North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Misguided spam Filtering techniques

  • From: Rich Kulawiec
  • Date: Mon Oct 22 11:22:32 2007

[ "Subject:" line corrected, noting that "SPAM" is a trademark
of Hormel and "spam" is the slang term for unsolicited bulk email. ]

On Sun, Oct 21, 2007 at 10:27:24AM -0400, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
> Of course, I fixed the issue for myself by simply blocking
>  I have no need to correspond with anyone who thinks
> that their spam problem needs to be my spam problem.

Unfortunately, they're not alone.  Any number of carpetbagging
"anti-spam" companies have materialized, eager to exploit the
Internet's collective misery for profit, and willing to engage
in wholesale abuse in order to do so.  The most common form of
observed abuse is C/R, but I've also noted outscatter-by-design,
callbacks, and outright spamming.  The local blacklist of such
entities follows below.

As to the snake-oil known as SPF (mentioned elsewhere in this thread),
it, like DomainKeys and SenderID, reflects confusion vis a vis the spam
problem vs. the forgery problem.  Yes, they're related, but solving one
is not the same as solving the other -- and at present, the forgery
problem is completely unsolvable.  (...because any of the 10e8 or so
fully-0wned systems out there that can emit apparently-unforged email
using any credentials that happen to be present on them...)  Efforts
should instead be focused on solving the outscatter problem, because
doing so helps minimize the impact of the forgery problem.