On 17/03/09 6:41 AM, "LuKreme" <krem...@kreme.com> wrote: > On 17-Mar-2009, at 03:08, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: >> I still think it's much better to report them to habeas for >> spamming... > > Why? My time is valuable, and I don't have any interest in being an > unpaid volunteer for a commercial service.
Well, to each his own. I have spent a lot of time reporting spam in my life, (probably too much), in actual fact. My thinking in reporting spam to DNSBLs (I am or was in the top 10 reporters at Phishtank & URIBL, high on the board at Netcraft, and have an ROKSO listing based upon the data I provided), accreditation services, and the spammers hosting is that it makes life more difficult for the bad guys. If you don't want to help us, that's fine, but helping the email ecosystem is always a good thing. > If they want their service to be > of any value, they need to be far more vigilant. As it stands now, > habeas is a pretty reliable spam indicator. Habeas cannot be more vigilant since they do not exist, Return Path has begun to, and will be. Once the Safelist IPs are migrated to our systems, and we have pressed down on obvious things (I have done some preliminary work with the legacy systems but they are not set up to do programme compliance and the work is extremely laborious and inaccurate to a degree), we will begin a process of auditing the whole lot of them, as well as our existing certified customers. That's about 800 of them. These are not placating platitudes; again, we take this seriously. Without our receiving partners, our product becomes valueless. This is a point recognized and acknowledged all the way to the top of the company, and unlike Habeas, I do not report to Sales. That's not how we roll. -- Neil Schwartzman Director, Accreditation Security & Standards Certified | Safelist Return Path Inc. 0142002038
