On Mon, 2021-07-26 at 18:34 +0200, Alessandro Vesely via mailop wrote: > On Tue 20/Jul/2021 04:17:31 +0200 Ángel via mailop wrote: > > On 2021-07-19 at 23:27 +0200, Slavko wrote: > > > Dňa Sun, 18 Jul 2021 13:56:18 -0400 Bill Cole: > > > > > > > > The only usable way seems to be GoiIP blocking countries, but > > > > > i > > > > > afraid that it is wrong way. > > > > > > > > Why? > > > > > > Hard to describe it in English for me, but i will try. > > > > > > I consider blocking access by country as discriminating all > > > honest > > > people in particular country. (...) > > > > You opened the thread describing it as a "personal mail server". I > > interpret that as being a mta serving just you, or a few select > > family > > members/friends. > > As such you can (should?) be highly selective. If you only use ISP > > A, > > why should you allow from any other source? It's not as if you > > won't > > notice when you change providers. If John uses only provider B, why > > would you let a login from ISP C? > > I run a personal mail server too. I agree with safety arguments and > all what Bill said. However, any family member/ friend of mine, or > even myself, could travel abroad for a week and forget to punch that > hole in the firewall. In addition, some use foreign services that > login on their behalf (gmail is one).
Punch hole in the firewall function must be easy. All user need to do is call a URL from the IP address from which they want to send email. Arrive at the hotel, log on to WiFi, hit https://example.com/hereIam with some authorization token or password and the hole in the firewall is punched automatically for the next 24 hours. If they forget, they get a bounce back from the mail server, they do the log on and they resend. Define "foreign?" -- to me, in the hostile world of the internet, every IP address that is not under my control is foreign. > However, I discriminate by country when I report such abuses. I only > send reports to countries where I expect providers act under > democratic laws. How do you know the laws of all countries? when interests are aligned, autocratic laws are better than democratic laws. If China's rulers decide to clamp down on spam emission, you can bet that their enforcement and therefore their outcome will be superior to that of any self-righteous idiocracy. And the big ISP/ESP are like not-so-little autocracies. If Microsoft/Google/Amazon wanted to reduce spam, they could do it by cutting accounts aggressively. However, that is not aligned with their interest of making money. Those amounts are all associated with a credit card. Not necessarily the spammer's, but as long as money flows in, GAFAM will not make a fuzz about it. > I don't want to wreak more havoc than it deserves, nor to deal with > incomprehensible problems. This discrimination also helps reducing > the overall number of reports being sent. > > Does that make any sense? If it makes sense for you, by all means. Given the outcome, I wonder how many of these reports are directed straight through to /dev/null with zero human review. -- Yuval Levy, JD, MBA, CFA Ontario-licensed lawyer _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
