|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical e-mail blacklists (was Re: SPEWS?)
On 06/20/02, "Geo." <[email protected]> wrote: > That was kinda my point. We need to stop this pushing and shoving back and > forth and find solutions that work and don't depend on bending every ISP on > the planet to conformity because that's never going to happen. The forcing > approach reminds me of copy protection, lets force everyone to be good. > Guess what, it's a big network and it's getting bigger and you'll never get > everyone to conform. So I suggest we take a different road whether that be > dynamic blocking as soon as a spamming starts or heuristic filters or > whatever else we can come up with that works. > > Note, I'm not saying don't use spews, just realize it's a copy protection > type of approach and will be of limited success for the same reasons. Copy protection is a good comparison, and one which I haven't seen before. However, dynamic blacklists will eventually fall into the same trap; spammers will find ways around 'em. Static or dynamic, you're still trying to apply a purely technical solution to a social problem. All that said, I do agree that dynamic lists are the obvious next step; they'll probably buy us another six months to a year. But spamcop's in specific is still based on spamcop user complaints, and most of the spamcop user complaints I've seen have been grossly mistargetted. -- J.D. Falk "It's all vegan, except for <[email protected]> the goat squeezings!" -- rachel
|