North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: dnsbl's? - an informal survey
Hello Jack , On Fri, 30 May 2003, Jack Bates wrote: > Mr. James W. Laferriere wrote: > <snip> > > White listing is NOT what was being discussed . Tho is can be > > adventagous in the right circumstances . > <snip> > > And neither was Static addressing . Filtering was being discussed > > based on some unknown (to me probably others as well) methodology . > > Twyl , JimL > White listing comes with any blacklist. The blacklists in particular > being discussed were the @dynamics, like the PDL and dynablock at > easynet. Both lists quite clearly state how they build their lists and > what they are designed to block (dynablock only takes out dialup, and > PDL takes out all dynamic addressing). Query , How is it determined that the address in question is dynamic or not ? Who/how/what makes that determination ? This is the core of my concerns . > Given the number of insecure client systems on dynamic addressing (proxy > servers, trojans, etc), accepting email from dynamic addresses is > becoming inherently more dangerous. If smarthosts can't be used from > those addresses, then special whitelisting can be done. Highly agreed . But sure am hoping some better solutions are being developed . > Of course, the person implementing email blocks of any type, especially > public blacklists, must take some ammount of responsibility in > maintaining legitimate email communications as dictated by users. YES ! Without this there is no check &/or balance to the procedure/s in use . Twyl , JimL -- +------------------------------------------------------------------+ | James W. Laferriere | System Techniques | Give me VMS | | Network Engineer | P.O. Box 854 | Give me Linux | | [email protected] | Coudersport PA 16915 | only on AXP | +------------------------------------------------------------------+
|