Why not to use SPEWS

Author	All Replies
nil Java Geek join:2000-11-27 kudos:1 Host: Webmasters and Dev.. Forum Feature Requ..	Why not to use SPEWS »openrbl.org/#209.123.109.175 Blacklisted an entire IP block belonging to nac which includes our mail server.. if you read the handy 'remove instructions' you'll find there's absolutely nothing we can do about it other than rant. Suggestions? Short of ranting I'm out of ideas... Full spews listing: »www.spews.org/html/S2814.html -- Life is too short to be boring
	to forum · permalink · 2004-01-19 22:34:47 ·
AmeritecTech Change we can believe in, 1922 Premium join:2002-09-06 Houston, TX kudos:6 1 edit	Yes, SPEWS is vicious. SPEWS does not accept requests for blocks to be added or removed. They shift as they please. The only alternatives are a media campaign (as Something Awful did) or changing hosts (clearly NOT an option) or petitioning NAC to terminate the spammers.
	to forum · permalink · 2004-01-20 01:04:42 ·

Steve I know your IP address Consultant join:2001-03-10 Yorba Linda, CA kudos:5	said by AmeritecTech: YThe only alternatives are a media campaign (as Something Awful did) or changing hosts (clearly NOT an option) or petitioning NAC to terminate the spammers. No, there is another solution. Publicize the abuses, and convince people that using SPEWS is a bad idea. SPEWS has no power not given to them by subscribers I don't subscribe. Steve -- Stephen J. Friedl * Security Consultant * Tustin, California USA * my web site
	to forum · permalink · 2004-01-20 01:15:37 ·
AmeritecTech Change we can believe in, 1922 Premium join:2002-09-06 Houston, TX kudos:6	Publicize the abuses....by way of a media campaign?
	to forum · permalink · 2004-01-20 01:37:49 ·
Mordy Comfortably Numb Premium,MVM,ExMod 2004-07 join:2001-12-02 Denver, CO	reply to nil Wonderful. More stupidity at the hands of the train wreck called SPEWS. Short term, I would see if NAC can give you a non-corrupt IP address. What SPEWS wants you to do is beg NAC to throw who they believe to be spammers off their network, which I would not do. That is playing their game. I agree with Steve and others; get Karl to publish this on page 1 news, and get the word out. If I have ever seen an anti-spam site, it is BBR. This is the height of stupidity to block this site. -- Facts do not cease to exist because the are ignored - Aldous Huxley
	to forum · permalink · 2004-01-20 01:38:25 ·
Steve I know your IP address Consultant join:2001-03-10 Yorba Linda, CA kudos:5	said by Mordy: Short term, I would see if NAC can give you a non-corrupt IP address. Actually, it would be easier to just relay the mail through a non-listed server. Postfix makes it easy to do this, and Kasia knows exactly where to find such a mail server. But it's no surprise - in the big picture of all the wierd people in the world - that any random person runs a list that has bogus listing requirements. Hell, I could run a bogus list. Why not? The surprise is that people subscribe to the list, and the way to counter SPEWS is to 1) publicize how dumb SPEWS is 2) expose those who use it Then the free market of public opinion can take it from there. Steve -- Stephen J. Friedl * Security Consultant * Tustin, California USA * my web site
	to forum · permalink · 2004-01-20 01:46:40 ·
Jason Levine Premium join:2001-07-13 USA	reply to nil My site (PCQandA.com) was listed as well. We seem to be off the list now though. How we got removed, I can't tell you. Just lucky I guess. It did nothing to change my opinion of SPEWS though. It's an awful operation and I wish it would just go away. (There are much better operations out there that would take up the slack.) -- -Jason Levine http://www.jasons-toolbox.com/ http://www.PCQandA.com/ http://www.urateit.com/
	to forum · permalink · 2004-01-20 14:03:11 ·
nil Java Geek join:2000-11-27 kudos:1 Host: Webmasters and Dev.. Forum Feature Requ..	I just wish there was some accountability involved in this.. but there isn't.. I like an operation like ordb, where everything is out in the open, removal is simple, automated and not affected by vengeance-full self-important admins. -- Life is too short to be boring
	to forum · permalink · 2004-01-20 14:07:03 ·
TamaraB Question The Current Paradigm Premium join:2000-11-08 Da Bronx Reviews: ·Optimum Online ·Clearwire Wireless	reply to nil said by nil: »openrbl.org/#209.123.109.175 Blacklisted an entire IP block belonging to nac which includes our mail server.. if you read the handy 'remove instructions' you'll find there's absolutely nothing we can do about it other than rant. Suggestions? Short of ranting I'm out of ideas... Full spews listing: »www.spews.org/html/S2814.html Nil: 1) your mail server is NOT BlackListed! If you look at the listing it is at level 2 the [2] means level 2. Read the SPEWS FAQ. No one blocks on level 2 listings. Level 2 listings are netblocks which are watched carefully for evidence of abuse, usually because the adjoining netblocks are in use by spammers, and because the provider (NAC in this case) is ignoring complaints about the abuse, or is doing nothing to remove the abusers. 2) There is something you CAN do other than rant, which will not do you any good at all; and that is to complain to NAC about their spam-friendly policies. It's NAC's hosting network abusers which is the problem. If the listing is upgraded to level [1] then there will be a problem getting your e-mail out; if this is intollerable, the ONLY solution would be to change providers. 3) If NAC persists (usually for a prolonged period of time) in it's disregard for the rest of the Internet, by allowing our mailboxes to be filled up by their customer's garbage, then many system administrators including myself, will choose to refuse mail from larger and larger portions of NAC's IP-Space, IMHO this is a perfectly reasonable choice. It puts presure on the service provider not to host spammers, something, which in the long run will help stop spam. Understand, that SPEWS does not block anyone, all they do is make available a list of spam-friendly, and spam-supporting providers. Many systems will choose not to communicate with providers who support spam operations in a direct effort to hurt spammers by denying them access to providers. Yes I run an ISP, and YES we use SPEWS as one of many BL's we use to eliminate UCE/SPAM from our customer's mailboxes. Spews comes in seccond only to spamhaus.org in it's effectiveness. We receive less than 10 spams/day across a user population of over one thousand. Spews alone is responsible for about 30% of the blocking. Captain Bob -- Motor Vessel - Tamara B. - 43' Long-Range Trawler Cape Elizebeth ME.»www.tamara-b.org
	to forum · permalink · 2004-01-20 16:45:58 ·
AmeritecTech Change we can believe in, 1922 Premium join:2002-09-06 Houston, TX kudos:6	said by TamaraB: Yes I run an ISP, and YES we use SPEWS as one of many BL's we use to eliminate UCE/SPAM from our customer's mailboxes. Spews comes in seccond only to spamhaus.org in it's effectiveness. We receive less than 10 spams/day across a user population of over one thousand. Spews alone is responsible for about 30% of the blocking. Yes, but who knows how many false positives are getting tagged? -- Independent thinkers tend to ALWAYS have someone not agreeing with them. It's the non-thinkers that always come in legions." -John Callari
	to forum · permalink · 2004-01-20 16:47:57 ·
nil Java Geek join:2000-11-27 kudos:1 Host: Webmasters and Dev.. Forum Feature Requ..	reply to TamaraB Actually, we are blacklisted.. it could be a case of the list being used incorrectly, but frankly, I don't care. Had one ISP so far whitelist us, as they were dropping our email.. This is a huge waste of my time and does nothing to help fight spam. Majority of spam does not originate in US anyway. -- Life is too short to be boring
	to forum · permalink · 2004-01-20 16:52:05 ·
TamaraB Question The Current Paradigm Premium join:2000-11-08 Da Bronx Reviews: ·Optimum Online ·Clearwire Wireless	reply to Mordy said by Mordy: If I have ever seen an anti-spam site, it is BBR. This is the height of stupidity to block this site. Spews does NOT block anyone. Especially not this site. In fact the netblock which this site sits on is not blocked by anyone using spews either. The listing which NIL quoted is a level [2] listing, no one blocks on spews level 2 listings, they block only on level [1] listings. As far as being "anti-spam" is concerned, you are correct, BBR is anti-spam. The question is will it remain anti-spam when and if push comes to shove (if NAC refuses to deal with their spammers, and the listing goes to level [1])? Will BBR continue to financially support a spam operation, or will they move on and financially support an ISP which does not support and harbor spammers? Will BBR vote anti-spam with their checkbook or not? Captain Bob -- Motor Vessel - Tamara B. - 43' Long-Range Trawler Cape Elizebeth ME.»www.tamara-b.org
	to forum · permalink · 2004-01-20 17:08:21 ·
AmeritecTech Change we can believe in, 1922 Premium join:2002-09-06 Houston, TX kudos:6	Almost everyone here is well-aware of how SPEWS works and that it doesn't actually block anyone. SPEWS uses its influence cavalierly, frequently creating secondary victims, like BBR and Something Awful. I note that you are Premium. Does this mean that you are also supporting a spam-friendly ISP? -- Independent thinkers tend to ALWAYS have someone not agreeing with them. It's the non-thinkers that always come in legions." -John Callari
	to forum · permalink · 2004-01-20 17:11:30 ·
TamaraB Question The Current Paradigm Premium join:2000-11-08 Da Bronx Reviews: ·Optimum Online ·Clearwire Wireless	reply to AmeritecTech said by AmeritecTech: Yes, but who knows how many false positives are getting tagged? No matter what method one uses to reduce spam there WILL be false positives, it's unavoidable. The ONLY way to not have false positives is to not block and to not filter at all! And then, if you have an old email address, you will still loose email, it will get burried in the blizard of garbage. My current public email address has been on the internet since 1993, and is on every spammer's optin CD! Before I moved my mailbox to our filtered mail server (we have a filtered and a non-filtered system) I was getting in excess of 300 spams per day. The sheer volume of spam caused me to loose more legit mail than our current filtered system does! When I had to sit there and sift through hundreds of spams to read the few legit e-mails, I inivetibaly kill off legit mail in the process and in the frustration, not to mention the wasted time (lost billable time). I would rather loose a couple of emails due to filtering, than an equal or greater number due to blizard-burrying ) Captain Bob -- Motor Vessel - Tamara B. - 43' Long-Range Trawler Cape Elizebeth ME.»www.tamara-b.org
	to forum · permalink · 2004-01-20 17:24:44 ·
nil Java Geek join:2000-11-27 kudos:1 Host: Webmasters and Dev.. Forum Feature Requ..	Filtering through spamassassin gets 99% of my spam (I get about 200+ a day) with only one false positive in the last six months. This is w/o using the draconian methods of spews. -- Life is too short to be boring
	to forum · permalink · 2004-01-20 17:26:06 ·
TamaraB Question The Current Paradigm Premium join:2000-11-08 Da Bronx Reviews: ·Optimum Online ·Clearwire Wireless	reply to AmeritecTech said by AmeritecTech: frequently creating secondary victims, like BBR and Something Awful. We all know what "collateral damage" means don't we? It is unavoidable in a war (just ask Dubya), and anti-spam operations amount to a war. That said, it is the "primary" victims which we should be more (primarily) concerned with. The thousands upon thousands of innocent victims who are inundated with porn, viruses, trojans, and lost bandwidth, not to mention the BILLIONS of dollars lost each year due to the spam/uce plague. The number of secondary victims pales greatly in number compared to the primary victims! said by AmeritecTech: I note that you are Premium. Does this mean that you are also supporting a spam-friendly ISP? Absolutely NOT! I support one of the Internet's best sources of information on a very wide range of subjects. BBR is one of the finest discussion systems on the NET, it is NOT however an ISP! It is also NOT spam-friendly, where did you get that Idea? You wouldn't be trying to mis-represent what I said in my post would you? Captain Bob -- Motor Vessel - Tamara B. - 43' Long-Range Trawler Cape Elizebeth ME.»www.tamara-b.org
	to forum · permalink · 2004-01-20 18:01:48 ·
AmeritecTech Change we can believe in, 1922 Premium join:2002-09-06 Houston, TX kudos:6	said by TamaraB: Absolutely NOT! I support one of the Internet's best sources of information on a very wide range of subjects. BBR is one of the finest discussion systems on the NET, it is NOT however an ISP! It is also NOT spam-friendly, where did you get that Idea? You wouldn't be trying to mis-represent what I said in my post would you? What money do you think BBR uses to pay its hosting costs? -- Independent thinkers tend to ALWAYS have someone not agreeing with them. It's the non-thinkers that always come in legions." -John Callari
	to forum · permalink · 2004-01-20 18:10:57 ·
Rhobite Premium join:2002-02-24 Cambridge, MA	reply to TamaraB Tamara, I agree 100%. It's interesting that the discussion here has focused on the evils of SPEWS, with little discussion of NAC's failure to deal with its spam problem. Not to mention, zero suggestions about how else to punish people who sell fake drugs and send porn to kids.
	to forum · permalink · 2004-01-20 18:13:18 ·
AmeritecTech Change we can believe in, 1922 Premium join:2002-09-06 Houston, TX kudos:6	SPEWS has the right to do what it does, and others have the right to voice their discontent. Others can then decide whether they think the claims of overbearing policies are justified. -- Independent thinkers tend to ALWAYS have someone not agreeing with them. It's the non-thinkers that always come in legions." -John Callari
	to forum · permalink · 2004-01-20 18:17:39 ·
TamaraB Question The Current Paradigm Premium join:2000-11-08 Da Bronx Reviews: ·Optimum Online ·Clearwire Wireless	reply to nil said by nil: Filtering through spamassassin gets 99% of my spam (I get about 200+ a day) with only one false positive in the last six months. This is w/o using the draconian methods of spews. Nil: You are an educated, informed, competent end-user. You are capable of filtering your mail as a client, you are capable of keeping your PC virus-free, you understand security, and you have resources to deal with the problem. MOST of our users are not technical and are completely CLUS-LESS and CARE-LESS. Unfortunately that is the state of affairs among the masses out there. This board represents an elite-class of computer users, and mods are at the top of that class usually. As an ISP, I have to be concerned about our network's security, it's bandwidth usage, it's effect on our neighbors and on other systems worldwide. In order to keep our costs down, and to be able to compete in this cut-throat market, we need to keep the 200,000+ garbage and virus-attached emails (many very large)OFF our network. Otherwise, the entire network suffers, latency suffers, web-access times suffer, and we become more vulnerable to attacks from behind our own firewalls from compromised/trojaned machines attempting to spam the world. Believe me, it is a very BIG problem, bigger than you can see from a client perspective. Captain Bob -- Motor Vessel - Tamara B. - 43' Long-Range Trawler Cape Elizebeth ME.»www.tamara-b.org
	to forum · permalink · 2004-01-20 18:30:33 ·

Broadband Tech > Security > Scam and Phishbusters > Why not to use SPEWS