IP address reputation, BorderWare

Res res at ausics.net
Sun Apr 1 12:08:09 IST 2007

On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Rick Chadderdon wrote:

> Res wrote:
>> The fact remains you accept these risks if you run a public mail server, 
>> just like greylisting
> Yes, I know.  And the fact remains that greylisting and SAV are two entirely 
> different moral questions because of who is initiating the behavior against 
> whom.

They are *all* part of someones anti spam defense, just because you dont 
like the way some do it, thats really just tuff luck.

> I'll live with it, but it's rude behavior.  And if a technological method

No, its only rude to you because you disagree with it, you wouldnt even 
know its happening if you werent a log hogger (no offence)

(loghogger: one who feels the need to read every single entry in their log 

> I'd prefer to see sender verification as a part of the SMTP protocol.  If it

Thats not possible for sanity reasons, eg: hosting customers, sending from 
their home account, using their domain email as sender, the current 
connection to the remove MTA wont work, because best chances the senders 
MTA is not the same as their hosting providor.

> Okay, so we're in agreement.  I guess the difference is that when I don't

So you disagree with greylisting as well? Thats the only thing I agreed to 

> users for streaming radio stations and youtbe videos, though.  They don't

streaming radio is nothing, its 3 to 4 kb/s, hell I do it, saves taking in 

> in their email, that a few users streaming audio and video can actually have 
> a negative impact.  But, as they say, "I can do it at home with just my one

then theres something seriously wrong with their network

> Just so I know which it is...  Do you honestly not see the difference between 
> affecting a third party and affecting one who is directly dealing with you, 
> or do you simply not care?  I know we don't agree, but I'd kind of like to 
> know whether it's because you're missing my point - or you don't think the 
> difference is relevant.

I do see your point, you dont like someone asking you if john.smith lives 
there before they let them in, you expect them to take on good faith 
that john.smith lives there.

> to address them) strikes me as a cheap cop-out.  Please understand that I'm 
> talking only about the moral choices involved, which is why the second

and who decides whats moral, what is to you may not be to others.

> DNS lookups are what the DNS server is for.  SAV is *not* what my mail server 
> is for.  Until it's part of the normal operation of a mailserver, I don't

In a perfect world nobody would impersonate anybody, we have not lived in 
that kind of world for many many many many years.

> While I'm not sure that I've been clear enough for everyone to understand the 
> moral flaws I'm pointing out, I do think I've made them as clear as I can

your morals, remember, I think youve made it real clear to this list you 
despise SV, however I doubt you are going to change anyones mind, because
like you, they are looking out for *number one* (themselves) and will take
whatever actions they deem appropriate to protect themselves, and so we 
all should, since nobody else is going to.


Let Novell know what you think of their back door deal with the devil.
Sign the petition today:   http://techp.org/p/1/

More information about the MailScanner mailing list