On Tuesday, June 29, 2004, 3:19:50 PM, Jonathan Nichols wrote: > Especially since they've gone *way* beyond blocking mail servers - they > will drop an entire /24 into their list because an IP in that block was > hosting *images* that were used in a spam. Not even intentionally. (Not > one single piece of mail came out of this block) That's just > ridiculous, IMHO. There's "collateral damage" and then there's just > plain silliness.
Agreed. That's absurd. So what happens if an abuser includes an image from the Spews web site in a spam? Would SPEWS include increasingly larger blocks of their own network until the abuser stops? ;-) If they were consistent in their application of principles they would.... Jeff C. -- Jeff Chan mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.surbl.org/
