nwrickert
sand groper
Premium,MVM
join:2004-09-04
Geneva, IL
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·AT&T Midwest
| reply to GunnCat
Re: SORBS got my buddy
said by GunnCat  :SORBS should be purged from the internet completely. I'm against censorship. SORBS has as much right to be on the internet as other sites that I don't like. Nobody is forced to use the SORBS list. |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to GunnCat
said by GunnCat :SORBS should be purged from the internet completely. Fortunately for those of us who dislike spam, you are not the "God of the Internet".
--
Norman
~A deam, dream, no dream
~Voices of the night go across the forest
~A dream, dream, no dream
~Good night my good child |
|
elvey
Spamassassin
join:2001-02-17
San Francisco, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
 ·Comcast
·SONIC.NET
| reply to JJV
Interesting. Comcast uses SORBS! Your friend needs to call his ISP ( GCI Communications ). They're at fault for not keeping their noses clean. Blaming Comcast or SORBS is just blaming the victim. (It's like saying a rape victim they need to change.) Having him power cycle his modem might help too, since he'll get a new IP.
BTW, someone doesn't seem knowledgeable enough to know the difference between the Internet and an internet.
--
SBC is the world's second-largest SpamHaus and leads an Organized Crime Syndicate. |
|
GunnCat
join:2001-08-11
Torrington, CT
| reply to GunnCat
If you want to get rid of spam, use a Turing Test. SORBS is garbage. My host had a spammer once and our entire block of IPs was banned by SORBS.
Again, SORBS should be purged from the internet. It's completely out of hand. It doesn't stop spam, it just bans ips. Again, only a Turing Test can helpo prevent spam. |
|
izy
Premium,MVM
join:2000-09-21
Naples, FL
| I was under the impression the Turing Test was a way of measuring how well a computer could hold a conversation with a human.
dammit! Your post passed! 
--
"When I played in the sandbox, the cat kept covering me up.." ~Rodney Dangerfield |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to GunnCat
said by GunnCat :If you want to get rid of spam, use a Turing Test. SORBS is garbage. My host had a spammer once and our entire block of IPs was banned by SORBS. Again, SORBS should be purged from the internet. It's completely out of hand. It doesn't stop spam, it just bans ips. Again, only a Turing Test can helpo prevent spam. A Turing Test would no more stop spam than pissing into the wind would. Spam is here to stay. So is SORBS. If not SORBS, then something else like it...
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
MrHelpful
@ntl.com
| reply to izy
The ISP is at fault here for using anonymous relay. If they used the authenticated user method, they wouldn't be blocked. We encountered this problem and were blacklisted by SORBS until we sorted it. The ISP in fact DOES have to contact SORBS about removing the block. They will remove you but ultimately its up to your ISP to stay off the list. Hope this helps! |
|
fantomposter
Phantom Poster
Premium
join:2002-09-21
Independence, OH
1 edit | reply to NormanS
said by NormanS :If not SORBS, then something else like it... Like private block lists, which never get adjusted/removed unless a user of that system complains. And then only if they ask nice  |
|
GunnCat
join:2001-08-11
Torrington, CT
| reply to NormanS
Of course a Turing test would, and is stopping spam. My spam filter has blocked tens of thousands of spam emails. It's often hard for a host with thousands of servers to see if anyone is running an open relay, therefore mistakes happen. Should entire businesses be punished because some self managed client who leases a server doesn't realize he has one?
I don't believe in censorship either, but once again SORBS sucks and should be purged from the internet.
Go on with your arguments. I'll just come back every few months and reply to your posts.
Maybe some of you should better educate yourselves
»www.google.com/search?sourceid=n···bs+sucks
Merry Xmas!
All I want is for SORBS to be purged from the internet |
|
GunnCat
join:2001-08-11
Torrington, CT
| btw, just for your general knowledge. I have been in internet marketing since 2001. I have never and will never use email to advertise. I know people that do and they laugh at SORBS as it hasn't affected their business in the least.
I use a Turing test to filter my email. In the last year these are my statistics:
Messages Processed 100164
Messages Forwarded 8616
Spam Percentage 91.4%
I can say that of those emails I have had 3 spammers who actually took the time to enter the proper code so that I get the email in my inbox, at which point I login and block the email address. This is a manual decision, not some arbitrary crap like SORBs. I have also known webmasters who dropped SORBs because they weren't receiving emails from important clients.
I could go on. Spending my time slamming some crap like SORBs is surely worth it, but I have to buy some gifts |
|
Keith
Why Ask Than?
Premium
join:2002-10-28
Fort Erie, ON
| reply to JJV
My sister (isp= Sympatico) e-mailed me (isp= Cogeco)
it bounced back to her Sympatico got listed on sorbs
she had no idea what to do, I e-mailed Sympatico's tech support explained and sent them the bounced e-mail
next morning e-mail back to normal
Any good provider will will act fast I know mine (Cogeco) dose and I was surprised how fast Sympatico acted on a complaint from a non Sympatico user
--
The only stupid question is the one not asked |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to GunnCat
said by GunnCat :btw, just for your general knowledge. I have been in internet marketing since 2001. I have never and will never use email to advertise. I know people that do and they laugh at SORBS as it hasn't affected their business in the least. I use a Turing test to filter my email. In the last year these are my statistics: Messages Processed 100164 Messages Forwarded 8616 Spam Percentage 91.4% I can say that of those emails I have had 3 spammers who actually took the time to enter the proper code so that I get the email in my inbox, at which point I login and block the email address. This is a manual decision, not some arbitrary crap like SORBs. I have also known webmasters who dropped SORBs because they weren't receiving emails from important clients. I could go on. Spending my time slamming some crap like SORBs is surely worth it, but I have to buy some gifts Turing test? Or Challenge Response? Turing test != Challenge Response. I block C/R servers from sending email to my domain. I don't think it is so much a problem, any more, since early C/R systems getting blocked brought about a change in the behavior of C/R operators. Most now use some kind of pre-filtering to sort out spam with forged sender email addresses.
The problem with C/R, when it doesn't uses spam filters for pre-filtering, is that spam with forged sender email addresses results in challenges sent to innocent parties. I have gotten such challenges before. My procedure is simple; if it was a response to spam with my email address forged, I take the "Turing Test", and release the spam to the intended recipient; if it was a response to a message I sent, I ignore the "Turing Test" and make the sender jump through his own hoops to add me to his white list. If he isn't so inclined, well, I probably didn't need to hear from him, anyway.
BTW, my current line-up of DNSBLs is working just fine, without the backscatter of C/R:
Spamhaus
DSBL
NJABL
Cluecentral, China
Cluecentral, Korea
Cluecentral, Brazil
You have a right to freedom of speech; keep on blasting SORBS. The guys who run SORBS also have a right to freedom of speech; and their publication of the SORBS list is their exercise of their freedom. Mail administrators are free to use SORBS, or not, as they see fit.
Mail advertisers may laugh at DNSBLs, but they are not doing much business with people whose mail servers utilize them.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
Suffering
Retrovertigo
Premium,VIP
join:2004-03-06
127.0.0.1
clubs:
| reply to Keith
said by Keith :Any good provider will will act fast I know mine (Cogeco) dose and I was surprised how fast Sympatico acted on a complaint from a non Sympatico user that's great that your sister's ISP did that, but I still contend that SORBS are money hungry idiots.
Here's a great example. Sorbs blocked one of qwest.net's mail servers. qwest security contacted sorbs to get it taken off (obviously qwest doesn't use one of their mail servers specifically for spamming, this was a mistake on sorbs part). Sorbs recognized the mistake and said they would whitelist the IP address for a $50 donation for every qwest.net subscriber that uses that mail server. Qwest replied back telling them that somewhere along the lines of 15,000 people use that mail server and maybe they didn't understand the issue. Sorbs replied back (with their usually modus operandi) that they would not budge on the price.
The mail server is still blocked.
--
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy -Benjamin Franklin |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| said by Suffering :...I still contend that SORBS are money hungry idiots. Here's a great example. Sorbs blocked one of qwest.net's mail servers. qwest security contacted sorbs to get it taken off (obviously qwest doesn't use one of their mail servers specifically for spamming, this was a mistake on sorbs part). Sorbs recognized the mistake and said they would whitelist the IP address for a $50 donation for every qwest.net subscriber that uses that mail server. Qwest replied back telling them that somewhere along the lines of 15,000 people use that mail server and maybe they didn't understand the issue. Sorbs replied back (with their usually modus operandi) that they would not budge on the price. The mail server is still blocked. The mail server is still listed. You do understand the difference? Well, yes, I realize some networks won't accept email from mail servers listed by SORBS; but that is not the same thing as the mail server being blocked. From the POV of a mail server not using SORBS, the Qwest mail server is not blocked at all.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
GunnCat
join:2001-08-11
Torrington, CT
| said by NormanS :The problem with C/R, when it doesn't uses spam filters for pre-filtering, is that spam with forged sender email addresses results in challenges sent to innocent parties. I have gotten such challenges before. My procedure is simple; if it was a response to spam with my email address forged, I take the "Turing Test", and release the spam to the intended recipient; if it was a response to a message I sent, I ignore the "Turing Test" and make the sender jump through his own hoops to add me to his white list. If he isn't so inclined, well, I probably didn't need to hear from him, anyway. That would explain those few pieces of spam I have gotten.
Good points and good to have a real debate about this topic. |
|
Suffering
Retrovertigo
Premium,VIP
join:2004-03-06
127.0.0.1
clubs:
| reply to NormanS
said by NormanS :The mail server is still listed. You do understand the difference? Well, yes, I realize some networks won't accept email from mail servers listed by SORBS; but that is not the same thing as the mail server being blocked. From the POV of a mail server not using SORBS, the Qwest mail server is not blocked at all. I realize that not everyone uses sorbs (and applaud those who don't), but I think you missed my point. Sorbs mad a mistake and instead of black listing an IP address of someone who had spread spam they mistakenly listed one of qwest's mail servers. They then acknowledged their mistake and wanted qwest to pay in the neighborhood of $750,000 to delete one single IP address.
I understand and like some parts of sorbs, however I disagree with the fact they they punish people based on the fact that someone else used an IP address to spam and now if I lease that IP address I am forced to pay sorbs bribe money to forgive the sins of another (and it happens every day).
--
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy -Benjamin Franklin |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| said by Suffering :I understand and like some parts of sorbs, however I disagree with the fact they they punish people based on the fact that someone else used an IP address to spam and now if I lease that IP address I am forced to pay sorbs bribe money to forgive the sins of another (and it happens every day). You shouldn't be running an end-to-end SMTP client from a dynamic IP address. AOL won't ask to to make a $50 contribution; but they won't de-list you, either:
554- (RTR:BB) http://postmaster.info.aol.com/errors/554rtrbb.html
554- AOL does not accept e-mail transactions from dynamic or residential
554- IP addresses.
554 Connecting IP: 71.131.248.172
You could also, of course, attempt to sue those parties who use SORBS...
A Qwest server got listed by SORBs? I wonder if they do what an SBC server did to me; bounced back a message to an email address forged as the sender of the spam. It can be a frustrating experience, trying to keep bounces from overwhelming your mailbox when regular ISP output servers are swamping it with bounces to a forged email address; I had that happen to me. But that is another issue...
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
Suffering
Retrovertigo
Premium,VIP
join:2004-03-06
127.0.0.1
clubs:
| said by NormanS :You shouldn't be running an end-to-end SMTP client from a dynamic IP address. yep I agree with you.
but you shouldn't email AOL users either 
--
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy -Benjamin Franklin |
|
Suffering
Retrovertigo
Premium,VIP
join:2004-03-06
127.0.0.1
clubs: | reply to JJV
»Is SORBS Blocking Gmail? |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to Suffering
said by Suffering :said by NormanS :You shouldn't be running an end-to-end SMTP client from a dynamic IP address. yep I agree with you. but you shouldn't email AOL users either If you aren't running an end-to-end SMTP relay client, you shouldn't worry about whether your assigned IP address is in the SORBS list, or not. The list is only used by some small number of mail administrators to block incoming port 25 connections to their MX servers; and you aren't making any, so why should you care?
Why shouldn't I send email to AOL users? 
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
