[ExchangeList] Re: I NEED TO GRIPE!

  • From: "William Lefkovics" <william@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 22:27:32 -0700

An RBL for servers that allow OOFs to list posts... now you're on to
something.

  _____  

From: exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of William Lefkovics
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 9:44 PM
To: exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ExchangeList] Re: I NEED TO GRIPE!


That depends on your perspective, John.  I am not failing to understand it
at all.  SpamCop was one of the RBLs I used back in 2002-2003 or so.
I understood the principles then, and I understand them now.
 
That does not mean I should concur with your all or nothing religious stance
on the subject.  
 
While I can forgive your inability to handle 'backscatter', does it mean
independent entities should be out looking for servers that do this because
it meets *their* definition of spam? That meets *my* definition of
vigilanteeism. 
 
You should start your own RBL.  It isn't difficult.  Well, it was easier 7
or 8 years ago, I think.
 

  _____  

From: exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John T (Lists)
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 2:10 PM
To: exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ExchangeList] Re: I NEED TO GRIPE!



William, what you and others are failing to understand is that SpamCop is
not the bad guy here, any one who is first accepting email for non-existing
addresses and THEN bouncing are the causes of the problem and SpamCop is
merely pointing that fact out.

 

It is entirely irresponsible for a company/entity to at first accept
delivery of email destined to non-existent addresses and then bounce. This
causes backscatter and additional spam, often to innocent people in the form
of forged from addresses. That is not acceptable in this day and age.

 

If a spammer is spreading spam and using a forged address that is one of
mine, and your server first accepts that spam and then bounces it to the
forged from address, mine, I will not hesitate one minute to cause your
server to be listed on RBL!

 

If the destination email address is non-existent, you must reject, not
accept then bounce.

 

John T

eServices For You

 

"Seek, and ye shall find!"

 

-----Original Message-----
From: exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of William Holmes
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 12:20 PM
To: exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ExchangeList] Re: I NEED TO GRIPE!

 

I am not ignoring spam. I am ignoring RTBL because of their marginal
usefulness and the fact that they can change their policy and affect email
flow to my organization.  In my environment they improve the detection of
spam only by about 3% while preventing quiet a bit of legitimate mail. I
find Bayesian filters much more effective and they don't "decide" to change
policy on a whim. 

 

It is not appropriate (at least in my opinion) to violate RFC822 just to say
you are a more effective spam filter. This is ostensibly what they
(spamacop) are doing.  Then again if you don't agree you are welcome to
continue using their services.

 

Bill

 

  _____  

From: exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Moon, Brendan
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 1:58 PM
To: exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ExchangeList] Re: I NEED TO GRIPE!

 

Sticking your head in the sand isn't going to solve the problem.  Neither is
avoiding the use of RBLs in your own shop.  The point is that the 'generally
accepted' customs and standards change with the times.

 

Most spam senders falsify the "from" address.  This means that the NDRs you
send out to the Internet go to a forged address, and end up in some
unsuspecting soul's mailbox.  As Spamcop asserts, this is arguably just as
bad as the original spam.

 

 

 - Brendan Moon

Other related posts: