- Welcome to IDNetters Forums.
Recent posts
#1
IDNet Help / Re: How to block spam that say...
Last post by zappaDPJ - Aug 13, 2026, 12:56:46I wish I could be more helpful but email management has never been my strong point which is probably why I get hundreds of spam messages every week.
The biggest issue I have is the majority of it is sent from temporary addresses on multiple domains so it doesn't seem possible to block although I did manage to block mail from the entire country of China with help from Simon.
The biggest issue I have is the majority of it is sent from temporary addresses on multiple domains so it doesn't seem possible to block although I did manage to block mail from the entire country of China with help from Simon.
#2
IDNet Help / Re: How to block spam that say...
Last post by john7 - Aug 13, 2026, 12:12:18Yes I can't see anyway of blocking it. Support were useless as its clearly a problem for more customers than just us. You can't block IDnet or your self so clearly they can't just ignore the problem as people like my wife get very worried about it. But ignore it they do apeare to be doing
#3
IDNet Help / Re: How to block spam that say...
Last post by zappaDPJ - Aug 12, 2026, 21:56:27I get a large amount of spam that purports to come from my own email address which is obviously spoofed and not blockable. It's annoying.
#4
IDNet Help / Re: How to block spam that say...
Last post by Simon - Aug 12, 2026, 18:30:04I'm not sure if you're still with IDNet, John, but if so, if you log into the Customer Portal, scoll down to the Email settings, you'll find some configurable mail filters there.
#5
IDNet Help / How to block spam that says it...
Last post by john7 - Aug 12, 2026, 17:27:39My wife keeps getting spam (or worse as we haven't been so stupid to do anything with them) which say from IDnet. Support just say config er the spam filters to block it but have ignored my request as to how as it has IDnet in the sending address. So is I add IDnet to be blocked that isn't really going to help anything from them. So any one any idea how to block tha last one IDNet via Docusign ?
#6
Broadband, Internet & General Computer News & Discussion / Re: Ofcom unable to take furth...
Last post by zappaDPJ - Jul 21, 2026, 00:10:41Quote from: nowster on Jul 20, 2026, 22:35:28The OSA is a right pain for legitimate forums and is toothless against the really harmful content.
This is a graphics forum where people can showcase their work. This is what I see without using a VPN. When I move on to the next site, usually located in the UK, I often I get banned for using a VPN
You cannot view this attachment.
#7
Broadband, Internet & General Computer News & Discussion / Re: Ofcom unable to take furth...
Last post by nowster - Jul 20, 2026, 22:35:28The OSA is a right pain for legitimate forums and is toothless against the really harmful content.
#8
Broadband, Internet & General Computer News & Discussion / Re: Ofcom unable to take furth...
Last post by Simon - Jul 20, 2026, 20:46:11Quote from: zappaDPJ on Jul 20, 2026, 20:36:34It would seem so. I'd be interested to know where the server for that site is situated geographically. If it's inside the UK I would have expected there would be laws that could be employed to be taken it down.
I think this is probably the difficulty. If it isn't, presumably there's bugger all they can do.
#9
Broadband, Internet & General Computer News & Discussion / Re: Ofcom unable to take furth...
Last post by zappaDPJ - Jul 20, 2026, 20:36:34Quote from: Simon on Jul 20, 2026, 20:24:08So, basically this proves what we've thought all along, in that apart from the ability to issue fines, Ofcom is toothless to actually take any concrete action.
It would seem so. I'd be interested to know where the server for that site is situated geographically. If it's inside the UK I would have expected there would be laws that could be employed to be taken it down.
#10
Broadband, Internet & General Computer News & Discussion / Ofcom unable to take further l...
Last post by Simon - Jul 20, 2026, 20:24:08Ofcom said it is unable to take further legal action against a pro-suicide forum which campaigners say has been linked to over 130 UK deaths.
The regulator said, external the site had blocked access for the "vast majority" of UK users, and it had "no further legal routes available" under the Online Safety Act.
But it accepted people would still be able to access the forum by using a VPN, which hides your location online.
Andy Burrows, chief executive of the Molly Rose Foundation, said the decision to take no further legal action would "result in more lost lives" and that announcing it on the day a new prime minister was named showed "an utter lack of moral courage".
In response, an Ofcom spokesperson said it had made the decision a "matter of days ago" following "months of work to exhaust all possible legal routes".
They said bereaved families were informed of the decision this morning after being contacted last week.
"In that context, we do not consider it appropriate to delay the announcement further to accommodate today's political developments," they said.
Meanwhile, Ofcom enforcement director Suzanne Cater said the regulator had used its powers "to the fullest extent possible".
"We'll continue to monitor the forum closely to check the geoblock remains in place," she said.
The geoblock means people based in the UK are unable to access the site, unless they mask their location through a VPN or similar means.
Ofcom said it was working with the government to explore whether its enforcement powers should be strengthened.
In particular, this concerns its ability to get a website blocking order through the courts, which would legally mandate internet service providers in the UK to block the website.
The regulator says it has reached the limit of what it can legally do under the Online Safety Act because the forum has implemented the geoblock.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3d3ejgdm20o
So, basically this proves what we've thought all along, in that apart from the ability to issue fines, Ofcom is toothless to actually take any concrete action.
The regulator said, external the site had blocked access for the "vast majority" of UK users, and it had "no further legal routes available" under the Online Safety Act.
But it accepted people would still be able to access the forum by using a VPN, which hides your location online.
Andy Burrows, chief executive of the Molly Rose Foundation, said the decision to take no further legal action would "result in more lost lives" and that announcing it on the day a new prime minister was named showed "an utter lack of moral courage".
In response, an Ofcom spokesperson said it had made the decision a "matter of days ago" following "months of work to exhaust all possible legal routes".
They said bereaved families were informed of the decision this morning after being contacted last week.
"In that context, we do not consider it appropriate to delay the announcement further to accommodate today's political developments," they said.
Meanwhile, Ofcom enforcement director Suzanne Cater said the regulator had used its powers "to the fullest extent possible".
"We'll continue to monitor the forum closely to check the geoblock remains in place," she said.
The geoblock means people based in the UK are unable to access the site, unless they mask their location through a VPN or similar means.
Ofcom said it was working with the government to explore whether its enforcement powers should be strengthened.
In particular, this concerns its ability to get a website blocking order through the courts, which would legally mandate internet service providers in the UK to block the website.
The regulator says it has reached the limit of what it can legally do under the Online Safety Act because the forum has implemented the geoblock.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3d3ejgdm20o
So, basically this proves what we've thought all along, in that apart from the ability to issue fines, Ofcom is toothless to actually take any concrete action.