On Dec 9, 2009, at 7:13 PM, Steve Atkins wrote:
On Dec 9, 2009, at 6:39 PM, Seth wrote:
Steve Atkins <steve(_at_)blighty(_dot_)com> wrote:
That's beside the point, though. What is the disadvantage of sending
reports to spammers?
2. It doesn't go to the site where it would do some good.
Nor does it go anywhere where it would do any harm.
This is only in the case where the MX operator (and the forwarder or mailing
list manager or anyone else along the delivery path) is not providing any
sort of FBL, nor gathering TiS data, at least not by using this approach, so
nobody else will be doing anything with the data.
Uh, to expand on that. I'm seeing the model in this case is that the spammer
pretends to be a forwarder, so a report that might otherwise go to a forwarder
would go to the spammer instead.
If the mail delivery path is "spammer -> forwarder -> isp -> recipient" then
the only useful places to report it are the ISP, the forwarder and
(potentially) the spammer. If, instead, it's
"spammer-pretending-to-be-a-forwarder -> isp -> recipient" then the only useful
place to send it is the ISP, but sending it to the spammer as well has no real
cost.
I might have missed a suggestion to not send it to the ISP, only to the
apparent forwarder, when there was something that looked like a forwarder - if
so, don't do that. :)
Cheers,
Steve
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg