http://slashdot.org/search.pl?query=blacklist
http://slashdot.org/search.pl?query=spam+blacklist http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=blacklist+spam&btnG=Google+Search http://www.google.com/search?q=site:kuro5hin.org+blacklist+spam&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&start=10&sa=N That should keep you busy for the next few hours... I don't really see a need for the GB list to discuss the topic; it's been beaten to death elsewhere and all the POVs are readily available with the above searches or ones like them. No sense in the continued flogging of equestrian mammals. My personal experience: I've been using MAPS at our site, ~150 users, for a little over a year now, with a sendmail relay. Every message I bounce from the MAPS lists bounces with the following text: Rejected - see<http://www.mail-abuse.org/rbl/>or call Ed at 650 801 7366 We average 100 blocks daily with an all time high of over 4000 in one 24 hour period; I've received precisely 1 call in over a year of doing this. A very low false positive rate, and acceptable to our business. YMMV. Regards, Ed Hintz Network Systems Administrator Natus Medical Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Michael O'Quinn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 12/10/02 01:15 PM To Gnat Box Users list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc david raistrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject Re: [gb-users] ADMIN: Re: [gb-users] BL question David, Could you suggest the appropriate venue for continuing this? Frankly, as a GNATBox user I think this discussion is very relevant and on-topic. This discussion could prove valuable in demonstrating to management why a product that includes BL capability is desirable (or not), it provides valuable background information on the entire BL "solution" AKA "controversy," and it's getting the word out about other potential solutions for SPAM and about current BL sites. Of course, I'm just one of thsoe silly customers... Michael O'Quinn On Tue, 10 Dec 2002, david raistrick wrote: > On Tue, 10 Dec 2002, Eric S. Johansson wrote: > > > blacklists are fundamentally wrong. They break end to end connectivity of > > the net and nab a fair number of innocent users (i.e. telecommuters, > > small-scale mail systems etc.) in addition to catching the occasional spammer. > > > Threads regarding the fundamental correctness of blocking email or other > network connections are very far off topic for this list. Please restrict > such replies to off-list. Thanks. > > > Threads relating to the technical aspects of such blocking (as well as how > to, or how not to implement such blocking) are welcome. > > ...david > > > --- > David Raistrick > Systems Administrator - Global Technology Associates, Inc > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Disclaimer: All opinions expressed are the opinions of > David Raistrick, not necessarily those of GTA, Inc. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To subscribe to the digest version first unsubscribe, then > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archive of the last 1000 messages: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe to the digest version first unsubscribe, then e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archive of the last 1000 messages: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe to the digest version first unsubscribe, then e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archive of the last 1000 messages: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
