Don't need to, it already works well here ;-)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Blackstone" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Exchange Discussions'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 2:11 PM
Subject: RE: RBL's


> Lets talk about something else like making it illegal to smoke in
> restaurants or bars....
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy David [mailto:davida@;vss.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 9:45 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: RBL's
>
>
> Caution: Thread is hot.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff@;messageone.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:47 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: RBL's
>
>
> At no time have I said that companies can't choose to implement RBLs;
simply
> that they should be cognizant of the complete ramifications of the
> technology. Obtaining this level of understanding is a much better example
> of risk management than some theoretical defense against a "risk" which
> appears to have no foundation in reality.
>
> Please don't use the McDonalds lawsuit as some type of example of the
legal
> system gone bezerk. If you actually understood the history of the case,
> you'd find that the judgment itself was well within the bounds of reason,
> even if the monetary damages awarded appear to be a bit shocking.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Finch Brett [mailto:brett.finch@;hrs.ualberta.ca]
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 1:31 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> >
> >  Can you say 'risk management'. If someone can drive up to a window,
> > order a coffee then take the lid off, drive over a speed bump and sue
> > someone else,
> > anything is possible :)
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff@;messageone.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 21:20
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: RBL's
> >
> >
> > I've never heard of a single instance where a lawsuit was initiated
> > against an organization based on incoming *spam*. Can you point to
> > one? I can point
> > to deals which didn't get done because of RBLs which resulted in real
> > monetary loss, which would seem to make one more likely than the other
> > unless you can point to a court case I'm not aware of.
> >
> > Matt's "client side" could technically be much different from a normal
> > organization since his firm provides hosting to businesses (clients)
> > who have their own users (another type of client). There are plenty of
> > examples of server based filtering based on individual user settings
> > which could potentially meet his objective and address your objection.
> > Most of those solutions are poorly done IMNSHO.
> >
> > RBLs in general aren't content filtering solutions, they are
> > connection filtering solutions. While they may at some level achieve
> > similar results, their objectives are actually quite different.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Finch Brett [mailto:brett.finch@;hrs.ualberta.ca]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 4:46 PM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > >
> > >  I've watched this thread for a while. I don't buy the argument that
> > > a ten million deal will fail because of a bounced email via RBL.
> > > It's just as likely that a dept. with predominant females could sue
> > > for fifteen million for sexual harassment in the fact the company
> > > with the ten million dollar deal didn't take reasonable steps to
> > > protect them from this spam. There also seems to be no argument
> > > about the value of email in the workplace and that a business may
> > > find they loose a ten thousand dollar deal but save fifteen thousand
> > > in the fact their people are actually doing what they were
> > hired
> > > to
> > > do (as mentioned in other posts bandwidth costs, storage costs as
> > > well). As for the per client configuration, that works until they
> > > start adding
> > their
> > > contacts to the junk list or they log into a Terminal Server or via
> > > wireless with a PDA. We also don't hire people based on their skills
> > > to manage their
> > > email. Finding a moderate RBL with reasonable rules and sending a nice
> > > e-mail back to a would be spammer seems to work as well as anything.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Matt Natkin [mailto:mnatkin@;natco-inc.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 11:49
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: RBL's
> > >
> > >
> > > Very true..We have hosted exchange for business and we get the sh-t
> > > spammed out of us. But we do not block any email! That may change as
> > > our customers are complaining bitterly. The best solution we would
> > > like is a filter on the client side and not the server side. MacAfee
> > > spam kill product looks
> > nice
> > > but I do not know if it can talk to Exchange server. (not POP) I
> > > just
> > felt
> > > we started something ugly on this list!!:)  Wanted to clarify why we
> > were
> > > interested.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff@;messageone.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 11:35 AM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: RBL's
> > >
> > >
> > > And in general, the business needs of a firm providing free web
> > > based e-mail, vs. the business needs of a Fortune 500 company are a
> > > tad different. So are the usage patterns and a host of other
> > > factors. My only comment about RBLs as it related to your question
> > > (not being defensive, just
> > reiterating
> > > for those who might have lost track) was that I hoped Microsoft
> > > would
> > not
> > > integrate RBL functionality directly into the Exchange product
> > > because I felt that such solutions were best left to 3rd party
> > > vendors... and then proceeded to mention a couple of reasons why I
> > > thought this to be true.
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Matt Natkin [mailto:mnatkin@;natco-inc.com]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 9:36 AM
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > >
> > > > I originally questioned about RBL's for exchange because we host a
> > > > large .com whose main stay of business is free web based email.
> > > > They have 100k plus users and get spammed to death. We have
> > > > content filtering tools, we can blacklist known spammers, and we
> > > > can even shut down ip's at the router. They still get spammed to
> > > > death hurting their service. Customers complain. The owner of this
> > > > .com asked us to use spamcop. Since enlisting spam cop 100's of
> > > > thousands emails are now refused a day!! All of the users were
> > > > notified of the use of spamcop and were told to report
> > > any
> > > > emails that should have gotten thru. It has been 3 months now and
> > > > one reported email that should have gotten thru did not. Our
> > > > customer is happy, his users are happy and we spend a lot less
> > > > time tracking spammers. Our servers are happy, our sans are happy,
> > > > I'm happy. Oh our bandwidth is happy also!!
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Erik Sojka [mailto:esojka@;NBME.org]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 9:50 AM
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject: RE: RBL's
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "You following remark ... Seems to say" ?
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: William Lefkovics [mailto:william@;techsanctuary.org]
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 2:26 AM
> > > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > > Subject: RE: RBL's
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > "depsite it's poor grammar" ?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > [mailto:bounce-exchange-104116@;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Walsh,
> > > > > Ric
> > > > > Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 11:52 AM
> > > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > > Subject: RE: RBL's
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 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
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > > > 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]
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --
> The information contained in this email message is privileged and
> confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or
> entity to whom it is addressed.  If the reader of this message is not the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you have
> received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler
> Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message.  Thank you.
>
>
============================================================================
> ==
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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]

Reply via email to