There is a bit of difference between blacklists and a DDoS against spammers
Not at all. Do you subscribe to RBLs? Have you qualified that every IP that you are blocking with a RBL query has specifically attacked your MXs?
though. Blacklists come with all sorts of caveats... knowing that there can be false positives, and that it is the responsibility of the user of the blacklist to adjust for any false positives to make sure legit correspondence goes through.
Exactly the same caveats, which we've successfully lived with, apply to Lycos-type tactics. Why can't you see the same caveats would work with DDoS attacks?
And this is a purely defensive mechanism, with no offensive components at all.
wrong. Rejecting a msg because the sending IP is RBLed but has probably not done any harm to you or your clients is pre-emptive offensive ACT you are taking based on somebody(ies) else's decision about that IP.
I still don't believe in the nature of this tactic, which I believe to be unethical and unlawful (just like fax blasting someone who spams you has proven to be)
What you fail to see is that THERE ARE NO LAWS/LAW ENFORCERS capable of stopping spam promoting spyware/phishing/counterfit-drugs/identity-theft websites in Russia, China, Singapore, etc., there are no laws to make you illegal and nobody to prosecute you (except the criminal spammers who "prosecuted" Lycos yesterday). Collective self-defense in the absence of protection of law, ie, vigilantism, is strictly ethical.
The only solutions are technical solutions like RBLs and, recently, DDoSing spamvertizers websites.
Len
_____________________________________________________________________ http://IMGate.MEIway.com : free anti-spam gateway, runs on 1000's of sites
To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
