Consolidated spammy countries rbl

[Tony Enderby]

Hugo,

I should have prefaced my original post about this zone with the fact 
that I put it together
based on the current geographic flow of email that my clients receive.  
It certainly isn't for everyone, nor
does it intelligently discern.

The point about including the US zone is very valid as you noted, it 
ranks amongst the top countries of
spam origin. The networks I service however receive a significant amount 
of email from the US and although
a percentage of it is Spam, the majority of it is legitimate. Most of 
the other countries in the zone however send
nothing but Spam to my networks and my client base have no desire to 
receive email from these locations either.

I have been using this for a quite a while and when going back through 
the list posts I noticed there were some individuals
who were interested in blocking by country.  I only posted it because of 
this and to save folks who wanted to do it the need
to include individual zones provided by countries.nerd.dk

Tony.

Hugo van der Kooij wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, sandrews at andrewscompanies.com wrote:
>
>> I think it's a reasonable list but probably isn't applicable to everyone
>> here.  That's one of the reasons I asked that he release his code so we
>> can implement locally and adjust the inclusion/exclusion of countries as
>> we see fit.
>>
>> For the majority of my clients in the US, this list is worthwhile for
>> them, but again, YMMV.  If you've got clients that are ok with blocking
>> everything from the US, that would be reasonable too for them.  The
>> whole notion that any server should accept mail from any other place and
>> pass it along, although part of the original plan, is long since gone.
>>
>> You, yourself have a hall of shame of poorly run networks.  Is blocking
>> them flawed by design?  I dunno, I hate the way SORBS acts in that you
>> get penalized if you happen to be hosted close to poorly run networks
>> when they block ranges, but I guess the only thing I don't like about it
>> is the perceived extortion to get unblocked.  More and more I'm of the
>> opinion that the sheer fact I accept your mail (not you specifically,
>> but anyone) is a privilege that may be revoked at any time.  I'm not
>> militant enough to block everything and then only accept upon request
>> and application, but that day is coming for all of us.  80% of all email
>> on the internet is junk and that's just freaking ridiculous.
>
> Blocking based on assigned network blocks is much more accurate. In 
> the few listed instances it is rather clear the owner of the netblock 
> is not taking any action at all against problems on their network.
>
> Country bounderies are not relevant on internet. IP delegations are.
>
> And they are my blocking actions. You can see they are present and 
> why. But I do not publish them on some RBL list.
>
> But publishing countries in a DNS blacklist for public usage in this 
> totally random yes/no style is flawed by design at best.
>
> In case of the Netherlands we have quite a bit of detection points 
> that alert any Dutch ISP as soon as we notice odd behaviours from any 
> Dutch ISP network.
>
> Hugo.
>

-- 
Kind Regards,

Tony Enderby.

Technical Director - MailWash Australia.
Premium Anti-Spam / Anti Virus / Identity theft protection.
http://www.mailwash.com.au


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scanned by MailWash Australia - http://www.mailwash.com.au
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------