On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 09:42:46PM -0600, Michael Loftis wrote: > --On July 26, 2006 5:17:28 PM -0700 Paul Johnson <baloo@ursine.ca> wrote: > > On Wednesday 26 July 2006 08:00, Juha-Matti Tapio wrote: > > > There have been at least these incorrect claims: > > > > > > a) Sorbs blocks email (except mail sent to them maybe). > > > b) Sorbs claims someone is a spammer by listing in DUHL. <snip some more> > > > > Which ones are incorrect again? I don't see any false statements so far. > > I realize the list above is a list of what has been incorrectly claimed, > below is atleast some of the reasons why. > > a) sorbs publishes a phone book of sorts. using it, or not, is not up to > sorbs. they let anyone use it, or read it. The UK government maintains a register of sex offenders which is used by employers to screen applicants for sensitive jobs. If someone is incorrectly entered on this register they are likely to find themselves refused employment. Such recourse as they have is not against the employers refusing them but against the maintainers of the register. Though the employer has done the actual refusing, it is the register which is at fault, as the register entry is the root cause of the refusal. Similarly if someone's email is blocked because the receiving server uses SORBS, it is the SORBS entry which is the root cause of the blocking. To deny that SORBS blocks email is to consider only the software aspect of the system. From the wider view of humans attempting to communicate - which after all is what email is for - it is certainly true that SORBS blocks email. > the information is accurate to > the specification of the requirements, they've made no false claims about > what is contained in their listings ever. Two minutes on Google will provide innumerable examples of listings which do not fit their criteria. > b) DUHL != SPAMMer -- heck we often refuse mail directly from known dynamic > and consumer IP ranges. This cuts down a lot of spam at little cost. We > maintain our own lists though for this, and only the blocks with worst > offenders get on it (mostly just the big ISPs cable and DSL ranges as we > see problems with them). again, use of sorbs DUHL is up to individual > entities, outside of SORBS. SORBS advertises itself as a tool to block spam. The idea is that if an IP is listed it is considered a possible source of spam. Therefore to be listed on the DUHL causes the listee to be considered a spammer. Again, the "DUHL != spammer" argument is based on viewing the situation from an inappropriate viewpoint, one which has more in common with writing code than with making valid evaluations of human interactions. -- Pigeon Be kind to pigeons Get my GPG key here: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x21C61F7F
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature