On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 13:48:13 +0200 Reindl Harald wrote: > Am 08.06.2016 um 13:29 schrieb RW: > > On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 20:30:32 +0200 > > Reindl Harald wrote: > > > > > >>>> it is *plain wrong* doing *any* deep header tests on received > >>>> headers and you will *never* achieve enough to outweight the > >>>> fallout of hit innocent victims > >>> > >>> they're blocks of static addresses > >> > >> surely since "CSS lists both IPv4 addresses (/32) and IPv6 > >> addresses (/64)" and /32 is not a block but a single IP? > > > > It doesn't really matter whether the list internally uses addresses > > or address blocks, the important thing is that they aren't dynamic > > pool addresses. > > i know that CSS is not a dial-up list > that's why PBL exists > > but that don't mean when my machine is hacked, sending snowshoe spam > and it *has* a dynamic IP that it don't get listed at > css.spamhaus.org for that reason > > one hour later you or anybody else could end in get the very same IP
No, because they aren't addresses from dynamic pools.
