unwise filtering policy on abuse mailboxes

Wed Jul 25 00:47:33 UTC 2018

I bet you can search the nanog list archive and find this very discussion
topic surface about ever 8-12 months...
folk always fall in this trap (or a form of it):
  "Welp, we've had 1 too many people in $CORP get infected via email, spam
filter all the things!!!"
    ... wait...
  "Oh, yea duh.. our spam/abuse alias can't block spam.. because people
will send us email they get that has spam/viruses/etc in it..whoops!!"

this 'always' happens, and we discuss it every 8-12 months.

On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 8:18 PM Ross Tajvar <ross at tajvar.io> wrote:

> Seemed pretty clear to me. He sent an abuse report to abuse at psychz.net and
> it was rejected as spam.
>
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2018, 8:11 PM Mel Beckman <mel at beckman.org> wrote:
>
> > Dan,
> >
> > Are you saying Nanog if spamming you? It's not at all clear what your
> > complaint is.
> >
> > -mel via cell
> >
> > > On Jul 24, 2018, at 4:37 PM, Brian Kantor <Brian at ampr.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >> On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 04:19:22PM -0700, Dan Hollis wrote:
> > >> can we please just stop this nonsense?
> > >>
> > >> ip under your direct control originates sewage. you should accept
> > reports as-is.
> > >>
> > >> requiring victims of your sewage to go through special contortions to
> > >> report it to you is not acceptable.
> > >>
> > >>>  ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
> > >>> <abuse at psychz.net>
> > >>>   (reason: 550 "The mail server detected your message as spam and has
> > prevented delivery.")
> > >
> > >
> > > abuse at fsec.or.kr and cert at fsec.or.kr do the same thing.
> > >    - Brian
> > >
> >
>