Arrogant RBL list maintainers

Adam Armstrong lists at
Wed Dec 16 05:49:27 CST 2009

On 16/12/2009 06:12, James Hess wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 11:30 PM, Adam Armstrong<lists at>  wrote:
>> personally, i'd recommend not being a dick and setting valid *meaningful*
>> reverse dns for things relaying mail.
> Many sites don't use names that will necessarily be meaningful to an outsider.
> Sometimes the non-meaningful name is the actual hostname and the
> _only_ name that machine is known by,  even if the name appears
> "generic" or contains an IP.   Host naming is a matter of local
> network policy, and the RFCs that pertain to hostnames specify syntax
> requirements only.
> Some sites might want to avoid  certain "meaningful"   RDNS entries
> since  spammers, hackers, and other abusive users that scan IP ranges
> can utilize the  RDNS to facilitate their activities.      All
> reverse DNS information is in the hands of the enemy.
> For example, when spammers'  IP scanning efforts  find that an IP
> address  reverses to   ""   the spammer will  know
> to try    e-mail addresses for  their dictionary-based
> brute-force spamming.
> On the other hand,  if the MTA's  IP reverses  to   something like
> As is common for many domains.
> Spammers coming in  by  scanning  large ranges of IPs,  have no
> pointer to report  the  mailserver they discovered  is
>   inbound  (or outbound) mail.

The 1970s called and asked for its security policy back :(

I would have thought that asking for the MXes for would have 
told them what the inbound mailserver is...


More information about the NANOG mailing list