Well, ya know, I do have my own DNS servers…
Na, sounds like more work and I have enough to do for clients as it is.
John T
eServices For You
"Seek, and ye shall find!"
-----Original Message-----
From: exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:exchangelist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of William Lefkovics
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 10:28 PM
To: exchangelist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ExchangeList] Re: I NEED TO GRIPE!
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
