On Feb 15, 2024, at 6:13 PM, Dave Crocker via mailop <[email protected]> wrote:
> Not using COI, as well as hitting spamtraps are both solid, affirmative
> indications of spam. Full stop.
Interesting, thanks. I find I disagree with the "full stop" part, but it seems
I'm in the minority.
Don't get me wrong -- lack of COI is annoying to others, and an indication of
poor list hygiene that should be fixed. And in many cases, lack of COI
obviously *is* connected to further abuse ("spam").
But in my mind, when seen by itself -- that is, when it's "some
otherwise-legitimate transactional messages are going to typoed addresses
because the unwise lack of COI" without other problems -- it's not "malicious
activities" or "spam". I think of misdirected transactional mail as being in a
separate category than, say, an open web form being abused by spammers where
they control both the recipient addresses and the message subject/contents.
The latter is the kind of thing I want an RBL to block for my users, regardless
of whether there is also a small amount of legitimate mail coming from that
form. But I generally wouldn't want to block addresses because they send some
misdirected transactional mail, unless it's being used as part of a mailbombing
amplification attack or something.
But from the responses, I'm just being naïve in expecting RBLs to treat those
differently. Thanks!
--
Robert L Mathews
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
[email protected]
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
