On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 12:43:51 -0400
dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
> On 10/28, David F. Skoll wrote:
> > Perhaps you have heard of a recent phenomenon called "a botnet"?
> > Just what security do you think TCP really buys you?
> Requiring them to use the botnet.
In other words: No security at all.
On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 13:56:08 -0230
"Lawrence @ Rogers" wrote:
> What reporting system do you use?
Although our Perl client library is free, the server-side code is proprietary.
> and how does one avail of the data it provides?
We sell rsync access to our lists. We also provide it for free to
On 10/28, David F. Skoll wrote:
> Perhaps you have heard of a recent phenomenon called "a botnet"? Just
> what security do you think TCP really buys you?
Requiring them to use the botnet.
> And what kind of account registration do you envision that lets you
> easily register "millions" of accoun
On 28/10/2010 1:45 PM, David F. Skoll wrote:
OK,
On a somewhat less sarcastic note: One reason we didn't use TCP is that
it simply doesn't scale. If you have clients that open a TCP connection,
do a report, and then close the TCP connection, there's a huge bandwidth
penalty. On the other hand
OK,
On a somewhat less sarcastic note: One reason we didn't use TCP is that
it simply doesn't scale. If you have clients that open a TCP connection,
do a report, and then close the TCP connection, there's a huge bandwidth
penalty. On the other hand, if your clients maintain persistent TCP
conne
On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 11:19:50 -0400
dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
> Having nothing to prevent someone from registering millions of
> accounts and spewing data from a single IP is not acceptable to me.
Umm...
Perhaps you have heard of a recent phenomenon called "a botnet"? Just
what security do y
On 10/28, Dave O'Neill wrote:
> >>http://www.mimedefang.org/reputation
> You're discounting it entirely because it uses UDP? Are you sure
> you read the RFC?
>
> The sender IP address is irrelevant -- it's not used for anything at
> all. Reports are authenticated with a prearranged username and
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 02:32:17PM -0400, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
On 10/22, Henrik K wrote:
You should check out this draft:
http://www.mimedefang.org/reputation
(An IETF draft of a Reputation Reporting Protocol.)
Yup, thank you. It's interesting that the ASRG list didn't mention this.
On man 25 okt 2010 21:24:38 CEST, Dennis German wrote
Have you pulled your own data from auto-whitelist ?
or use spamcop worst spam ipranges ?
awl is usefull if one change the default mask to /32
else the ip counts will be to fussy to make anything there
--
xpoint http://www.unicom.com/pw/re
On Oct 23, 2010, at 12:31 PM, Royce Williams wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 7:31 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
>> Royce Williams wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 5:19 AM, Michael Scheidell
>>> wrote:
On 10/21/10 8:50 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
>
> I'd like to try collecting
On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 7:31 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
> Royce Williams wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 5:19 AM, Michael Scheidell
>> wrote:
>>> On 10/21/10 8:50 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
I'd like to try collecting reputation data for every IP address from
everyone willing
Royce Williams wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 5:19 AM, Michael Scheidell
> wrote:
>> On 10/21/10 8:50 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
>>>
>>> I'd like to try collecting reputation data for every IP address from
>>> everyone willing to submit it.
>
>> re-inventing the wheel.
>
> If what's be
On 10/22, m...@khonji.org wrote:
> www.ceas.cc/2006/19.pdf
On 10/22, Claude Frantz wrote:
> considered as importunate by another recipient. Therefore, an
> universally valid SPAM ranking is not possible. Further, a SPAM ranking
The high rankings in spamassassin rule QA of existing blacklist a
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 5:19 AM, Michael Scheidell
wrote:
> On 10/21/10 8:50 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
>>
>> I'd like to try collecting reputation data for every IP address from
>> everyone willing to submit it.
> re-inventing the wheel.
If what's being suggested is a non-commercial alte
On 10/21/10 8:50 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
I'd like to try collecting reputation data for every IP address from
everyone willing to submit it. Via something like spamassassin's --report
(spam) and --revoke (non-spam) functions. And then providing a list with
a percentage of non-spam (vs
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 08:50:43PM -0400, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
> I'd like to try collecting reputation data for every IP address from
> everyone willing to submit it.
You should check out this draft:
http://www.mimedefang.org/reputation
On 21.10.10 20:50, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
> I'd like to try collecting reputation data for every IP address from
> everyone willing to submit it. Via something like spamassassin's --report
> (spam) and --revoke (non-spam) functions. And then providing a list with
> a percentage of non-spam
On 10/22/2010 02:50 AM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
Or falsely reporting legit mail servers as sending large quantities of spam
in another attempt to cripple the usefulness of such a system.
I'm also interested in more ideas on how spammers could game this system,
and what could be done about
www.ceas.cc/2006/19.pdf
---
Mahmoud Khonji
-Original Message-
From: m...@khonji.org
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 01:03:54
To: ;
Reply-To: m...@khonji.org
Subject: Re: Collecting IP reputation data from many people
>I was originally thinking it would be
>most informative to provi
>I was originally thinking it would be
>most informative to provide the
>number of spams and non-spams from
>each IP over some time period.
Google has a presentation in CEAS (check ceas.cc website) that explained a very
similar approach to fight SPAM by ranking mail senders. As the presentation
I'd like to try collecting reputation data for every IP address from
everyone willing to submit it. Via something like spamassassin's --report
(spam) and --revoke (non-spam) functions. And then providing a list with
a percentage of non-spam (vs. spam) seen from every IP. And hopefully
that would
21 matches
Mail list logo
