On Sun, 2009-05-31 at 14:39 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
On 29-May-2009, at 07:32, Andy Dorman wrote:
1. I could not find out WHY our IPs (we have a block of 32 for the
cluster of servers that my email was being sent from) were being
listed
I do have to add this would be a lie. A call to
BUZZHOST_STINGER wrote:
On Sun, 2009-05-31 at 14:39 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
On 29-May-2009, at 07:32, Andy Dorman wrote:
1. I could not find out WHY our IPs (we have a block of 32 for the
cluster of servers that my email was being sent from) were being
listed
I do have to add this would be
[mailto:neil.schwartz...@returnpath.net]
Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2009 11:58 AM
To: Bob O'Brien; Spamassassin
Subject: Re: Barracuda Blacklist
On 29/05/09 4:09 PM, Bob O'Brien bobr...@barracuda.com wrote:
Neil,
Based on our Requests for Removal filed over the past 3+ weeks from
ReturnPath, the number
ANTICOM-STINGER a écrit :
On Fri, 2009-05-29 at 12:16 -0600, J.D. Falk wrote:
Rob McEwen wrote:
Additionally, I'd like to ask, other than being a superb cash-generating
machine, what good is a whitelist built upon pay-to-enter and NOT based
on editorial decisions made by non-biased e-mail
Actually, Richard, yes - I have management approval for what details I choose
to share with any given online community. I am also learning to count Jann
among my friends, and I'm sure he would *appropriately* acknowledge your
greeting.
If your participation is at all typical of this
On Tue, 2009-06-02 at 13:40 -0700, Bob O'Brien wrote:
Actually, Richard, yes - I have management approval for what details I
choose to share with any given online community. I am also learning
to count Jann among my friends, and I'm sure he would *appropriately*
acknowledge your greeting.
Bob O'Brien wrote:
Actually, Richard, yes - I have management approval for what details I choose
to share with any given online community. I am also learning to count Jann
among my friends, and I'm sure he would *appropriately* acknowledge your
greeting.
If your participation is at all
On Tue, 2009-06-02 at 13:40 -0700, Bob O'Brien wrote:
Actually, Richard, yes - I have management approval for what details I choose
to share with any given online community.
Share? Oh Sorry Bob. I only had Barracuda down as digital thieves. Let
me see;
SPAM and 'VIRUS' (lol) 'FIREWALL'
BSMTPD
On 29-May-2009, at 07:32, Andy Dorman wrote:
1. I could not find out WHY our IPs (we have a block of 32 for the
cluster of servers that my email was being sent from) were being
listed
And there are a LOT of stories out there like this. At this point in
time I don't care what anyone at
: Barracuda Blacklist
On 28/05/09 10:42 AM, Karsten Bräckelmann guent...@rudersport.de wrote:
Yes, every list does have occasional FPs. So your point about those 22
listings is what exactly?
My point is the 409 false positives. Sorry if I was unclear or obtuse.
--
Neil Schwartzman
Director
On Fri, 2009-05-29 at 12:16 -0600, J.D. Falk wrote:
Rob McEwen wrote:
Additionally, I'd like to ask, other than being a superb cash-generating
machine, what good is a whitelist built upon pay-to-enter and NOT based
on editorial decisions made by non-biased e-mail administrators?
Those
On 29/05/09 4:09 PM, Bob O'Brien bobr...@barracuda.com wrote:
Neil,
Based on our Requests for Removal filed over the past 3+ weeks from
ReturnPath, the number of IPs that you are claiming to have had issues with
appears inflated by a factor of nearly 50%.
Bob, I don't want to waste
On Fri, 29 May 2009, Bob O'Brien wrote:
Barracuda Reputation does not arbitrarily list hosts. Messages have passed
through each host with characteristics indicative of spam. Those listings
would only have been cleared because someone contacted the BRBL team and
requested their clearance -
On Fri, 29 May 2009, ANTICOM-STINGER wrote:
The Barracuda white list is an 'exclusive' club and I suspect money has
This applies to any whitelists, and I never use them, I think, I and my
staff are the *only* ones in a position to decide who to whitelist, and I
think most ISP/ASP's are of
On 28.05.09 14:12, Neil Schwartzman wrote:
* see the attachment for gross numbers, sorry, I can't show you specifics.
[-- Attachment #2: DNSBL Summary.pdf --]
[-- Type: video/x-flv, Encoding: base64, Size: 182K --]
... nice joke I'd say. Is there any reason not to put the att. somewhere to
the
Neil Schwartzman wrote:
Given the huge amount of bumph I've seen and heard about emailreg.org, I
figured it would be an interesting experiment to see if what everybody
feared was happening was true. It isn't. No big extortion plan on the part
of emailreg and Barracuda that I can see.
Neil, I
On 29/05/09 9:32 AM, Andy Dorman ador...@ironicdesign.com wrote:
Neil Schwartzman wrote:
Given the huge amount of bumph I've seen and heard about emailreg.org, I
figured it would be an interesting experiment to see if what everybody
feared was happening was true. It isn't. No big extortion
Neil Schwartzman wrote:
Hold up now. Why did you goto emailreg.org?? That is the whitelisting
service. I'd go ahead and request a delist at
http://www.barracudacentral.org/rbl/removal-request
Worked well for me.
Good question.
I went to emailreg.org because the bounce I got back directed
On Fri, 29 May 2009, Andy Dorman wrote:
I went to emailreg.org because the bounce I got back directed me to this page
http://www.barracudacentral.org/reputation?r=1 which included this
quarter-page ad:
---
One way to get your email through spam filters even if you are listed on the
BRBL is
John Hardin wrote:
It might be less confusing if that ad was presented *after* you've
completed the traditional unlisting request...
Good point. And I also wonder, how many emailreg payments were made by
disparately frantic e-mail admins who normally don't ever send spam, but
had a security
Rob McEwen wrote:
Additionally, I'd like to ask, other than being a superb cash-generating
machine, what good is a whitelist built upon pay-to-enter and NOT based
on editorial decisions made by non-biased e-mail administrators?
Those two aren't necessarily exclusive. The standards for
On 28/05/09 9:35 AM, Matt lm7...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there a reason the Barracuda blacklist is not in the official checks by
Spamassassin yet? I keep thinking sometime sa-update -D will add it but
have yet to see it.
I would like to add some perspective to potential use of the BRBL.
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 09:47 -0400, Neil Schwartzman wrote:
I would like to add some perspective to potential use of the BRBL.
Three weeks ago, I began requesting de-listings of any IP (active or
suspended) on Certified that was listed on the Barracuda BRBL. When I
started on April 29 there
On 28/05/09 9:35 AM, Matt lm7...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there a reason the Barracuda blacklist is not in the official checks by
Spamassassin yet? I keep thinking sometime sa-update -D will add it but
have yet to see it.
On 28.05.09 09:47, Neil Schwartzman wrote:
Of interest is the
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
We're not going down the path of judging blacklists based on whitelists
or certification services, or vice versa, do we?
If the whitelist involves possibly questionable business practices
(trying to reserve judgment here), then the information that Neil
provided
On 28 May 2009, at 07:35, Matt lm7...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there a reason the Barracuda blacklist is not in the official
checks by Spamassassin yet?
Yes. Barracuda is a scam.
I keep thinking sometime sa-update -D will add it but have yet to
see it.
And hopefully you never will.
-Original Message-
From: LuKreme [mailto:krem...@kreme.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 11:19 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Barracuda Blacklist
On 28 May 2009, at 07:35, Matt lm7...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there a reason the Barracuda blacklist
Neil Schwartzman wrote:
-
Thank you for contacting Barracuda Networks regarding your issue. ...
There are a number of reasons your IP address may have been listed as
poor, including:
...
8. In some rare cases, your recipients'
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 11:10 -0400, Rob McEwen wrote:
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
We're not going down the path of judging blacklists based on whitelists
or certification services, or vice versa, do we?
If the whitelist involves possibly questionable business practices
(trying to reserve
On 28/05/09 10:42 AM, Karsten Bräckelmann guent...@rudersport.de wrote:
Yes, every list does have occasional FPs. So your point about those 22
listings is what exactly?
My point is the 409 false positives. Sorry if I was unclear or obtuse.
--
Neil Schwartzman
Director, Accreditation Security
I would suggest that pay for play delisting fees, like those at
backscatterer.org, blur the line extremely between the spammers who
abuse us and the services that try to make money off legitimate
servers who follow RFCs. And too, what's to say that the spammers
themselves are intimately
On 28-May-2009, at 09:26, Sean Leinart wrote:
Yes. Barracuda is a scam.
Can you elaborate a bit? Thanks :0)
Barracuda is run by the same people that run emailreg.org which is a
$20/year subscription per domain to not be listed in Barracuda's
blacklist. Barracuda's policy seems to be to
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 14:12 -0400, Neil Schwartzman wrote:
On 28/05/09 11:39 AM, Karsten Bräckelmann guent...@rudersport.de wrote:
Wait, I was /not/ justifying emailreg.org -- actually not even talking
about it, but the certification service SSC as a sole base to overrule
any other
On 28/05/09 3:09 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann guent...@rudersport.de wrote:
I was merely arguing that not all blacklistings are necessarily bad,
just because they happen to be listed in SSC (or any other whitelist for
that matter), as I understood your post.
Re-reading what I wrote, I can't see
Neil Schwartzman a écrit :
On 28/05/09 9:35 AM, Matt lm7...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there a reason the Barracuda blacklist is not in the official checks by
Spamassassin yet? I keep thinking sometime sa-update -D will add it but
have yet to see it.
I would like to add some perspective
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 15:52 -0400, Neil Schwartzman wrote:
On 28/05/09 3:09 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann guent...@rudersport.de wrote:
I was merely arguing that not all blacklistings are necessarily bad,
just because they happen to be listed in SSC (or any other whitelist for
that matter), as
please redirect this thread back to the original _blacklist_
question?
Bob O`Bob O'Brien
-Original Message-
From: Rob McEwen [mailto:r...@invaluement.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 8:10 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Barracuda Blacklist
Karsten
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
Enabled = on the whitelist
Suspended = removed from the whitelist, live in the client account
Disabled = removed from the client account
Suspended on request by the client, suspended due to complaints pending
investigation, or forcefully suspended due to abuse and
On 28/05/09 8:06 PM, J.D. Falk jdfalk-li...@cybernothing.org wrote:
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
Enabled = on the whitelist
Suspended = removed from the whitelist, live in the client account
Disabled = removed from the client account
Suspended on request by the client, suspended due to
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 18:06 -0600, J.D. Falk wrote:
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
Suspended = removed from the whitelist, live in the client account
Suspended on request by the client, suspended due to complaints pending
investigation, or forcefully suspended due to abuse and violating the
On 28/05/09 8:19 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann guent...@rudersport.de wrote:
Could be any of those. Why does it matter? Suspended IPs aren't on the
list.
Thus there's little or no incentive to get em delisted from blacklists,
no?
\I don't understand your question. Incentive to whom? The
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 20:32 -0400, Neil Schwartzman wrote:
On 28/05/09 8:19 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann guent...@rudersport.de wrote:
Could be any of those. Why does it matter? Suspended IPs aren't on the
list.
Thus there's little or no incentive to get em delisted from blacklists,
no?
On 28/05/09 9:03 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann guent...@rudersport.de wrote:
Incentive for you, to get em delisted from BRBL. The funky question is,
is BRBL part of your weighted blacklist metric?
BRBL was and is in test mode for possible use against our whitelists.
Given the huge amount of bumph
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 21:16 -0400, Neil Schwartzman wrote:
On 28/05/09 9:03 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann guent...@rudersport.de wrote:
Incentive for you, to get em delisted from BRBL. The funky question is,
is BRBL part of your weighted blacklist metric?
BRBL was and is in test mode for
44 matches
Mail list logo
