ietf-asrg
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [Asrg] Trustic anti-spam system closes down because it doesn 't work

2003-08-06 09:53:43
Margie Arbon wrote:
The criteria for listing on most lists are yes/no bits, 
such as "is it an open relay?", "is it an open proxy?"

        Whatever you may say about "most" of the lists, there remains an
issue with those lists that allow subjective measures to influence their
contents. For instance: a "community based" list which relies on votes
from users rather than objectively testable attributes of the server.
        If subjective opinions are allowed to influence what goes on the
list, then there is an undeniable risk of a "tyranny of the mob" being
established. It is likely that such actions could result in attacks on
political groups, etc. Phil was simply suggesting that such attacks have
actually occurred in the past. 

IMO, there is as much, if not more, danger in "censoring" mail 
with contect filters - particularly the "black box" types.
        You are, of course, correct. As you acknowledge, there is a
danger that DNSBLs will be used to "censor" traffic on the net -- one
may argue whether this danger is greater or less than the danger of
censorship that is presented by content filters, nonetheless, it is
important to acknowledge that the danger exists. Just as the dangers of
content filters have been discussed in this group, it is appropriate
that we should discuss the danger of censorship that can come from
DNSBLS. 


                bob wyman


-----Original Message-----
From: asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org [mailto:asrg-admin(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On 
Behalf Of
Margie
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 12:34 AM
To: asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: [Asrg] Trustic anti-spam system closes down because it
doesn 't work



--On Tuesday, August 05, 2003 5:05 PM -0700 "Hallam-Baker, Phillip"
<pbaker(_at_)verisign(_dot_)com> wrote:


This action is a regular occurrence, not a possibility.

There are over 400 DNSBLs that *I* know about. It would be completely
impossible for it to happen, even ONCE on the vast majority of them. The
criteria for listing on most lists are yes/no bits, such as "is it an
open relay?", "is it an open proxy?", "is it a dynamically assigned IP
address?", "is the IP space in the USA?", "is the IP address in
China?"... "does this mailing list do confirmations?".  

In May, your argument for the demise of DNSBLs was that the root servers
could be attacked because someone could joe them and get them listed on
a DNSBL, now it's censorship of the political lists. Neither have any
basis in reality.

DNSBLs are a tool, and a rather effective one.  I'm not quite sure what
the paranoia is here. IMO, there is as much, if not more, danger in
"censoring" mail with contect filters - particularly the "black box"
types.  Frankly, I don't see the problem with either, as long as the
owners of the server know what they are using and why.

We're here to develop technical solutions to the spam problem. From
where I sit, it's going to take every tool we have and then some to even
approach solving the problem. Speculation, innuendo and FUD about any
tool in the arsenal are counter-productive.


-- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
-=-=
Margie Arbon                   Mail Abuse Prevention System, LLC
Director of Operations
margie(_at_)mail-abuse(_dot_)org          http://mail-abuse.org


_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg


_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg