Re: NEVER USE SORBS - Debian

This is a discussion on Re: NEVER USE SORBS - Debian ; At 10:43 AM 7/26/2006 +0800, Shane Chrisp wrote: >I find it amazing that those who have problems are generally those who >thinks the world of 'privately owned, connected networks' owes them >something. SORBS is doing something some like and use ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 117

Thread: Re: NEVER USE SORBS

  1. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    At 10:43 AM 7/26/2006 +0800, Shane Chrisp wrote:
    >I find it amazing that those who have problems are generally those who
    >thinks the world of 'privately owned, connected networks' owes them
    >something. SORBS is doing something some like and use and others dont
    >like and dont use. They are not forcing anything upon anyone, the mail
    >admins do so at thier own choice.


    That's a cop out. I've used this analogy before and I'll state it again.
    It's like farting in an elevator and saying, "hey it's ur choice to ride the
    elevator or not. U don't have to smell it if u don't want to, it's ur
    choice!!".

    Now can there be no more SORBS posts?






    --
    REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=--
    "...ne cede malis"

    00000100


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  2. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 01:38:30 -0400, wagnerc@plebeian.com (Chris
    Wagner) wrote:

    > It's like farting in an elevator and saying, "hey it's ur choice to ride
    > the elevator ... Now can there be no more SORBS posts?


    Interesting ANALogy. ;-)

    But new subscribers need to be educated too. That's a never ending
    cycle. Anyone who can't tolerate repetition should either ignore it,
    or unsubscribe.

  3. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 18:00:03 +0300, Juha-Matti Tapio
    wrote:

    > c) Sorbs lists IP addresses for low TTL values.


    > None of these are true


    Clearly they refuse to delist IPs with low TTL values. Your statement
    is misleading.


    > but I use DUHL personally and my $DAYJOB includes postmaster-duties


    One postmaster who favors SORBS. I suppose there will always be a
    small minority opinion, no matter what the topic.

  4. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Wed, 2006-07-26 at 11:11 -0400, John Kelly wrote:
    > On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 18:00:03 +0300, Juha-Matti Tapio
    > wrote:
    >
    > > c) Sorbs lists IP addresses for low TTL values.

    >
    > > None of these are true

    >
    > Clearly they refuse to delist IPs with low TTL values. Your statement
    > is misleading.
    >
    >
    > > but I use DUHL personally and my $DAYJOB includes postmaster-duties

    >
    > One postmaster who favors SORBS. I suppose there will always be a
    > small minority opinion, no matter what the topic.
    >


    If SORBS wasnt a problem to you because nobody uses it, why are you
    continuing to make such a hoohaa about it?

    Im not going to make any more comments on the matter as its clear that
    you just dont get it, or you have a chip on your shoulder for whatever
    reason, but keep it to yourself and let others make up thier own minds,
    based on the facts and not something you just made up.

    Shane


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  5. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 23:23:02 +0800, Shane Chrisp
    wrote:

    >Im not going to make any more comments on the matter as its clear that
    >you just dont get it, or you have a chip on your shoulder for whatever
    >reason, but keep it to yourself and let others make up thier own minds,
    >based on the facts and not something you just made up.


    That's mudslinging innuendo. I haven't "made up" anything.

    But if you just don't like what I say, or the way I say it, take your
    own advice:

    "keep it to yourself"

  6. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    Shane Chrisp wrote:
    > Im not going to make any more comments on the matter as its clear that
    > you just dont get it, or you have a chip on your shoulder for whatever
    > reason, but keep it to yourself and let others make up thier own
    > minds, based on the facts and not something you just made up.


    Facts:
    - I've successfully run my own mail server on a static IP for around 3
    years;
    - recently I have had failed email to and from optusnet.com.au and
    westnet.com.au domains
    - my ISP fought with SORBS to delist my static IP [along with many other
    staic IPs]
    - SORBS relisted my block and my ISP had to fight again....

    Final fact:
    - I gave up on not needing nor requiring an rDNS setup.... I now have it,
    perhaps my SORBS problems are over, but I won't hold my breath.

    Kind Regards

    AndrewM

    Andrew McGlashan
    Broadband Solutions now including VoIP 1300 85 3804

    Mobile: 04 2574 1827 Fax: 03 8790 1224

    Affinity Vision Australia Pty Ltd
    www.affinityvision.com.au
    www.affinityvision.net/adsl/

    In Case of Emergency -- http://www.affinityvision.com.au/ice.html


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  7. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Wednesday 26 July 2006 05:33, John Kelly wrote:
    > On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 01:38:30 -0400, wagnerc@plebeian.com (Chris
    >
    > Wagner) wrote:
    > > It's like farting in an elevator and saying, "hey it's ur choice to ride
    > > the elevator ... Now can there be no more SORBS posts?

    >
    > Interesting ANALogy. ;-)
    >
    > But new subscribers need to be educated too. That's a never ending
    > cycle. Anyone who can't tolerate repetition should either ignore it,
    > or unsubscribe.


    Why not just point to where in the archives it's been discussed before?

    --
    Paul Johnson
    Email and IM (XMPP & Google Talk): baloo@ursine.ca
    Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQBEx876tFWT6GUYO7QRAj6mAJ9IUySI9x0T/iWlTOvs+A7IpSdX8ACgo2lx
    s93Wjd3ZeXFJAOBCQqFVSBU=
    =ZZKq
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  8. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    Prelude: Please people, email is a very definite system and especially with
    blocking we as admins should be pedantic and exact about issues. Having said
    this, I would like to highlight that I actually did talk about listing and
    not delisting:

    On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 11:11:24AM -0400, John Kelly wrote:
    > On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 18:00:03 +0300, Juha-Matti Tapio
    > wrote:
    > > c) Sorbs lists IP addresses for low TTL values.
    > > None of these are true

    > Clearly they refuse to delist IPs with low TTL values. Your statement
    > is misleading.


    You are confusing listing criteria and delisting criteria. Sorbs does not
    specify low TTL as a listing criteria and I have yet to see anyone present
    proof of otherwise. And if TTL is not a listing criteria, it therefore is
    propably never the sole delisting criteria. A lot of people have claimed
    otherwise, but _that_ is misleading and not proved.

    Let's consider a hypothetical scenario:

    There are two hosts (Again note that I do not work for Sorbs and I am only
    speculating based on what I have read about Sorbs):

    Dyn-1-2-3-4.domain.tld and foobar.domain.tld. Both of these have a low TTL
    such as 7200. If the published Sorbs listing criteria are correct, Sorbs
    will list on DUHL the first address on-sight, but will not list the second
    one because there is no reason to believe it to be dynamic.

    Now if they both are actually statically allocated mail hosts, I do believe
    it is enough if the ISP gives the first host a real reverse name and bumps
    up the TTL temporarily (in order to publically state that this name change
    is not just a short term trick), and asks Sorbs for delisting. Once
    delisting is done and the first host has a real name, I do not see any
    reason why it would end up magically listed again if it keeps looking like a
    static host.

    The most vocal people tend to claim that this is too much work and
    impossible for them to do. While the TTL is not something I would personally
    do, Sorbs has decided to use it as some kind of automatic indicator of the
    willingness of postmasters to properly configure their systems. That is not
    an entirely unfair assumption.

    Now if I were wrong and Sorbs actually listed (as some people keep claiming)
    hosts with no other reason than low TTL, then I think they would be wrong in
    doing that and they would end up with _a lot_ of false positives.

    > > but I use DUHL personally and my $DAYJOB includes postmaster-duties

    > One postmaster who favors SORBS. I suppose there will always be a
    > small minority opinion, no matter what the topic.


    Out of tens of thousands of mails I have yet to have only one person who was
    caught as a false positive. If I were the only person blocking mail with a
    DUHL, so be it. And as some of you are apparently planning to do, please
    feel free to blacklist me for being such a huge problem that several
    mailinglist threads, lawsuit threats against Sorbs and custom blacklists are
    needed to try to make a small minority start receiving more spam


    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFEx9sVRGhQc/k/gTsRAmLvAKCl1LnTyx6AXyCFAMD6qXMiqArTCwCcCxt7
    q//BSjLTEmxrKhZ3/DFA+x4=
    =iCrw
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  9. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 12:13:57AM +0300, Juha-Matti Tapio wrote:
    > On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 11:11:24AM -0400, John Kelly wrote:
    > > On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 18:00:03 +0300, Juha-Matti Tapio
    > > wrote:
    > > > c) Sorbs lists IP addresses for low TTL values.
    > > > None of these are true

    > > Clearly they refuse to delist IPs with low TTL values. Your statement
    > > is misleading.

    >
    > You are confusing listing criteria and delisting criteria. Sorbs does not
    > specify low TTL as a listing criteria and I have yet to see anyone present
    > proof of otherwise. And if TTL is not a listing criteria, it therefore is
    > propably never the sole delisting criteria.


    http://strugglers.net/~andy/tmp/sorb...-delisting.txt

    This IP space, and many others, are not delisted solely because of
    their DNS PTR record's TTL. SORBS has no place enforcing arbitrary
    rules on DNS TTL, and that is why I no longer use it to outright
    reject email.

    My users get false positives and then I have to tell them that the
    ISP of the person sending the mail applied a TTL that is too low in
    the opinion of SORBS, then I need to explain what DNS TTL is about.
    And after all that when they ask "Okay so why is that bad?" there
    really isn't a good answer other than some paranoid stance regarding
    people changing their RDNS while SORBS looks and then changing it
    back later (WTF???) I cannot advocate a position I find ridiculous,
    much less spend a lot of time doing so.

    --
    http://strugglers.net/wiki/Xen_hosting -- A Xen VPS hosting hobby
    Encrypted mail welcome - keyid 0x604DE5DB

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFEx+OhIJm2TL8VSQsRApHQAJsGTDrhKIoLYSWXXc75Hs sgmax7bQCeLuyx
    qd7qmL9p/GrRMDL6NjNvh0w=
    =nhnC
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  10. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 01:38:30AM -0400, Chris Wagner wrote:
    > At 10:43 AM 7/26/2006 +0800, Shane Chrisp wrote:
    > >I find it amazing that those who have problems are generally those who
    > >thinks the world of 'privately owned, connected networks' owes them
    > >something. SORBS is doing something some like and use and others dont
    > >like and dont use. They are not forcing anything upon anyone, the mail
    > >admins do so at thier own choice.

    >
    > That's a cop out. I've used this analogy before and I'll state it again.
    > It's like farting in an elevator and saying, "hey it's ur choice to ride the
    > elevator or not. U don't have to smell it if u don't want to, it's ur
    > choice!!".


    no, it's nothing at all like that. an elevator is a shared space. a
    mail server is private property and the owner/admin has every right to
    restrict access using whatever criteria they like.

    > Now can there be no more SORBS posts?


    that would be good....but it will only happen if people who think they
    have a right to access other people's mail servers whenever they want,
    even against the owners' wishes, will stop whining.


    craig

    --
    craig sanders (part time cyborg)


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  11. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 11:11:24AM -0400, John Kelly wrote:
    > On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 18:00:03 +0300, Juha-Matti Tapio
    > wrote:
    >
    > > c) Sorbs lists IP addresses for low TTL values.

    >
    > > None of these are true

    >
    > Clearly they refuse to delist IPs with low TTL values. Your statement
    > is misleading.


    no, it's not. he was correcting a clear falsehood uttered by one of the
    anti-SORBS crusaders.

    SORBS do *NOT* list IP addresses for having a low TTL. it is one of the
    criteria they check for DE-listing DUHL IPs, not a criteria for actually
    listing them.

    > > but I use DUHL personally and my $DAYJOB includes postmaster-duties

    >
    > One postmaster who favors SORBS. I suppose there will always be a
    > small minority opinion, no matter what the topic.


    it's his mail server, he can configure it as he likes. he likes to
    prohibit mail coming direct from dynamic/dial-up address space. that's
    his right. and, this is the important point, YOU HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO SAY
    AT ALL IN HOW HE CONFIGURES HIS MAIL SERVER(S).

    craig

    PS: i use the SORBS DUL too. i think it is a valuable anti-spam tool.
    i would have no hesitation in recommending it to anyone who wants to
    reject spam and viruses during the SMTP session.

    --
    craig sanders (part time cyborg)


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  12. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 01:29:39AM +1000, Andrew McGlashan wrote:
    > Shane Chrisp wrote:
    > >Im not going to make any more comments on the matter as its clear that
    > >you just dont get it, or you have a chip on your shoulder for whatever
    > >reason, but keep it to yourself and let others make up thier own
    > >minds, based on the facts and not something you just made up.

    >
    > Facts:
    > - I've successfully run my own mail server on a static IP for around 3
    > years;
    > - recently I have had failed email to and from optusnet.com.au and
    > westnet.com.au domains
    > - my ISP fought with SORBS to delist my static IP [along with many other
    > staic IPs]
    > - SORBS relisted my block and my ISP had to fight again....


    some more facts:

    - you were too lazy to bother having correctly configured DNS for around 3 years.
    - you think this justifies whining in public


    > Final fact:
    > - I gave up on not needing nor requiring an rDNS setup.... I now have
    > it, perhaps my SORBS problems are over, but I won't hold my breath.


    final fact: you finally got off your arse and configured DNS as you should
    have done over 3 years ago.


    the only people i ever see whining about SORBS (or most other RBL/DUL
    services) are a) spammers, b) incompetents, c) lazy slobs, and d)
    self-centred jerks who think that their desire to operate a dinky little
    mail server somehow requires all other mail server operators to receive
    millions of spams and viruses just on the off-chance that they might one
    day want to send them an email.


    craig

    --
    craig sanders (part time cyborg)


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  13. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Wednesday 26 July 2006 15:38, Craig Sanders wrote:

    > the only people i ever see whining about SORBS (or most other RBL/DUL
    > services) are a) spammers, b) incompetents, c) lazy slobs, and d)
    > self-centred jerks who think that their desire to operate a dinky little
    > mail server somehow requires all other mail server operators to receive
    > millions of spams and viruses just on the off-chance that they might one
    > day want to send them an email.


    SORBS throws the baby out with the bathwater. If you want to use something
    more precise, try bl.spamcop.net or bl.ursine.ca.

    --
    Paul Johnson
    Email and IM (XMPP & Google Talk): baloo@ursine.ca
    Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQBEyAZ5tFWT6GUYO7QRAoIbAJ0VOgi+PB5HbPLUyBOPGn ezPSCfbACdF20t
    gb9FXQcP6og9/GGImWYKDlU=
    =2ZV+
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  14. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Wednesday 26 July 2006 18:00, Micah Anderson wrote:
    > gpgkeys: HTTP fetch error 7: couldn't connect: eof
    >
    > Paul Johnson wrote:
    > > On Wednesday 26 July 2006 15:38, Craig Sanders wrote:
    > >> the only people i ever see whining about SORBS (or most other RBL/DUL
    > >> services) are a) spammers, b) incompetents, c) lazy slobs, and d)
    > >> self-centred jerks who think that their desire to operate a dinky little
    > >> mail server somehow requires all other mail server operators to receive
    > >> millions of spams and viruses just on the off-chance that they might one
    > >> day want to send them an email.

    > >
    > > SORBS throws the baby out with the bathwater. If you want to use
    > > something more precise, try bl.spamcop.net or bl.ursine.ca.

    >
    > You have to be kidding, you recommend spamcop's blacklist over sorbs?


    Yes, because they have a clear criteria for listing and delisting.

    > In Spamcop's own words:
    >
    > This blocking list is somewhat experimental and should not be used
    > in a production environment where legitimate email must be delivered. It
    > is growing more stable and is used by many large sites now. However,
    > SpamCop is aggressive and often errs on the side of blocking mail -
    > users should be warned and given information about how their mail is
    > filtered.


    That doesn't mean it doesn't help as a 4xx rejection.

    --
    Paul Johnson
    Email and IM (XMPP & Google Talk): baloo@ursine.ca
    Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQBEyBDmtFWT6GUYO7QRAi+QAJwIiSj+ulUcQd3qwY/qqOAFcQi1iACaAv0K
    CHGS2s88lXnwGvtlHYjQiB8=
    =OfdE
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  15. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    Paul Johnson wrote:
    > On Wednesday 26 July 2006 15:38, Craig Sanders wrote:
    >
    >> the only people i ever see whining about SORBS (or most other RBL/DUL
    >> services) are a) spammers, b) incompetents, c) lazy slobs, and d)
    >> self-centred jerks who think that their desire to operate a dinky little
    >> mail server somehow requires all other mail server operators to receive
    >> millions of spams and viruses just on the off-chance that they might one
    >> day want to send them an email.

    >
    > SORBS throws the baby out with the bathwater. If you want to use something
    > more precise, try bl.spamcop.net or bl.ursine.ca.
    >


    You have to be kidding, you recommend spamcop's blacklist over sorbs?

    In Spamcop's own words:

    This blocking list is somewhat experimental and should not be used
    in a production environment where legitimate email must be delivered. It
    is growing more stable and is used by many large sites now. However,
    SpamCop is aggressive and often errs on the side of blocking mail -
    users should be warned and given information about how their mail is
    filtered.

    The "solution" which Spamcop imposes is worse than the problem they are
    trying to solve: by one estimate[1], Spamcop often blocks 10,000
    legitimate emails for each actual spam it stops.

    1. http://jhoward.fastmail.fm/spamcop.html

    micah
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFEyA/29n4qXRzy1ioRAl1IAKCSH+FgnwN0z8qiehgakiCn0xQnPACcD vMU
    qHqqgSlmPW60BxipTJrG/fI=
    =0xFl
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  16. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 08:30:49AM +0800, Shane Chrisp wrote:
    > > > None of these are true (at least no one making these claims has
    > > > bothered to provide evidence).

    > >
    > > I'm under NDA about that situation still. Don't construe being
    > > legally unable to share as a lack of evidence.

    >
    > This only looks like another way of saying I dont have any evidence to
    > offer so im gonna give another bull**** story.


    it is. God spoke to me and told me it was, and so did the aliens.
    unfortunately, i'm under an NDA and can't provide any proof of these
    conversations. but they happened. really and truly they did.

    craig

    --
    craig sanders (part time cyborg)


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  17. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 05:19:02PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
    > On Wednesday 26 July 2006 15:38, Craig Sanders wrote:
    >
    > > the only people i ever see whining about SORBS (or most other
    > > RBL/DUL services) are a) spammers, b) incompetents, c) lazy slobs,
    > > and d) self-centred jerks who think that their desire to operate
    > > a dinky little mail server somehow requires all other mail server
    > > operators to receive millions of spams and viruses just on the
    > > off-chance that they might one day want to send them an email.

    >
    > SORBS throws the baby out with the bathwater.


    i keep seeing this claim, or variants of it, but i've seen no evidence
    whatsoever to support it. i've been using SORBS DUL for several years
    now (I don't use the main SORBS RBL because i don't approve of their
    de-listing policy - in particular, the charity donation) and in my
    experience it has a remarkably low false-positive rate.


    (BTW, note that while i don't approve of the SORBS RBL de-listing
    policy, i don't in any way dispute their right to have whatever policies
    they like. it's their opinion, their list, they can do what they like
    with it. but i choose not to use it).

    > If you want to use something more precise, try bl.spamcop.net or
    > bl.ursine.ca.


    i wouldn't ever use spamcop - their automation is broken to the point
    of being moronic. i've seen way too many legitimate mailing lists end
    up blocked by them because some idiot (who *DID* subscribe in the first
    place) is too lazy to read & follow the how-to-unsub instructions at the
    bottom of each message.

    never heard of bl.ursine.ca. if it has DUL entries that SORBS doesn't,
    it might be worth checking out but i dont see any point using a DUL that
    has less than SORBS (IMO, it is woefully incomplete - there are a lot
    more dynamic addresses which should be listed but aren't yet).


    craig

    --
    craig sanders (part time cyborg)


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  18. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    Oh and FastMail is SPAMCOPS COMPETITION. By definition they can NOT be
    objective. On that very page they make mention of the fact they're trying
    to develop a competing system.

    --On July 26, 2006 9:00:47 PM -0400 Micah Anderson wrote:

    > http://jhoward.fastmail.fm/spamcop.html




    --
    Michael Loftis
    Modwest Operations Manager
    Powerful, Affordable Web Hosting


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  19. Re: NEVER USE SORBS



    --On July 26, 2006 5:19:02 PM -0700 Paul Johnson wrote:

    > On Wednesday 26 July 2006 15:38, Craig Sanders wrote:
    >
    >> the only people i ever see whining about SORBS (or most other RBL/DUL
    >> services) are a) spammers, b) incompetents, c) lazy slobs, and d)
    >> self-centred jerks who think that their desire to operate a dinky little
    >> mail server somehow requires all other mail server operators to receive
    >> millions of spams and viruses just on the off-chance that they might one
    >> day want to send them an email.

    >
    > SORBS throws the baby out with the bathwater. If you want to use
    > something more precise, try bl.spamcop.net or bl.ursine.ca.


    Never heard of the latter, but we do make front-line-use of the former
    (SpamCop) with great success. Very very low false positive rate and very
    high stop rate. It's also completely automated. Listings are within a two
    day timeframe so if you're not a SPAM source, and jsut temprarily had a bad
    few hours, you might get on the list, and competent admins who are just
    using SC to 4xx (tempfail) mail will receive your mail a few hours later
    after you're delisted.


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  20. Re: NEVER USE SORBS



    --On July 26, 2006 9:00:47 PM -0400 Micah Anderson wrote:


    >
    > The "solution" which Spamcop imposes is worse than the problem they are
    > trying to solve: by one estimate[1], Spamcop often blocks 10,000
    > legitimate emails for each actual spam it stops.


    Empirically *false*. We block thousands upon thousands of hosts daily
    based on SC's BL. The false positive rate is definitively less than 1% in
    practice.

    >
    > 1. http://jhoward.fastmail.fm/spamcop.html




    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 ... LastLast