On Fri, 2009-07-03 at 12:06 +0200, Yet Another Ninja wrote: > On 7/3/2009 11:14 AM, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote: > > On Fri, 2009-07-03 at 10:06 +0100, Justin Mason wrote: > >> I've heard that they are diligent about terminating abusive clients. > >> Are you reporting these spams to them? > >> > > Yes - but you would thing a log full of 550's may be a clue. > > > > What concerns me is SpamAssassin effectively white listing spammers. > > White listing should be a user option - not something added in a > > nefarious manner. At least it is clear to see with Spamassassin which is > > a plus - but I cannot pretend that I am not disappointed to find a > > whitelisted 'spammer net' in the core rules. I'm wondering why (other > > than MONEY) it would have ended up in there? > > this has a historical reasons and its not about "whitelisting spammers" > > Many moons ago, when SA started doing URI lookup with the SpamcopURI > plugin, there was only one URI BL: SURBL and to spare it from > unnecessary queries, the skip list was implemented avoid the extar load > and a number of ESPs which back then were considered to never send > UBE/UCE were added. > Times have changed and there's option regarding URI lookups, in public > and private BLs. Also, URI Bls can handle way more traffic than they > could 6 or 7 years back. > > There have been numerous requests to get some of these skip entries > removed but non was honoured. > > The bottom line is that its trivial and cheaper to write a static URI > rule to tag a URL (if you really need to) and which doesn't affect the > globe, than hammering the BLs with zillion of extra queries. > > SA is conservative and caters to a VERY wide user base, with VERY > different understanding what is UBE/UCE so while everyone saves reources > on useless queries, you still havea way to score constantcontact with > 100 if its your choice. > > > axb Should that be Hi$torical Rea$ons ? ;-) There is no current excuse and this kind of alleged legacy rubbish needs to be pulled out.
As it stands the is simply white listing a bulker. A spam filter that white lists a spammer - how bizarre ! I'm cynical. The only logical reason I can see for anything of this nature is money changing hands.
