this blew up last Friday[0], Three's response was, paraphrased, "you contacted the wrong department, here's how to contact the correct department. Their turnaround time is three business days." Here we are three business days later, and it works for me. This seems a bit overwrought? (Content filters are an issue, but they're mandated by the UK gove…

It is a good case study about abuse of unchecked power - even if accidentally. Tutanota is a false positive and obviously should not be flagged in the first place. Do they have any business or legal remedies? Likely not.

Re: Threeuk is blocking Tutanota

#103

Post by blitzar »

fmajid wrote: post #85

The UK is almost as bad an enemy of the Internet as Australia and the nanny-state filters are beyond obnoxious. Back when I was with “Vodafone Full Fibre broadband” (in reality shitty VDSL because the truth-in-advertising authority gave ISPs license to lie), they had accidentally blocked StackOverflow for 3 days because it was actually the test site for implementation of the filters and they had been turned on by acc…

> The UK is almost as bad an enemy of the Internet as Australia

The UK is almost as bad an enemy of the Internet as North Korea.

Re: Threeuk is blocking Tutanota

#104

Post by blitzar »

samwillis wrote: post #98
flurdy wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did use Three for a while as a Mifi device at home and on the train when we moved back to the UK after we had our first baby back in 2011. As new clueless parents (who thought we were prepared but god no) I spent a lot of time researching English and Norwegian sites on breastfeeding and other baby matters. And so many sites was blocked by Three. So frustrating when these were big mainstream baby and health sites bu…

> As new clueless parents (who thought we were prepared but god no) Absolutely no one is prepared, anyone who claims they are or seems to be are faking it.

I have seen "second time" parents (and recently someone on their third) who thought they were prepared, they had done it before ...

Re: Threeuk is blocking Tutanota

#105

Post by blitzar »

throwaway4good wrote: post #81
mwagstaff wrote: post #8

Slightly off topic, but I was with Three UK for a while. Reception was universally terrible, and trying to use mobile data was a joke. This was in a small urban centre... called London. Would never, ever touch them again. Back on topic, it seems that they are not using Bluecoat/Symantec Site review (which I suspect other providers do), which has the domain categorised correctly: https://sitereview.bluecoat.com/#/look…

If you do a lot of roaming / international travel, nothing I found, beats 3.

Greatest feature ever. Sadly they are taking it away customer by customer it seems. Out of principle when they take the roaming from me I will be leaving the network.

Re: Threeuk is blocking Tutanota

#106

Post by borissk »

Just advice your users to switch away from Three - of the three and a half mobile operators in UK (O2 and Vodafone share cell towers) Three is the worst anyway.

A VPN may be a solution currently, but recently a Labour Party MP - Sarah Champion proposed the government needs to do something about the VPN providers (obviously the plebs can't have too much freedom).

Re: Threeuk is blocking Tutanota

#107

Post by borissk »

mwagstaff wrote: post #8

Slightly off topic, but I was with Three UK for a while. Reception was universally terrible, and trying to use mobile data was a joke. This was in a small urban centre... called London. Would never, ever touch them again. Back on topic, it seems that they are not using Bluecoat/Symantec Site review (which I suspect other providers do), which has the domain categorised correctly: https://sitereview.bluecoat.com/#/look…

Three is the cheapest and most oversubscribed network. Most of their users still have 4G devices, so getting a 5G phone is a way to get better speed from them in busy areas.

Re: Threeuk is blocking Tutanota

#108

Post by [deleted] »

mwagstaff wrote: post #8

Slightly off topic, but I was with Three UK for a while. Reception was universally terrible, and trying to use mobile data was a joke. This was in a small urban centre... called London. Would never, ever touch them again. Back on topic, it seems that they are not using Bluecoat/Symantec Site review (which I suspect other providers do), which has the domain categorised correctly: https://sitereview.bluecoat.com/#/look…

[deleted]

Re: Threeuk is blocking Tutanota

#109

Post by blitzar »

darrenf wrote: post #63
mrtksn wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually like Three but it was impossible to use data at the rush hour in central London. I don't know what's the current situation but that was my main frustration with Three. Also, I'm disappointed that they ended Roam like home despite having universal(?) roaming before EU made all the carriers do it.

They renamed it to "Go Roam" and if you've been with them since before October 2021 it's still free in 71 countries (otherwise it's pretty steep): https://www.three.co.uk/go-roam "If you’re on Pay As You Go, or your Pay Monthly plan started before 1 October 2021, these charges won’t apply." (I'm a happy Three customer since 2011, can't recall significant signal woes in London while I lived there and have reliable, fa…

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/2022/01/three-custome...

Eventually your time will come and they will remove it.

Re: Threeuk is blocking Tutanota

#110

Post by vladvasiliu »

tomxor wrote: post #96
fmajid wrote: post #85

The UK is almost as bad an enemy of the Internet as Australia and the nanny-state filters are beyond obnoxious. Back when I was with “Vodafone Full Fibre broadband” (in reality shitty VDSL because the truth-in-advertising authority gave ISPs license to lie), they had accidentally blocked StackOverflow for 3 days because it was actually the test site for implementation of the filters and they had been turned on by acc…

> A VPN is essential to defend yourself from the jackbooted UK government. I tend to agree. Unfortunately even VPN doesn't entirely solve it though. On the one hand wiregaurd makes this feel far more transparent and comfortable technically compared to how it used to with old fashioned crappy TCP over TCP style VPN... instead we now get low overhead, low latency, native, simple configuration etc. The only problem is t…

> The only problem is the end point: Running your own makes you very uniquely identifiable

I think it depends on where you are. In France, my fiber connections have had a fixed IPv4 since I first got one, 10 years ago. Some ISPs have recently switched to CG-NAT, though. But they also started offering fixed ipv6.

My point is that trying to hide behind a non-fixed IP is a losing game. Plus, you can probably be indentified quite reliably but the pattern of websites you visit.

Post reply on HN