Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)
On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 22:55:41 +0200 Reindl Harald wrote: > the question is *how* is that de-listing managed and how do you > manage "i will take care in the future" and if that's not true > because de-listing is just a click how easy is it for spammers to not > realy care I delist anyone who asks without questioning them. The server stays delisted for 45 days and then we once again re-evaluate it based on observed reputation. We have the whole process pretty much automated. This system has worked very well for us. Regards, Dianne.
Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)
On Sun Jun 21 16:22:26 2015, Dianne Skoll wrote: > I don't approve of Barracuda's behaviour. If they're blocking > /24s because of some bad machines, you should not have to pay for > delisting one IP. If they can prove that your specific IP was responsible > for a spam run, then it's legit to charge for delisting, but not > otherwise. I don’t know how Barracuda manages /24 blacklisting, but generally the abuse contact is contacted (in fact the ISP, unless you have your own IP block) and if there isn’t answer for some IPs, the block is blacklisted. -- Alarig Le Lay signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)
Am 21.06.2015 um 23:50 schrieb Jered Floyd: There is a murky relationship between Barracuda and EmailReg. It's awfully suspicious that signing up on whitelist X clears you from "unrelated" blacklist Y. So, it may not be "paying to delist one IP" in framing, but in action it seems to be pretty darn close to that... no, it is not if somebody thinks he has a free ride for spam he will be removed from EmailReg as fast as lightning - that said from a BN customers from 2005 until 2014/08 and aware all of bullshit BN do the last few years after 2013-11 (In November 2013, Barracuda Networks went public on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol CUDA) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)
EmailReg.org operates a whitelist, so you pay to get listed there. The site doesn't say much at all about what sort of verification or later delisting for spam they might do. However, they are promoted directly on the "Sorry, your email was blocked" page for Barracuda Reputation, and the page explicitly says that if you register at EmailReg.org then you'll bypass the BRBL. There is a murky relationship between Barracuda and EmailReg. It's awfully suspicious that signing up on whitelist X clears you from "unrelated" blacklist Y. So, it may not be "paying to delist one IP" in framing, but in action it seems to be pretty darn close to that... --Jered - On Jun 21, 2015, at 5:43 PM, Jim Popovitch jim...@gmail.com wrote: > On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Dianne Skoll wrote: >> On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 16:26:54 -0400 >> Jim Popovitch wrote: >> >>> On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Dianne Skoll >>> > you should not have to pay for delisting one IP. >>> and with BN you are NOT paying for a delisting. >> >> You are splitting hairs. Essentially, you are paying for delisting. > > /sigh > > I'm not splitting hairs, you are redefining "delisting". Go read the > first sentence on emailreg.org and learn something about them. > > -Jim P.
Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)
On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Dianne Skoll wrote: > On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 16:26:54 -0400 > Jim Popovitch wrote: > >> On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Dianne Skoll >> > you should not have to pay for delisting one IP. >> and with BN you are NOT paying for a delisting. > > You are splitting hairs. Essentially, you are paying for delisting. /sigh I'm not splitting hairs, you are redefining "delisting". Go read the first sentence on emailreg.org and learn something about them. -Jim P.
Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)
Am 21.06.2015 um 22:52 schrieb Dianne Skoll: On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 16:26:54 -0400 Jim Popovitch wrote: On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Dianne Skoll you should not have to pay for delisting one IP. and with BN you are NOT paying for a delisting. You are splitting hairs. Essentially, you are paying for delisting. We run our own set of DNSBLs and we delist anyone who requests delisting for free. That's how it should be done the question is *how* is that de-listing managed and how do you manage "i will take care in the future" and if that's not true because de-listing is just a click how easy is it for spammers to not realy care in fact if someone had a hacked server that's bad luck, but if someone sends spam by intention and need to spend money to get his IP's de-listed there is a barrier because send spam is no longer a business model signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)
On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 16:26:54 -0400 Jim Popovitch wrote: > On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Dianne Skoll > > you should not have to pay for delisting one IP. > and with BN you are NOT paying for a delisting. You are splitting hairs. Essentially, you are paying for delisting. We run our own set of DNSBLs and we delist anyone who requests delisting for free. That's how it should be done. Regards, Dianne.
Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)
Am 21.06.2015 um 22:22 schrieb Dianne Skoll: On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 19:23:58 +0200 Reindl Harald wrote: spammers don't invest money, never Of course not. They pay using a stolen credit card. I don't approve of Barracuda's behaviour. If they're blocking /24s because of some bad machines, you should not have to pay for delisting one IP. If they can prove that your specific IP was responsible for a spam run, then it's legit to charge for delisting, but not otherwise. I also don't approve of blocking entire networks for one or a few bad IPs. People who use DNSBLs that have those policies simply lack decent spam filters, so they take a scorched-earth approach agreed - at least partly - it's hard to say from outside how much "few bad IPs" really did send junk and on the other hand there are RBL operators which list whole /24 networks just because the operator don#t like a single person which writes mails to mailing lists by hand and with his full name.. Barracuda is far way from beeing perfect, otherwise i would not have spent many hundret hours of my lifetime to build up a replacemnt and maintain it, but what they don#t do is list something without any reason just to make money signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)
On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Dianne Skoll wrote: > you should not have to pay for delisting one IP. and with BN you are NOT paying for a delisting.You are paying for the upfront ID validation and verification process that goes into fast-tracking your email flow. If you don't want that fine, don't pay it. -Jim P.
Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)
On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 19:23:58 +0200 Reindl Harald wrote: > spammers don't invest money, never Of course not. They pay using a stolen credit card. I don't approve of Barracuda's behaviour. If they're blocking /24s because of some bad machines, you should not have to pay for delisting one IP. If they can prove that your specific IP was responsible for a spam run, then it's legit to charge for delisting, but not otherwise. I also don't approve of blocking entire networks for one or a few bad IPs. People who use DNSBLs that have those policies simply lack decent spam filters, so they take a scorched-earth approach. Regards, Dianne.
Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)
Am 21.06.2015 um 20:52 schrieb Antony Stone: On Sunday 21 June 2015 at 19:23:58 (EU time), Reindl Harald wrote: spammers don't invest money, never Ah, my bad understanding - I followed the link you posted earlier http://www.spamhaus.org/faq/section/Glossary#233 which pointed me to http://www.spamhaus.org/news/article/641?article=641 which contains the quote from a spam enabling entity: "$70,875/month gets you 9 class C's spread across at least 5 providers with bandwidth for 8 Millions HTML emails per day per class C. Network blocks (class C's) will be replaced after at least 60 days if they are blocked. Network Blocks may be replaced solely in the event such Network Block has been blacklisted by SpamHaus." That looked to me like the spammers were paying for the IP address ranges which we were discussing being blocked that's why spammers mostly use hijacked servers or enduser machines like on ore most likely more IP's in the /24 network of the thread starter, he is just a victim of another fool not are about security updates on his webservers if you follow the thread signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)
On Sunday 21 June 2015 at 19:23:58 (EU time), Reindl Harald wrote: > spammers don't invest money, never Ah, my bad understanding - I followed the link you posted earlier http://www.spamhaus.org/faq/section/Glossary#233 which pointed me to http://www.spamhaus.org/news/article/641?article=641 which contains the quote from a spam enabling entity: "$70,875/month gets you 9 class C's spread across at least 5 providers with bandwidth for 8 Millions HTML emails per day per class C. Network blocks (class C's) will be replaced after at least 60 days if they are blocked. Network Blocks may be replaced solely in the event such Network Block has been blacklisted by SpamHaus." That looked to me like the spammers were paying for the IP address ranges which we were discussing being blocked. Regards, Antony. -- It is also possible that putting the birds in a laboratory setting inadvertently renders them relatively incompetent. - Daniel C Dennett Please reply to the list; please *don't* CC me.
Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)
On 21 Jun 2015, at 10:33, Jered Floyd wrote: Richard, The BRBL may have listed the entire /24 that includes your sending IPs. Painful experience has shown that Barracuda won't hear your requests for delisting, and the listing may never go away. I believe you've got it in one. I heard back from a colleague on the same /24 (though not the same address!) and he had a client with a bad WordPress install that was generating spam. That seems to make this EmailReg situation even more egregious -- if they're really blocking whole networks based on a single IP then it really is a protection scheme operated (opaquely) by Barracuda. "Pay us money if you want mail to get through to our customers; we'll blacklist you arbitrarily otherwise." How can this possibly be legal under US racketeering laws? I'm not defending Barracuda specifically, as I have long believed them to be an opportunistic, ethics-free, low-quality organization selling overpriced garbage to people too desperately clueless to know better... However, even carelessly run blacklists of IPs for email have been protected in US courts by 2 things: 1. Blacklist operators are not doing any actual blocking, their users are. Senders on "collateral damage" IPs are free to appeal to the actual sites rejecting their mail for exceptions and any competently-administered site will be able to do so. Any DNSBL operator is akin to a movie reviewer: they don't directly control anyone's behavior, they merely influence those who choose to pay them heed. 2. Virtually every US law explicitly touching Internet filtering (COPPA, COPPA2, CAN-SPAM, etc.) has included some "safe haven" provision for those implementing and using filtering tools in good faith. The interpretation of what constitutes "good faith" has been extremely broad, essentially meaning that if Barracuda has a theory that listing innocents in the vicinity of spammers helps avoid future spam, they don't need to actually have evidence of its validity or weight any tangible damage against theoretical benefit. The flipside of this de facto immunity is that you are free to point out to those who reject your mail due to Barracuda's shoddy advice that Barracuda gives shoddy advice for which they do not deserve much attention or any money.
Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)
Am 21.06.2015 um 18:58 schrieb Antony Stone: On Sunday 21 June 2015 at 17:22:58 (EU time), Jim Popovitch wrote: I appear to be getting a shakedown scam from Barracuda Networks. You are not being shaken down, but you might be slandering. ;-) I'm fairly certain that BN isn't making much profit off of your $20. What they are getting is your commitment, and your ID, that one or more IP addrs under your control will not spam. And if you do spam from those IPs, and BN detects it, they have evidence to tie you to the crime (plus previously accepted agreement that you would voluntarily handle the situation in a mutually agreed upon manner) It seems to me that $20 is nothing to the spammers - and they're already using techniques to change their IP addresses on a regular basis. So, spammer pays BN $20, gets found out some while later, moves IP, and pays BN $20 for that address instead (meanwhile raking in another $20 quicker than most of us do, I suspect). Or, are you assuming that spammers don't have multiple identities / businesses / bank accounts to make their payments from? spammers don't invest money, never spammers just use botnets and hacked machines and leave the collateral damage for the hacked machines and network ranges to the owner $20 is $20, but frankly most people pay more than that in snail mail postage each year. Er, so? Most people pay more than $20 for lots of things per year - that doesn't mean you should just give $20 to anyone who asks for it, so that you can carry on running a legitimate business there are more RBL's that you think which handle "bad neigbourhood" not only Barracuda - example: http://www.uceprotect.net/de/index.php?m=3&s=4 it escalates based on network size and spammer ips detected: /23: 9 abuser IP's /22: 14 abuser IP's /21: 24 abuser IP#s signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)
On Sunday 21 June 2015 at 17:22:58 (EU time), Jim Popovitch wrote: > > I appear to be getting a shakedown scam from Barracuda Networks. > > You are not being shaken down, but you might be slandering. ;-) > > I'm fairly certain that BN isn't making much profit off of your $20. > What they are getting is your commitment, and your ID, that one or > more IP addrs under your control will not spam. And if you do spam > from those IPs, and BN detects it, they have evidence to tie you to > the crime (plus previously accepted agreement that you would > voluntarily handle the situation in a mutually agreed upon manner) It seems to me that $20 is nothing to the spammers - and they're already using techniques to change their IP addresses on a regular basis. So, spammer pays BN $20, gets found out some while later, moves IP, and pays BN $20 for that address instead (meanwhile raking in another $20 quicker than most of us do, I suspect). Or, are you assuming that spammers don't have multiple identities / businesses / bank accounts to make their payments from? > $20 is $20, but frankly most people pay more than that in snail mail > postage each year. Er, so? Most people pay more than $20 for lots of things per year - that doesn't mean you should just give $20 to anyone who asks for it, so that you can carry on running a legitimate business. Regards, Antony. -- BASIC is to computer languages what Roman numerals are to arithmetic. Please reply to the list; please *don't* CC me.
Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)
> I appear to be getting a shakedown scam from Barracuda Networks. You are not being shaken down, but you might be slandering. ;-) I'm fairly certain that BN isn't making much profit off of your $20. What they are getting is your commitment, and your ID, that one or more IP addrs under your control will not spam. And if you do spam from those IPs, and BN detects it, they have evidence to tie you to the crime (plus previously accepted agreement that you would voluntarily handle the situation in a mutually agreed upon manner) $20 is $20, but frankly most people pay more than that in snail mail postage each year. -Jim P.
Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)
Am 21.06.2015 um 17:00 schrieb Jeroen de Neef: I wonder what their justification is for doing this. the questoon is how many addtional IP's on the /24 where in fact sending spam, see http://www.spamhaus.org/faq/section/Glossary#233 2015-06-21 16:33 GMT+02:00 Jered Floyd mailto:je...@convivian.com>>: Richard, > The BRBL may have listed the entire /24 that includes your sending IPs. > Painful experience has shown that Barracuda won't hear your requests for > delisting, and the listing may never go away. I believe you've got it in one. I heard back from a colleague on the same /24 (though not the same address!) and he had a client with a bad WordPress install that was generating spam. That seems to make this EmailReg situation even more egregious -- if they're really blocking whole networks based on a single IP then it really is a protection scheme operated (opaquely) by Barracuda. "Pay us money if you want mail to get through to our customers; we'll blacklist you arbitrarily otherwise." How can this possibly be legal under US racketeering laws? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)
I wonder what their justification is for doing this. 2015-06-21 16:33 GMT+02:00 Jered Floyd : > > Richard, > > > The BRBL may have listed the entire /24 that includes your sending IPs. > > Painful experience has shown that Barracuda won't hear your requests for > > delisting, and the listing may never go away. > > I believe you've got it in one. I heard back from a colleague on the same > /24 (though not the same address!) and he had a client with a bad WordPress > install that was generating spam. > > That seems to make this EmailReg situation even more egregious -- if > they're really blocking whole networks based on a single IP then it really > is a protection scheme operated (opaquely) by Barracuda. "Pay us money if > you want mail to get through to our customers; we'll blacklist you > arbitrarily otherwise." How can this possibly be legal under US > racketeering laws? > > --Jered > > > >
Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)
Richard, > The BRBL may have listed the entire /24 that includes your sending IPs. > Painful experience has shown that Barracuda won't hear your requests for > delisting, and the listing may never go away. I believe you've got it in one. I heard back from a colleague on the same /24 (though not the same address!) and he had a client with a bad WordPress install that was generating spam. That seems to make this EmailReg situation even more egregious -- if they're really blocking whole networks based on a single IP then it really is a protection scheme operated (opaquely) by Barracuda. "Pay us money if you want mail to get through to our customers; we'll blacklist you arbitrarily otherwise." How can this possibly be legal under US racketeering laws? --Jered
