On 6/13/07, Jochem wrote: > > ** Private ** wrote: > > On 6/12/07, Jochem wrote: > >> > >> I choose my ISPs more carefully then that. > > > > You hope. > > I'm sure (being on first name basis with the CEO or CTO helps). > > > >> That is the point of subscribing to a blacklist, isn't it? > > > > The point of a blacklist is to block offending emails, i.e. spam, but > allow > > legitimate mail through. This list does not accomplish that objective. > > There are many DNS RBLs that have the objective you described, apews just > is not one of them. It has a different objective and it is actually prety > good at achieving that objective.
Just wait. >> It won't. NANA* is not for complaining, it is for getting technical > support > >> to get delisted. The target audience is the abuse officers of ISPs, not > >> end-users. > > > > It got posted. > > Were the responses helpful? Mostly a bunch of self-righteous, coercive BS. > You complained to the FTC about a Brazilian website hosted in Canada? Who cares, the Feds can squeeze them if they want to. > No, no, no. What is happening is more like a situation where no one from > the > > state of Georgia can send mail to anyone subscribed to a watch list > > Is that subscription voluntary? There are several issues at play. One is automation. Two is secrecy. Three is collective punishment. > because > > someone sent a mail bomb from a post office in the state of Georgia and > the > > people who run the watch list decided to blacklist the entire state. > > Is the policy applied based on the blacklist dictated by the blacklist or > is that voluntarily chosen by the operator of the mail server? Got me. I would guess that most mail admins are doing this on their own in some automated fashion, setting up subscriptions and letting it run. >> I have seen it a lot with certain ISPs. It was always resolved by > >> switching to a reputable ISP. > > > > So two of the biggest ISPs in the country are disreputable? > > By the definition applied by apews they are. I agree only partially with > their definition so I don't recommend to block based on an apews listing. If > you want to use apews, make sure you run it after your greylisting and use > it to increase the spam score of messages. I don't think that is realistic for many mail admins. > That is simply not what is happening. When you send email your email > server connects to the recipients email server. There is nobody in between. > Nobody but the operators of both servers decide whether email gets > exchanged. > And yes, I respect the right of mail server operators to inform themselves > of the reputation of certain areas of the internet and base decisions on > that. And I trust the operators of DNS RBLs to either correct any listings > that are not according to the stated policy or the community to find out > about wrongfully listed IPs and make sufficient noise about it to > effectively kill the list. > You are missing my point. APEWS has glommed onto the way blacklists work, which is as trusted sources to block spam. APEWS is abusing that trusted relationship to block very large segments of the Internet in an attempt to coerce the users on those networks to switch operators, and thereby coerce the operators themselves to implement better control over spam coming from their networks. Why is it abuse? Because they are going far beyond the boundaries of what a spam blacklist is meant to do. They are engaging in a political fight using the tools of economic warfare to try to push their agenda. -- --------------- Robert Munn www.funkymojo.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Upgrade to Adobe ColdFusion MX7 The most significant release in over 10 years. Upgrade & see new features. http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion?sdid=RVJR Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:236603 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
