Jerry put forth on 4/11/2011 4:39 PM: > On Mon, 11 Apr 2011 15:43:09 -0500 > Stan Hoeppner <s...@hardwarefreak.com> articulated: > >> pf at alt-ctrl-del.org put forth on 4/10/2011 10:33 PM: >> >>> My thought on auto combating this is to use a CIDR list to kick >>> these networks (and only these networks) over to a greylist policy >>> that delays these emails for 4+ hours. By then, most of the bad IPs >>> would be listed in one or more RBL and be blocked. >>> >>> So, has anyone else already done something like this? >> >> Why bother with this complex greylisting setup? Simply hammer the big >> blocks with a CIDR entry and whitelist individual IPs in the range >> from which you need legit mail. If such IPs are used to send both >> snowshoe spam and ham, that's a human shield tactic, and deserves >> permanent blocking, FOREVER. If anyone complains, lay the full >> skinny on them as to why. I.e. lay the blame at the proper feet, and >> direct complaints at the guilty. >> >> Life is too short to waste _your_ valuable time playing whack-a-mole >> with spammers, isn't it? We don't live in a totally "collateral >> damage free" world. People must get used to this. > > Unless of course you get hit with a law suit.
Anyone can file suit against anyone in the US for anything. These are classified as "frivolous" lawsuits, and most are tossed after the initial dismissal request by the defense attorney, if not simply rejected by the court clerk for not meeting some basic requirement. Have you heard of a case of an SMTP sender suing an SMTP receiver for message rejection, and winning the case? Something like this would echo through the tech press, and I've heard nothing. AFAIK, "my server, my rules" is the "law of the land" in this regard. There is no actual law (in the US) that covers SMTP mail, with the exception of CAN-SPAM. AFAIK, CAN-SPAM places no such burden on receivers. -- Stan
