Dec 20, 16 / Cap 19, 00 20:57 UTC

Asgardia emails and Junk Mail  

As an eBook author, I don't want or have privacy. To generate sales, I'm an open book. Still, it concerns me that Norton Antivirus forces Asgardian emails to my Junk Mail folder. What do Asgardia's email senders add to the posts that alert Norton to take this action? # Unlike older email handlers, Outlook doesn't allow me to look under-the-hood to see what's what. It could be and innocent or negligent phenomenon, but I hate to trust software by default.

Dec 20, 16 / Cap 19, 00 21:24 UTC

Have you tried adding Asgardia to the whitelist in Norton? If it's on your personal computer try this:

Remove the sender's address or domain from the Blocked List 1. Start your Norton product.

  1. Click Settings.

  2. Under Detailed Settings, click AntiSpam.

  3. On the Filter tab, next to Blocked List, click Configure.

  4. In the Blocked List window, select the item that you want to remove, and click Remove.

  5. Click Apply, and then click OK.

Add the sender's address or domain to the Allowed List

  1. Start your Norton product.

  2. Click Settings.

  3. Under Detailed Settings, click AntiSpam.

  4. On the Filter tab, next to Allowed List, click Configure.

  5. In the Allowed List window, click Add.

  6. In the Add Email Address window, from the Address Type drop-down, select the address type.

  7. Add the name and address of the sender, and then click OK.

  8. In the Allowed List window, click Apply and OK.

  Updated  on Dec 20, 16 / Cap 19, 00 23:21 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time

Dec 21, 16 / Cap 20, 00 20:54 UTC

Interesting you seem to think that you as an author seeking publicity and you as an individual seeking privacy are two facets unable to exist in the same space and time.

It's likely nothing that Asgardia email senders add to the email that trips spam filters. Without applicable data it's not overly clever to make random suggestions, but it's incredibly likely done by source IP originating from a known datacenter, without previously paying to exist in an upstream whitelist. I assume the service isn't otherwise known for spam and does not currently feature on blacklists.

Outlook should allow for "looking under the hood" as much as is applicable without wanting at the source. Even outlook express (unless it's changed that vastly since I've last used) should be able to indicate a reasonable range of informations. You seem convinced that Norton is responsible for some reason, so I don't quite understand what outlook has to do with things.

Also: people actually still use Norton?

Dec 21, 16 / Cap 20, 00 21:11 UTC

I right now will say. Asgardia needs a flow of money some how. I understand business.

Dec 22, 16 / Cap 21, 00 12:22 UTC

What your software turns into the state of junk-listing an received email is not what the server adds to the mail, it's about what the server does not add to the mail. Mails are often identified as junk because they do not successfully implement the internet messaging standard.

Dec 22, 16 / Cap 21, 00 14:27 UTC

Considering how poor and bug-ridden Symantec products tend to be, you expect too much from Norton. All Antivirus performance has been hit this year, but Norton is rarely in the top 5. You can get decent protection with a more reliable vendor, and reliability is more important than occasionally being any good.

Month after month, year after year, Avira and Bitdefender are consistently in the top 5 and often swap between being the No.1 and No.2.

I am an IT consultant, but I always say "don't take my word for it" Always check the evidence, so you are happy with "your" choice. Look at the following pages and say farewell to Norton ASAP.

Aggregated test result over the past half year from Virus Bulletin

November test results from AV-Comparatives

October test results from AV-Test