As part of an overall spam strategy, implemented using an umbrella approach unseen by myself in any currently shipping content filtering software, use of RBLs as a metric in message disposition might actually be useful. Anything which attempts to categorize a gray-scale world into black and white buckets (which is what current RBL software implementations tend to do) is fundamentally flawed.
> -----Original Message----- > From: David Gibbons [mailto:David.Gibbons@;Calibercollision.com] > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 1:53 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > > Mr. Scharff, > > I do monitor the postmaster email box and have tried and tried to ease up > on the content filter but HR is HR and we provide a service to our company > no matter how flawed I feel their thinking my be on issues that they do > not fully understand. > > I thank you for this information and will pass it along in my report to > management who, by the by, think RBL is the best thing since sliced bread. > In short, there is too much room from human error and ego for RBL to be > an effective tool to block Spam as well as lack of standardization to > remove one's domain for such a list after testing and the like. Too bad, > RBL seems like a really good idea for Spam control. > > Again, I thank you for your input > David Gibbons > > > > > Hopefully this e-mail message will get through. I fear that the most > > technically useful portions of this thread may have been blocked by your > > company's overzealous content filter. If you administer the postmaster > > mailbox, I'm sure you've seen my comments on your server's filter > settings. > > > > Actually, your company's content filters provide a useful analogy to the > RBL > > situation. In the case of your content filters, no matter how crappy > they > > are, you've decided to implement them in the manner you currently find > them. > > You can further refine the criteria you use for filtering messages as > you > > choose. > > > > When you choose to use an RBL, you are subject to the criteria that some > > random entity has decided is appropriate to filter messages bound for > your > > domain. There's no guarantee that the RBL you are using isn't run by > some > > zealot who cares more about making statements than blocking spam. And > when > > his interests and those of your business collide, it is likely your > business > > will be the one to suffer. I am aware of too many examples of legitimate > > mail being blocked by numerous RBLs. Look at your typical Domain Hosting > > Provider, they put 200 domains on the same server and spread them over > 10 > > IPs. 10 domains per IP... 1 loser spammer on the IP you share with 9 > other > > folks and suddenly you are unable to send mails to the vendor you'd like > to > > spend $10 million with. Wonder if any other vendors want your money. > > > > As to links... the SPEWS FAQ http://www.spews.org/faq.html is a great > place > > to start. > > > > Q41: How does one contact SPEWS? > > A41: One does not. SPEWS does not receive email - it's just an automated > > system and website, general blocklist related issues can be discussed in > the > > public forums mentioned above. The newsgroup news.admin.net-abuse.email > > (NANAE) is a good choice, and Google makes it quite easy to post > messages > > there via the Web as M@ilGate does via email. First time newsgroup > posters > > should read the NANAE FAQ. Note that posting messages in these > newsgroups & > > lists will not have any effect on SPEWS listings, only the > discontinuation > > of spam and/or spam support will. Be aware that posting ones email > address > > to any publicly viewable forum or website makes it instantly available > to > > spammers. If you're concerned about getting spammed, change or "mung" > the > > email address you use to post with. > > Q42: My IP address/range is being listed by SPEWS but I'm not a spammer > and > > I just signed up for this/these address(s). What can I do to be removed > from > > the list? > > A42: SPEWS is just an automated system, if spam or spam involvement > (hosting > > spammers, selling spamware) from your IP address/range ceases, it will > drop > > out of the list in time. Normally the listing involves spam related > problems > > with your host and the first step you need to take is to complain to > them > > about the listing, in almost all cases, they are the only people who can > get > > an address/range out of the SPEWS list. If there is a spam related > problem > > with your host, their IP address/range will not be removed until it is > > resolved. If your host or network is certain a listing mistake has been > > made, ask them to read this FAQ then post a message in a public forum > > mentioned above with the SPEWS record number (eg. S123) and/or the IP > > address/range information in it. Placing the text "SPEWS:" in the > subject > > can help a SPEWS editor or developer see the message and they may double > > check the listing - note that, although others may, no SPEWS editor or > > developer will ever reply to the posting. Will this get your IP > > address/range removed from a SPEWS listing? Again, not if there are > > currently spam related problems with your host. Be aware that posting > ones > > email address to any publicly viewable forum or website makes it > instantly > > available to spammers. If you're concerned about getting spammed, change > or > > "mung" the email address you use to post with. > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: David Gibbons [mailto:David.Gibbons@;Calibercollision.com] > > > Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 5:52 PM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > > > > Mr. Scharff, > > > > > > I understand that you're currently a bit jaded with this topic (or you > > > could be enjoying yourself not sure... The email intonation module on > my > > > pc is broken *grin*). But, would you mind taking a moment to explain > or > > > send links to previous explanations as to why RBL is not a good idea? > > > With the research that I have conducted I cannot find any serious > issues > > > with it. Of course I'm missing quite a lot of first hand knowledge > with > > > this technology since I have yet to incorporate within my test > > > environment. > > > > > > I fear that I might be apart of that 32% your talking about and wish > to... > > > um... well... *shrug* not be. > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the input! > > > David > > > > > > > Perhaps you should read your e-mails before you send them. Just > cause > > > > you wrote something down and it sounds one way in your head doesn't > > > > meant that it will sound the same way on the other end. > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > [mailto:bounce-exchange-97309@;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Chris > Scharff > > > > Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 1:02 PM > > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > > Subject: RE: RBL's > > > > > > > > > > > > I guess the #include humor.h module wasn't loaded for you this > morning. > > > > I'd suggest that the spelling remark was only rude to a subset of > the > > > > 32% of admins who actually could spell RBL and thus understood the > barb. > > > > As a journalism major, with an English minor I am quite concerned > about > > > > any grammatical errors I might have made in the comment you are > > > > referring to. Would you please be so kind as to point out my grammar > > > > errors so that I might endeavor to eliminate them from my future > > > > postings? > > > > > > > > Now, as to your point that my statement that of the 32% of mail > > > > administrators who can spell RBL many are unable to comprehend the > > > > implications of it: I've made more than 8,000 replies in various > public > > > > forums in the last 12 months. I've read over 50,000 threads during > that > > > > same period. It's been a relatively slow year for me, but even if we > > > > take those low water numbers back 4 years it's still a fairly > > > > substantial number of administrators and posts that I've > encountered. > > > > Based on that vast experience with and exposure to mail > administrators > > > > around the world, I find it highly likely that 16% or more of mail > > > > administrators don't understand fully the implications of the RBL > > > > technology they are using and or advocating. > > > > > > > > It has nothing to do with being smart or dumb. It has to do with > being > > > > knowledgeable about a particular issue or technology. My comments > were > > > > not directed at any particular individual user on this list and were > > > > more accurately a diatribe against the technology than those who > choose > > > > to implement it. I'm sorry you chose to misinterpret my comments. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Walsh, Ric [mailto:Walshr@;national-citymortgage.com] > > > > > Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 1:52 PM > > > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > > > > > > > > Ok your "spelling" remark was rude to all of us. > > > > > > > > > > You following remark despite it's poor grammar seems to say that > the > > > > > rest of us are dumber that you. I'd have to say that it was ALL > rude. > > > > > > > > > > Ric Walsh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Walsh, Ric > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 10:32 AM > > > > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > > > > Subject: RE: RBL's > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok what makes you such a wizard? Also add the word rude to that. > > > > > > Have > > > > > you > > > > > > though of taking an anger management class? > > > > > > > > > > > > Ric Walsh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: Chris Scharff [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 5:22 PM > > > > > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > > > > > Subject: RE: RBL's > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd guess 68% or more of mail admins are unable to even spell > RBL. > > > > > > > > > > > The majority of the remainder is unable to comprehend the > > > > > > > implications of > > > > > > the > > > > > > > functionality on their environment, whether they understand > how it > > > > > > > > > > > actually works or not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > From: William Lefkovics [mailto:william@;techsanctuary.org] > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 4:16 PM > > > > > > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: RBL's > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's a little harsh. (I love it when you're harsh...) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean they are not aware of it, or they are unable to > > > > > > > > comprehend its functionality? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > William > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > [mailto:bounce-exchange-104116@;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of > Chris > > > > > > > > Scharff > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 1:49 PM > > > > > > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: RBL's > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 97.25% of mail admins are too stupid to understand what an > RBL > > > > > > > > actually is/does. I for one hope they continue to rely on > 3rd > > > > > > > > parties to provide the functionality, otherwise I'll likely > have > > > > > > > > > > > > to join you in phoning stupid admins to tell them why RBL > $foo > > > > > > > > is costing their company business. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Chris Scharff, MVP MCSE > > > > > > > > EMS Sales Engineer > > > > > > > > MessageOne > > > > > > > > 512.652.4500 x-244 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > From: Darcy Adams [mailto:Darcy.Adams@;gettyimages.com] > > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 3:42 PM > > > > > > > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: RBL's > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Still 3rd party. I was at a meeting at MS on Monday night > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > the current stance on that is that they're "thinking about > > > > > > > > > possibly" including RBL support in a future release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Darcy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > From: Matt Natkin [mailto:mnatkin@;natco-inc.com] > > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 1:50 PM > > > > > > > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > > > > > > > Subject: RBL's > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey does exchange 2k have a rbl feature or is this 3rd > party? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > > > List posting FAQ: > > > > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > > > > > > > Archives: > > > > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > > > > > > > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > > > List posting FAQ: > > > > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > > > > > > > Archives: > > > > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > > > > > > > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > > List posting FAQ: > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > > > > > > Archives: > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > > > > > > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > > > > > > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > List posting FAQ: > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > > > > > Archives: > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > > > > > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > > > > > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > > > > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > > > > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > > > > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > > > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > > > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > > > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
