Re: spam on old lists - was [89attendees] Fw: new important message

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> A few years ago,

   Thank you for stipulating "a few years ago". Spammers have learned
a lot in the last few years.

> I???ve managed to get a customer out of spamhaus, despite having sent
> a SPAM because a bot, etc.

   In this case, there is _no_ evidence of a bot among my users.

> I was able to find all the info about how to proceed in their web
> site, apply to clean, etc.

   When is the last time you tried?

   Spamhaus has become more paranoid; and several features of their
website aren't functioning well right now. (Not to mention their preference
for users blindly enabling all javascript...)

> Same with other similar DNS-BLs

   Actually spamhaus has a better-than-average reputation. It is _not_
the "same" with the average DNSBLs.

> I think if you???re ???clean??? you should have not problem,

   "clean" by whose definition?

   Nowadays, it's not even a publicly-available definition!

> and we can choose which DNS-BL to apply.

   I refuse to feed a flame-war here; except to say we _won't_ reach
a useful rough-consensus without excluding too many contributors (and
probably won't reach rough-consensus at all).

> If we have from the community negative reports about bad-behaviours
> from any of those DNS-BLs for example.

   Again, how much are you contributing to the costs of what you ask?

--
John Leslie <john@xxxxxxx>




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]