Re: Massive increase of spam on debian-*@l.d.o
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 06 May 2004 00:36, Paul Johnson, Paul Johnson <baloo@ursine.ca>
wrote:
> Steve Lamb <grey@dmiyu.org> writes:
> > Personally I haven't used any of my hosting company's email
> > servers since setting up my own server. In the same time I've never
> > sent out virus email or been an open relay. Yet because of boneheaded
> > ideas like the above I now have to get around idiotic, lazy blocks.
> > Tired of it.
>
> I agree. Dialup/residential IP lists used for blocking purposes is
> pretty retarded. However, using something like bl.spamcop.net, which
> only lists currently spamming IPs, is considerably more useful.
>
Actually, you can block a lot of infected boxes by blocking dynamic IPs, so
there is something to be said for it.
But tell me, since spamcop accepts reports from anyone able to click a mouse
button, which of the following are they NOT subject to?
1. Reports from people to stupid or lazy to unsubscribe lists or newsletters
they receive.
2. Spammers intentionally reporting legitimate mail sources with the intent
to keep the number of false positives high enough that people will not risk
using spamcop.
In the past few days, I've seen netfilter.org's list and foxnews in spamcop.
They were both removed, but the fact remains that they should never have been
there to begin with.
- --
Robin Lynn Frank
Director of Operations, Paradigm-Omega, LLC
============================================================
- From the Room-Full-of-Monkeys Typing Pool:
Did you actually take the time to read this?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.3.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFAmniwzXwq4t8X1KoRAuzlAKC3Qs4reu//TKVuXJHHYnAx/mrRGgCfcWXx
wNThJccTISC1G5FQdjQvt3U=
=Bjus
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: