ietf-asrg
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Asrg] UCEPROTECT's comment on draft-irtf-asrg-bcp-blacklists-07

2011-02-27 09:48:38
Claus v. Wolfhausen wrote:

We at UCEPROTECT-Network made the expirience that people which did
not care about the security of their systems and got abused by spammers
learned an unforgettable lesson by dealing with our removal procedures:

NEVER GO ONLINE AGAIN WITH AN UNSECURE SYSTEM.

They would not have learned that lesson if they would have been able to
escape from ourlists immediatley free of charge like they did from others.

New listings of formerly listed static IPs are really rare at UCEPROTECT.

So UCEPROTECT was able to educate those former listees to take care
of their systems next time, which clearly prevents futher spam form those
systems.

That is a really important point, which is often not seen by people which had
never run a public DNSBL.

As a counterpoint, I run a public DNSBL and I agree with the choice of
wording used in the BCP draft. Watching the history of blacklists over
the years, few things have caused more angst and accusations than
requiring a delisting fee. Even SORBS has stopped requiring such a
fee.

I think there are many instances where, when you require a delisting
fee, you set yourself up for accusations that this was a trap you have
led listees into. You signed up for my list just so you can blacklist
me! I think it is wise to avoid this line of discussion and not charge
a fee.

-- 
trblspamtrap dnsbl: http://www.trblspam.com
simple, spamtrap driven, easy on, easy off
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>