On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 11:11:08AM -0500, Jason Kohles wrote:
| Bascically what happened is they discovered that probing open relays
| is dangerous
Only in a political way. (just to avoid anyone asking what the harm
is or what could blow up)
| and can get you in trouble, so they stopped doing that, now they
| want everyone else to do it for them, which takes the risk off their
| shoulders and puts it on others.
It only sort of does. If you get a message from a spammer, you can
trace where it came from. If the relay is wide open, you are only
sending a single valid message through it, just like the spammer did.
You don't have the potential to cause an unintended DoS against broken
software. In addiiton, how is someone going to find you and sue you?
One problem with ORBZ (and napster, and ...) is that a single central
site was "in charge". It is easy to see a message that originated
from ORBZ is causing your (broken) software to wreak havoc, and it is
easy to point the finger at them. It is also easy because they would
repeateadly perform the scanning. If you distribute the work, then
there is no longer a central target to be attacked. Since dsbl is
passive, how would it be liable for attack?
Whether or not it will actually be effective is yet to be seen.
-D
--
A man of many companions may come to ruin,
but there is a friend that sticks closer than a brother.
Proverbs 18:24
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
