The libspf/libsrs vs. libspf2/libsrs2 controversy - Linux

This is a discussion on The libspf/libsrs vs. libspf2/libsrs2 controversy - Linux ; Hi, After i sent the below email to the Developers of libspf , the email server of Meng Weng Wong from pobox.com responded with a interesting but also strange error message : delivery 29415: failure:207.106.133.15_does_not_like_recipient./ Remote_host_said:_554_ :_Recipient_address_rejected:_broadband/ _returned_deny:_161-98.mxp.dsl.internl.net_looks_like_a_consumer_broad band_machine/ Giving_up_on_207.106.133.15./ ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: The libspf/libsrs vs. libspf2/libsrs2 controversy

  1. The libspf/libsrs vs. libspf2/libsrs2 controversy


    Hi,

    After i sent the below email to the Developers of libspf , the email
    server of Meng Weng Wong from pobox.com responded with a interesting but
    also strange error message :

    delivery 29415:
    failure:207.106.133.15_does_not_like_recipient./
    Remote_host_said:_554_:_Recipient_address_rejected:_broadband/
    _returned_deny:_161-98.mxp.dsl.internl.net_looks_like_a_consumer_broad band_machine/
    Giving_up_on_207.106.133.15./

    So today anti-spam efforts go as far as to reject email because the
    sending email server is using a "consumer_broadband_machine" ip-number. If
    that is all what anti-spam is about, then the true agenda of anti-spam
    guru's has been exposed : Make email a costly service, censure certain
    people's email from the internet using misty anti-spam rules, and in the
    end allow the old phart rulers to take over the Internet, go back to
    pre-Internet ages and resume business as usual.

    Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 00:04:33 +0200 (CEST)
    From: Robert M. Stockmann
    To: root@teddy.ch
    Cc: Patrick Earl ,
    Sean Comeau ,
    Matthias Ruttmann ,
    Rob McMahon ,
    Meng Weng Wong
    Subject: The libspf/libsrs vs. libspf2/libsrs2 controversy

    Hello Dominik Mahrer,

    I am a little confused about the SPF/SRS and SPF2/SRS2 competition.
    libspf-1.0.0-RC6/AUTHORS lists the following active developers :

    "Active developers:
    ------------------

    James Couzens ..........
    Michael Weiner .........
    Teddy ..................
    Travis Anderson ........ "

    I assume you are teddy@codeshare.ca as you support libspf on

    http://www.teddy.ch/libspf/

    and started your own company teddy.ch. If that is the case, i have a
    couple of questions for you.

    1. there seems to be some controversy which
    libraries to use :
    libspf or libspf2
    libsrs or libsrs2

    2. Do you have a working libsrs (the original James Couzens implementation),
    and also the qmail and sendmail MTA patches for this?

    From the FreeBSD ports i downloaded libsrs.0.3.beta.tar.bz2 which
    clearly is designed and written for performance, where the spf2 and
    srs2 crowd clearly is tailored around the Perl::Whatever:Plugin
    culture. For email and a sound MTA server i detest such Perl::XYZ
    solutions.

    In fact Larry Wall's Perl is absolutely 100% orthogonal in contradiction
    of what the UNIX Linux philosophy stands for. What the secret agenda is
    behind the zealous promotion of Perl on UNIX/Linux I today have some
    well funded explanations, who clearly point to the objective to
    have the UNIX/Linux platform migrated in a below average platform, both
    in performance and scalability.

    Qmail is one of the MTA's out there who still stick to the old diehard
    UNIX philosophy, of building a complex service out of a number of
    separate but fast programs in the C programming language. That's what
    UNIX is : the blinding fast execution of complicated tasks using a
    chain of many small fast and rock-solid programs.

    From libsrs.3/TODO we read :

    "libsrs v0.3 beta
    (c) 2004 James Couzens

    TODO:
    - MTA patches
    -- Qmail 99% done
    -- Sendmail 50% done
    -- Exim3 0%
    -- Exim4 0%
    -- Postfix 0%
    -- Courier 0%
    -- Autoconf this library - someone with experience please do this!
    Would be nice to use configure and have it build proper make files
    for BSD/Linux etc..

    - OTHER
    -- Get this to compile in solaris "

    Currently it seems that www.libsrs.org is offline and also
    codeshare.ca. Luckily we now have
    http://libspf.userfriendly.net/. But still I'm in the dark where the
    qmail MTA patch for James Couzens version of libsrs can be downloaded.

    I found somewhere on a obscure ftp server this patch :
    qmail-srs-0.3.patch which obviously is to used together with
    libsrs.0.3.beta.tar.bz2 . But when inspecting this patch it seems to
    link with -lsrs2 instead of -lsrs

    qmail-srs-0.3.patch :

    "INSTALL INSTRUCTIONS

    1) Download and install libsrs2 from http://www.libsrs2.org/download.html

    2) Apply this patch

    tar -xzf /path/to/qmail-1.03.tar.gz
    cd qmail-1.03
    patch -p1 < qmail-srs-0.2.patch "

    Then again it seems there's a lot of cash to be made with SPF/SRS as
    besides aol.com now also gmail.com is implementing spf1 records inside
    its DNS.

    I somehow have the impression that the libspf2/libsrs2 crowd is
    seriously trying to eat you guys lunch/diner and mortgage for the house
    with this. And from what i am seeing they are actually are getting away
    with that. This needs to be stopped.

    Certainly as James Couzens has been the True pioneer for the SPF DNS
    record anti-spam solution. See the news article collections on
    http://libspf.userfriendly.net/, [1][2][3][4].

    Thanks,
    Best Regards,

    Yours Sincerely,

    Robert M. Stockmann
    PS.
    [1] "Spoofed From: Prevention"
    Posted by timothy on Sun Oct 05, 2003 09:18 PM
    http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?s...00&mode=thread

    [2] "SPF Design Frozen"
    Posted by timothy on Tue Dec 16, 2003 12:29 AM
    http://developers.slashdot.org/artic...43&mode=thread

    [3] "AOL Now Publishing SPF Records"
    Posted by CowboyNeal on Fri Jan 09, 2004 05:03 AM
    http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?si...34&mode=thread

    [4] "AOL Tests Sender Permitted From / E-mail Caller ID"
    Posted by timothy on Sun Jan 25, 2004 10:22 PM
    http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?s...27&mode=thread
    --
    Robert M. Stockmann - RHCE
    Network Engineer - UNIX/Linux Specialist
    crashrecovery.org stock@stokkie.net


  2. Re: The libspf/libsrs vs. libspf2/libsrs2 controversy

    Robert M. Stockmann wrote:
    >
    > Hi,
    >
    > After i sent the below email to the Developers of libspf , the email
    > server of Meng Weng Wong from pobox.com responded with a interesting but
    > also strange error message :
    >
    > delivery 29415:
    > failure:207.106.133.15_does_not_like_recipient./
    > Remote_host_said:_554_:_Recipient_address_rejected:_broadband/
    > _returned_deny:_161-98.mxp.dsl.internl.net_looks_like_a_consumer_broad band_machine/
    > Giving_up_on_207.106.133.15./
    >
    > So today anti-spam efforts go as far as to reject email because the
    > sending email server is using a "consumer_broadband_machine" ip-number. If
    > that is all what anti-spam is about, then the true agenda of anti-spam
    > guru's has been exposed : Make email a costly service, censure certain
    > people's email from the internet using misty anti-spam rules, and in the
    > end allow the old phart rulers to take over the Internet, go back to
    > pre-Internet ages and resume business as usual.
    >


    http://www.openspf.org/blobs/sender-...whitepaper.pdf

    (Meng Weng Wong)



    If the IP address appears in the hostname, together with a
    distinctive subdomain name, lots of people will recognize
    that as a consumer-class broadband machine that should
    not send mail. Conversely business-class accounts should
    get their choice of reverse DNS naming, and the PTR
    hostname should resolve back to the actual IP.



  3. Re: The libspf/libsrs vs. libspf2/libsrs2 controversy

    ____/ [H]omer on Wednesday 17 October 2007 00:46 : \____

    > Verily I say unto thee, that Robert M. Stockmann spake thusly:
    >
    >> So today anti-spam efforts go as far as to reject email because the
    >> sending email server is using a "consumer_broadband_machine"
    >> ip-number. If that is all what anti-spam is about, then the true
    >> agenda of anti-spam guru's has been exposed : Make email a costly
    >> service, censure certain people's email from the internet using misty
    >> anti-spam rules, and in the end allow the old phart rulers to take
    >> over the Internet, go back to pre-Internet ages and resume business
    >> as usual.

    >
    > It is highly irritating when you find yourself on a blocklist, but your
    > anger is misdirected. First, it is not /you/ personally who has been
    > added to the blocklist, but your ISP's MX server, since presumably there
    > /is/ a spammer either using that server to directly transmit spam, or
    > relaying it through an open proxy. Either way, it is /right/ that this
    > server should be blocked, until the offending zombie and/or spammer is
    > kicked off. The rest of the world should not have to suffer spam just
    > because one ISP can't control its network.

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    It's almost like blaming only a mother for her crying baby. Remember that
    controlling Windows zombie can be hard when 1 in 4 Windows PCs is already
    compromised, so it's a matter of a criminal's will, not the actual
    vulnerability of a PC (there's usually a zero-day floating around anyway, so
    merely any Windows PC is up for grabs at any moment).

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    For governments that eavesdrop, here is a quick list of tags: Communism,
    Hawaiian shirts, China, Suitcase, Martha Stewart, Encryption, Prison, Stalin.
    Thanks for tuning in.

  4. Re: The libspf/libsrs vs. libspf2/libsrs2 controversy

    In article ,
    "Robert M. Stockmann" wrote:
    [things]

    Set your outgoing email to go through your ISP's SMTP server. Handle
    incoming email with your own server.

    --
    --Tim Smith

+ Reply to Thread