On Wednesday, September 20, 2006 3:19 PM -0500, John Kelly wrote: > On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 15:33:05 -0500, "Seth Goodman" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Did anyone investigate the problem and make this request? > > If they're not self motivated, I have no incentive to use them.
I don't particularly want to defend these guys. I'm defending spamtrap-based DNSBL's, not any specific list. Expecting anybody to notice that a server from any friendly organization was listed is a bit much. If someone from Debian contacted them and didn't get anywhere, that would be a different story. > > Any DNSBL is subject to gaming by spammers who would like to > > curtail the use of DNSBL's in general and spamtraps in particular. > > No, not any. Just spamtrap based lists poorly administered. Spamtraps are easily manipulated for any server that sends out confirmation messages, and some lists are better than others. While I don't like the idea that a Debian server is listed anywhere, it is reasonable to expect that someone would contact the list maintainers. In the case that it is impossible to avoid sending mail to a spamtrap, as for any machine that sends confirmation messages from a web form, and the server admins are known to deal with abuse complaints, then whitelisting is appropriate. However, it is not unreasonable to expect that someone would request it. > My three step defense works fine without spamcop: > > 1) require matching DNS, forward and reverse I personally advocate this approach, although it is not strictly RFC-compliant, so some large servers won't use it. > 2) use regex tests for dynamic/dialup host names (works because #1 > strictly enforced, and thus hostname is known) Even if you don't reject on !exist(reverse)||(reverse != forward), you can still use the reverse on the IP for the regexp and reject for "local policy" when it matches. > 3a) query dynablock.njabl.org for any dynamic hosts missed by my > local checks in step 2 > > 3b) query a few GOOD, RELIABLE dnsbls: > > dnsbl.njabl.org > list.dsbl.org > sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org This is a very reasonable set of lists. I believe that dnsbl.njabl.org is a subset of xbl.spamhaus.org, so the first query is redundant (unless you are trying to limit spamhaus queries). -- Seth Goodman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
