On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 14:57:47 -0400 - Matthew Carpenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote the following Re: Re: spam issues
I agree with you in theory but all RBL's are not equal. But what I've seen is that once on one its a bitch to get unlisted. They also get legitimate web sites in the same block as the spammer. We got RBL'd once. It was a nightmare. Ya, it was our fault, we were open for a bit but the result was that even after the block was lifted we were still blocked at many domains and had to contact them individualy. I remember it took forever to get IBM to unblock us. That is a lesson not forgotten. That is why I chose to block by domain. >RBL's are still better than SA or other filters... > >Why? Because properly selected RBL's (ie. Deterministic, easy to get off of) >actually allow you to block based on a PROBLEM! RBL's that you want to use >are Open Relay black lists and Dialup server blacklists. These are PROBLEMS >to be FIXED. They aren't attempting to look for the appropriate number of >"Free" and "XXX" in the email, which could be used in real life email. > >I have been blocked before. I used to administer a GroupWise system that was >difficult to lock down. This was before I learned about RBL's. They >rightfully flagged my server as an Open Relay (anyone can send email to >anywhere/anyone) and when I checked the server, we had a HUGE backlog of >emails which the spammers had sent to anyone and everyone. We got the server >configured correctly and then got off the RBL. It was inconvenient, but RBL's >are a real part of a good strategy against SPAM, and will be around for as >long as SPAM is around. And this is why. > _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
