real-time black-hole listing

Mon Mar 28 20:03:59 UTC 2005

On Mon, 2005-03-28 at 09:55 -0500, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
>
> As for "didn't authorize you to block", two thoughts come to mind:
> first, the person with the last clear chance in a mail blacklisting
> situation is the mail admin in question, is it not?

Many administrators avoid complaints by placing within the message
refusal, the name of the real-time black-hole list.  In many ways, this
is a better situation for the sender than filtering, which places
messages into junk folders or silently drops messages.  (Some filter
programs even toss these DSNs because they appear to be
spamvertisements.)  In some cases, the administrator may return the
wrong list.  This is why most list providers offer a query form.  Many
abusers fake DSNs, just to get someone reading them, as DSN tend to
avoid the junk folder.

The real-time black-hole list operation takes the task of reviewing
complaints, notifications, and response records to assist in resolving
issues, to maintain acceptable use policies as part of the service.
Some providers do not wish to enforce policies demanded by the community
using the list, such as opt-in for bulk email and controlling access.
This disregard of policy may cause collateral blocking affecting their
other customers, and, although unfortunate, is often unavoidable.

With growing reliance upon RBLs as a means to protect resources, in
addition to establishing acceptable practices, few are confused as to
how these lists work, and contracts further ensure these details are
understood.

Is there a cogent means to abate abuse that does not include some form
of reputation or accreditation?  Pattern recognition within filtering is
a type of reputation based upon content, but alone, this does not scale
and may create worse problems.  There is no perfect system, but what
system is better?

-Doug