[Nanog-futures] blacklists getting out of hand?

[Lynda]

Rich Kulawiec wrote:

>On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 09:30:23AM -0800, Lynda wrote:
>  
>
>>I'm hoping that this just gets through. For two or three years, I've 
>>been relaying all deaddrop.org email through pair.com, which has 
>>apparently made it onto mail-abuse's blacklists. 
>>    
>>
>
>1. I'm surprised; pair.com has had a pretty good reputation for a number
>of years as being very spam-intolerant.  But mail-abuse.org is pretty
>conservative about listings, so *something* must have triggered this.
>  
>

Pair rules. It's hosting for grownups. I like it. I'm very, very happy 
with them. This particular email address has been out there for quite a 
few years (although not nearly as long as some), and it's just made it 
into a lot of lists from spammers. I couldn't survive the onslaught if 
it weren't prefiltered by pair's servers (we're talking about incoming, 
in this case, not me, outgoing). There are indeed intolerant of 
spammers. Apparently someone got loose. I'm sure they've already fixed 
it, but you know how long it takes to get back off those lists.

>2. A very cursory check also shows listings for pair.com mail systems
>on the DNSBL at backscatterer.org.
>  
>

Yeah, no surprise from me. Personally, I don't much care for blacklists. 
I find them a bit heavy handed, and I think they aren't effective. On 
the other hand, the problem is so bad that I don't blame anyone for 
using any methods they can. I actually find it stupid to put gmail 
there, since gmail accounts have just ended up everywhere. I read almost 
all the heavy noise mailing lists from gmail accounts, so that I can 
filter heavily, and never concern myself with the moronic waves of the 
unwashed masses (Full Disclosure comes to mind).

>3. Have you taken this up with pair.com?  If they're showing up on
>multiple blacklists, then it's unlikely that all those blacklists are
>making the same mistake or using the same policies.  It's much more
>likely that pair.com is doing something wrong (or not doing something
>they should be), and that one by one, the blacklists are noticing.
>  
>

Sweet of you to notice, but I've only had trouble with one person (and 
he fixed it). I'm sure that other people will holler; no need for me to. 
I'd actually just dragged them in to go along with the gmail 
blacklisting thing. The point I'd been trying to make (albeit poorly) 
was that, when I discovered there was an issue, I went around it. Nanog 
is not composed of Random Joe Sixpacks; I'd expect that anyone using 
gmail (including myself) not to be surprised that it makes it into 
blacklists now and then.

If it gets to be inconvenient, I'll just start passing outbound mail 
through my local machines, rather than pair's special relay. I hope not. 
It's nice to have it when I travel.

-- 
...Deep Hack Mode -- that mysterious and frightening state of
consciousness where Mortal Users fear to tread.
                Matt Welsh
(also see: http://catb.org/jargon/html/H/hack-mode.html)