Hi,It is about netizenship. A guy/gal comes accross with a red (or red/black) flag and boldy says "let's fight spam". "Turn in on, stash and use every possible blacklist...".
Such _email_ blacklists are quite evil, they've managed to strip down internet email from a "service" to something strongly related to the weather conditions and the mood of buncha non-suable guys.
Sometimes I do have the "pleasure" of talking with a proud "spam filtered" sysadmin just because some person have "invented" a "new way" to "reduce spam".
I can accuse almost every list for not INSISTING of some kind of understanding what the particular list does - not from the blacklisted but from the users also. I do really have situations where some bold young guy are boldly telling me "you have been marked" with something in the voice insisting on my guild and shame... hell, NO!. I do not have noting to do nor with the spammers, nor with the lists, not with the ignorance admins who use without understanding anything they came across the net. Kill the spam!!! The God will separate them from the sinners.... You're from the ghetto, and we do not ever care if you're a good or bad or just ugly.
Anyway, this does not reduce spam, this just escalates the "fight" ... we closed the relaying servers, they started using "direct" mailing, we've used sophisticated software to search for the spam content in the messages - they just started using random words and .gifs, we did hide the email addresses - they've started to use dictionaries..
Let's guess what causes increased spam volume - are you sure that the not-completely-efficient-but-improving tecniques does not have their own big share in this?
I will never ever believe such "fighters" really want to win - they just escalate the fight. This is not a solution, it is just fight without end. And the casualities are more and more often civilian... Hey, the solution was never ever fighting such battles without a slight chance of ultimate victory. Do you ever imagine how much efforts are burried in "fighting spam"? Hell again, if this manpower was used to create test and praise new (not "patched") protocols... Nah, big but narrow-minded brains does insist on target practice instead of cutting the problem from the roots. Yes, there are ways - but they do not get even 5% of the whole power throwed to fight spam - and maybe they do not even get a .5% of the money spent to fight spam. Think about it.
I do really only mark the spam in the header, leaving the decision to delete it or not to the real client. I can not allow missing a single letter - I do work for government and this kind of "threatment" means only one thing to me : PROBLEMS. So, hell with them. And guess what? ? I do have less problems with less filtering. Our users also do not complain, they've get used and they're the best filter ever seen - does not miss a single message w/o single false positive. Quick, distributed. At the moment, relaxed spam checking + marking + whitelists are the best for me.
ediPS really pissed off. Sorry but it comes at the end of a bunch of mail testing and shouting at some "clever admins" w/o "a single spam in our boxes". Will be glad if someone guilty of spam-fighting overkill understands it.
Mariusz Kruk wrote:
Craig Sanders napisał(a):i don't use their RBL (although i do use their excellent dynamic IP list) because i strongly disagree with their de-listing policy. i don't, however, dispute their right to create and manage their RBL using whatever criteria they like...i just exercise my right to not use it. and, IMO, that's the correct approach - if you dont like it, dont use it and convince your correspondents to not use it....but dont blame SORBS if your correspondents decide to continue using the SORBS list even after they have been informed of any (real or perceived) deficiencies in SORBS's policies. SORBS arent blocking your mail, they're just publishing a list of IP addresses. lawyers and censorship of SORBS is not a good solution and sets an extremely dangerous precedent which could be used to harass any RBL - they have a right to publish their list, and individual mail server operators have the right to chhose to use it or not.OTOH, "freedom" is not the same as "anarchy". And you can not freely go out on the street and shout "Mr. whatever is a fscking thief, he stole my 200$" justifying it by "it's the listener's choice whether he likes to believe it or not".It's not as simple as you want it to be.Try to "just make a list" of firms who do this or do that (generaly - something wrong), and publish this list on the internet. Unless you have strong proof for your acucsations, they'll sue your pants off.