ietf-822
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Allowing MTAs to split messages to different recipients

2001-01-26 15:21:57
moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu (Keith Moore)  wrote on 15.01.01 in 
<200101151619(_dot_)LAA07967(_at_)astro(_dot_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu>:

To my way of thinking, the blacklists were indeed abusive.  They

ORBS was (possibly still is - I don't know), for reasons I don't want to  
go into here because I've done so often enough in other places in the  
past. The MAPS stuff, OTOH, doesn't seem to be abusive in any way, shape,  
or form.

Unless you want to spam, that is.

were mounting a distributed denial-of-service attack, using
propaganda and disinformation to entice gullible MTA administrators
into filtering using their criteria.

You certainly won't convince me by insulting me.

Then again, the fact that cs.utk.edu didn't manage to do *anything* about  
being a wide open relay for *months* is in itself an appalling display.

But it is, of course, a long inhonourable tradition to shoot the  
messenger.

And the statistics certainly draw a pretty clear picture. The amount of  
spam I receive that gets filtered out via blacklists is incredibly huge.

Since MTAs I control do mark, but not throw away, mail from blacklisted  
servers, I have a pretty good idea of how much spam there is, and how much  
non-spam. It's a case of no contest.

  In this case the attackers were naive
about the likely good that it would do and about the harm that would
result.

Experince says they were naive only insofar as they underestimated the  
good, and overestimated the bad effects.

MfG Kai