On 18-06-08 08:21 AM, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
If you really think that rejecting email from senders that want to
optimize their costs is a good strategy....
Well, IPv6 is simply a way to make email sending cheaper. So not
supporting Ipv6 is an effective way to dump cheap sending.
I guess anyone with a good corpus can easily check that "inexpensive
ESP" are not more spammy than "fortune 500 ESP".
Someone proposed to simply add some cost to every SMTP transaction as
a way to stop the spam, some blacklist offer paid unlisting services,
too... but spammers sometimes have more money to send email than the
average user IMHO.
While this thread has gone far off the original topic..
It is sometimes important to point out that the email marketing is a
multi-billion dollar business..
The spam protection and RBL operators get very little money if any in
comparison..
They are always going to have more money to spend on finding ways to get
their email delivered, that the poor front line systems admin's and RBL
operators trying to deal with customer complaints..
So, there is the aspect that the RBL's and system admin's are going to
need cost effective ways to address this, and that is sometimes more
important than 'perfect' ways to address the issues.
IMHO, and the way most of our platforms are designed to work.. Empower
the users when you can.. but block the worst of the worst..
* Block at SMTP via RBL's that have very low false positive rates
* Try to use RBL's that allow those few false positives to be quickly
removed.
* Tag as spam via RBL's where the system admin SHOULD be addressing the
egress problem, but where the source could be a shared environment, eg a
mix of good and bad, where the bad complaints outnumber the good..
* Increase the 'score' via RBL's where it is too big to block, but the
problem users aren't being addressed by the system operators.
* Allow Users to make the final decision, eg, this is not spam/this is spam.
Anyone who says they can provide 100% accurate spam protection, is lying
to your face. In the real world, there will always be an email that one
person wants, and the other person doesn't want, so you can't argue, you
have to let the customer decide.
And while using that as feedback might seem the logical conclusion, in
the real world we still see more feedback reports from legitimate email
the customer should have wanted, vs emails tagged as spam that are spam.
Probably, because most systems doing ingress spam protection are pretty
good accurate nowadays..
But more onus has to be put on the senders networks..
Not to call anyone out, but as far as too big to block goes, those
senders have a lot more money to invest in egress filtering, and have
better optics into the behavior, than the poor guys on the receiving
end, however as history shows, the senders often don't worry about it as
much, even though they have the budgets, UNTIL it impacts legitimate
business..
And there are hosting companies out there that simply have a blind eye
towards the activity on their networks..
So SOMETIMES RBL operators and/or system admins have only one cost
effective way to address the issue, and that is to put the IP(s) and/or
networks on the 'rejection' list.. until conditions approved..
Still way too much IPv4 space is wasted by known spammer havens.. And
when it comes to IPv6, well years of reputation history can be undone in
a single moment, when you allow a whole brand new internet of 'fresh'
IP(s) to be used.. eg IPv6
Have a happy Spam Freeeeeeeeee Weekend all..
--
"Catch the Magic of Linux..."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Peddemors, President/CEO LinuxMagic Inc.
Visit us at http://www.linuxmagic.com @linuxmagic
A Wizard IT Company - For More Info http://www.wizard.ca
"LinuxMagic" a Registered TradeMark of Wizard Tower TechnoServices Ltd.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
604-682-0300 Beautiful British Columbia, Canada
This email and any electronic data contained are confidential and intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed.
Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely
those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company.
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
