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

Re: Re: Re: OT: sorbs blacklisting scam

On Mon, 2006-05-01 at 04:52, Matthew Sullivan wrote:
> 1/ Stop spam filter backscatter which is widely known to be 99.9999999% 
> forged senders, and thus stop attacking innocent users.

Both your system and ours have generated backscatter in the
past.  Despite yesterday's change, your systems (and ours)
can still generate backscatter today.  Let's concede that
we're both working to minimize backscatter but preventing
backscatter is not yet technically feasible.

The difference between us is that we don't cause email to
be blocked for reasons different from those documented on
the SORBS website.

> 2/ Admit that you are/were running a faulty system which was attacking 
> innocent users.

Our system is less than perfect, as is SORBS.  Faulty?  No.

An RBL is not just about software.  It's about minimizing
false positives and false negatives, providing a fast and
reliable service, and responding promptly to issues.  But
let's focus in this technical list on the technical issues:

A well run RBL lists based on the criteria documented on
the website, not some undocumented test (backscatter) which
the RBL domain itself has failed for years.

A well run RBL typically takes care to avoid false

A well run RBL typically provides tools to quickly
determine the cause of a listing.

A well run RBL typically provides a speedy and well
documented mechanism to rectify its mistakes.

A well run RBL typically involves a mechanism to
automatically remove listings after a time period
proportional to the severity of the attack.

A well run RBL does not have a $50 "fine" as the primary
criteria for delisting.

We respect those who can manage RBLs well, and we are
grateful that we are permitted to use their RBLs.

--Mike Bird

Reply to: