[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Every spam is sacred

Mathieu Roy wrote:
> > You are missing the point because you don't know how DSBL works.
> > Please go to http://dsbl.org and read about it.
> Ok. I done what you asked.
> First link, I can read
>         "We're sorry. If you bothered coming to this page, you are
>         probably an innocent mail user who's mail has bounced back
>         with a message telling you to come to this site. We'll try to
>         explain what's happened.
>         [...]
>         Please don't misunderstand; we're not implying that you send
>         spam. The message that you received simply means that the
>         administrator of your server either doesn't know, or has
>         chosen to run an open relay or open proxy."
> First link (<http://dsbl.org/sender>), disaprooval of what you said:
> recognition of the fact that innocent people may be trapped by dsbl.

I didn't say it could *never* happen. I said it was extremely
difficult for it to happen, statistically speaking.

What the paragraph says is true: If you are a spammer, you don't even
bother to visit dsbl.org, so it's likely that most of the people who
visit dsbl.org are legitimate users (hey, you just visited it and it was
not because you have just been blocked, it was because I asked you! :-).

In either case the paragaph you quoted is standard in many DNSBLs,
it tells the user that his mail was blocked not for being spam but
because some more or less objective criteria.

The fact that there is a (more or less) probabilistic correlation
between these objective criteria and spam is what makes people to use
DNSBLs. Those DNSBLs for which the correlation is higher are the best.
In the specific case of the DSBL, the probability that a message sent
from an IP in the DSBL is spam is about 99.95%.

My point is that the inconvenience caused to you for having to look
for an SMTP server which is not an open relay is by far much less than
the inconvenience caused to me for receiving and handling 1999 spam

> Now, same question one more time,
>    What if -innocent people trapped by dsbl- had to report a bug
>    about debian?

There is no such thing as "innocent people trapped by dsbl".
DNSBLs do not block persons, they just block IPs.

> Creating an account on yahoo instead of using debbugs.el
>    in their favorite mail reader?
>    Working everyday on an another computer via ssh with a 56K modem to
>    avoid getting mails refused because of their IP?

If you are really a Debian user you can accept Debian's standard exim
configuration, which by default is not an open relay, and send your message
using your own computer, without using the SMTP server of your ISP.

In either case, I'm not asking the BTS people that they reject
messages from IPs in the DSBL, I would be happy if I'm just not forced
to receive mails from such IPs directly sent to my @debian.org address.

If you report a bug against any of my packages, the BTS will forward
the report to me, and I will receive the message, because it will come
from bugs.debian.org (master) which is one of our machines.

In short: This is not the big problem you are trying to make.

Reply to: