|
Media3 Sues MAPS Over RBL Listings
|
Login/Create an Account
| Top
| 656 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
Idiot (Score:1)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 13, @05:50PM (#560438)
|
|
Why can't you morons actually do some RESEARCH? MAPS RBL does not block
ANYONE from accessing ANY web sites.. it blocks incoming mail sourcing from
MAIL SERVERS listed in the RBL, get your facts right before you post crap
like this.. |
How to remove your site from the block list? (Score:1)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 13, @06:29PM (#560439)
|
|
Hmm, when they block your IP (example), they say that you can contact them through email to get it removed from the blacklist. How the hell are you supposed to send the blacklist people an email from a blacklisted address? That's
like saying "There's a lot of junk phone calls coming from the 612 area code"
but they compromise by saying "You can call us up to fix it." And where do
you live? In the 612 area code! Oh man! |
Slashdot proves they're shoddy/knee-jerk lunatics. (Score:1)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 13, @08:05PM (#560440)
|
|
MAPS is censorware, eh? This has to take the cake as the most ridiculously shallow assessment I've yet heard - Slashdot joins the "elite" ranks of Spamlords Andrew Brunner, Sam Khuri, Brad Pugh, et al in calling MAPS an organ of censorship. Either that or you're just pushing good old talk-show-host let's get the audience frothing and bashing each other over the head in violent (and ad hominem) "debate" game that accomplishes absolutely nothing productive.
Yes, eBGP multi-hop (RBL) subscriptions can blackhole websites, etc. This
is a consequence of an ISP disregarding sensible and ethical standards of
conduct. Nobody forces an ISP or network authority to subscribe, and the
MAPS block isn't made (or UNmade) because of any content issues. Get your
facts straight. Spam and network abuse isn't about content, it's about consent
to use MY network [MY being the authority who PAYS for the network pipes
and decides to control their spamflows via MAPS or other methods].
If Media3 were serious about acting sensibly and ethically, they'd have
cleaned up their act. You conveniently neglected to mention that the process
of being RBL listed takes quite a bit of time [in fact, most of us anti-abuse
types feel it often takes TOO long in most cases]. There's no excuse for
their being unable to repair and re-implement proper procedures for limiting
and curtailing network abuse on their services. NONE. They had MONTHs to do something about this.
Your bogus 2% block claim is ridiculous, according to my logs, the MAPS
trio along with ORBS neutralises 99.7% of all inbound spams. I have logs
which put this in black and white. Prior to my using these dns-RBLs, my
users received between 3-7 spams per DAY. Now, only one of my users still
receives the odd spam, perhaps 8-9 a month. Your attempts to portray MAPS
as an impotent tool against SPAM is as specious as it is WRONG.
While it is regrettable that collateral damage occurs when a netblock like
Media3's is listed, this is an unfortunate consequence when a provider has
such egregiously negligent abuse handling (and prevention) practices. Peacefire
should have sought a better home for their website, plain and simple. MAPS
doesn't give a rat's ass about what content (other than SPAMWARE/network-abuse
tools/"millions of addresses CDs", etc.) It could be end-all-world-hunger
and cure HIV, but if it's a spam-spigot, it will get listed. This is simple.
Vixie has made this entirely clear from the get-go. SPAM IS NOT ABOUT CONTENT, IT'S ABOUT CONSENT. This clear and simple position exonerates MAPS of being censors
as you so spasmically-knee-jerkingly claim. Peacefire's block was a part
of collateral damage, not based on any of their content. I fully
support MAPS listing of Media3 - they were a plague of spamhaus-support websites
and tacitly encouraged network abusers to roost there and spamvertise products
hosted on Media3 sites. If Peacefire were serious about their commitment
to be an effective media organ about censorship, they'd have chosen a more
responsible provider.
Anyhow, you guys have demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of the
issues of network abuse, the slippery nature and tenacity of the network
abusers themselves (and the babblespeak they use to try to "snowjob" people
into thinking they're legitimate businesspeople), the vileness of those ISPs/providers
who provide spammer-friendly havens, and the sheer volume of the problem.
You have demonstrated incompetence and negligence in your "claimed role"
as journalists - and as such, are worthy of relegation to /dev/null with
the rest of your net-kook friends.
This is the third time I've visited this silly website (directed from USENET)
and I can see a consistent lack of intelligence or competence in reporting
facts (in any guise or semblence). I feel sorry for anyone who comes here
expecting to be told any shadow or pretence of the "Truth".
Lord Apollyon
|
Sorry, you're a moron (Score:1)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 14, @12:16AM (#560441)
|
|
Get a clue: most RBL subscribers use the DNS version. And yes, I don't
wish to cooperate with anyone who tolerates spammers. And that includes
anyone who distributes spamware. -russ nelson, too lazy to log in. |
Re:What MAPS is... (Score:1)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 14, @05:05AM (#560442)
|
Get a goddamn clue!
MAPS does NOT block ANYTHING.
To put it simply MAPS publishes a list of IP addresses. It's up to individual
subscribers of the service to use that list in any way they want.
Some of the possible uses include:
using MAPS to block email from those IP addresses (this is probably the most common use)
using MAPS to tag Email with a X-Warning header if the Email is sent from an IP address in RBL (also very common)
block all IP traffic coming in from and going out to IP addresses listed in RBL (this is what AboveNet does)
Again, MAPS does NO blocking! Nada, none, zip, none whatsoever. They
publish a list of IP addresses according to the policies listed in their
website.
Clueless sheep all over this thread. Go do your research idiots!
Tero Paananen
|
Re:A compelling argument... (Score:2)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 13, @05:35PM (#560443)
|
|
If you don't like MAPS, don't use it.
The problem with this is that you can't keep someone who subscribes to MAPS
from sending mail to you! It's a one-way blackhole. Someone on a MAPS-enabled
ISP can send mail to someone who is blackholed by MAPS, but that person can
never reply. The MAPS using ISP's customers don't know they will never get
a response.
Arguing about this with MAPS people will just get you listed in MAPS.
Spam sucks, but there really needs a better way of dealing with it. Leaving
it to an autonomous private group who isn't responsible to anyone is just
asking for more trouble. |
Re:MAPS != censorship. (Score:2)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 13, @06:39PM (#560444)
|
Censorship is something that can only be conducted by the government
Censorship can be done by anyone (I censor my own speech on a regular basis so as not to offend).
You have censorship confused with the first amendment -- freedom of speech
can only be violated by the government (because only the government is limited
by the constitution) but private individuals and corporations can and do
censor every day... |
right to censor (Score:2)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 13, @10:45PM (#560445)
|
|
Yes: ISPs have the right to say what can go on their network and what
cannot. However, if an ISP sells me internet access, that is generally on
the implicit assumption that it will be _complete_ internet access. So if
my ISP uses RBL without my agreement, they are breaking their contract with
me and I can sue them. If a backbone uses an RBL without informing its customers
(ISPs, etc.) it can be sued for a lot of money. |
check max hops (Score:1)
by William Aoki (waoki @ g6net . com) on Wednesday December 13, @07:45PM (#560446)
(User #392 Info | gopher://hydrogen.g6net.com:79/0waoki)
|
If you look at your traceroute output you'll notice that your traceroute
is defaulting to 18 hops max - if its destination isn't within 18 hops it'll
stop the trace. If traffic were being rejected you'd be seeing something
like:
19 * * *
20 * * *
(if it's being dropped on the floor)
or:
19 bbr1.lax.netplanet.net (64.77.31.5) 250ms !X !X
20 bbr1.lax.netplanet.net (64.77.31.5) !X 260ms 250ms
Comparing your trace to mine, it looks like you're landing just a few
hops short of the destination. I ran traces from two locations - the one
through alter.net has bbr2.lax.netplanet.net (64.77.31.3) one hop upstream
of mediamasters.org, and the one through cw.net went through bbr1.lax.netplanet.net
(64.77.31.5).
If your traceroute accepts the same args as mine does, try 'traceroute -m 255 mediamasters.org' instead.
|
Re:Just ignore the spam? (Score:2)
by Chris Johnson on Wednesday December 13, @10:09PM (#560447)
(User #580 Info | http://www.airwindows.com)
|
|
How many years do you have to live? 50?
10 secs * 356 days * 50 years = 178000 seconds
178000 secs = 2966 minutes = 49 hours = 2 days
Are you willing to let spammers take 2 days from your life? And in doing
so, you are doing nothing to help others. I make more of an effort- I file
reports with Spamcop.net. I spend about six times the seconds you do, per
day.
What right do you have to say that I should have almost two weeks taken
out of my life by spammers? I won't get those two weeks again. You won't
get those two days again- and do you think it's going to _stay_ at 10 seconds
a day? Soon you'll be spending 45 seconds digging through the spam (nine
days out of your life) and I might be spending fifteen minutes a day spamcopping
(I have a domain...) and that's SIX MONTHS off my life, just dealing with
spammers! Already it seems like I spend many minutes a day on the spam, over
and over and over in unending repetition. I wish my ISP used the RBL. They
are considering some such action. If they go with the RBL I will fully support
it even at its most extreme application. |
That's no good at all. (Score:2)
by Chris Johnson on Thursday December 14, @12:51AM (#560448)
(User #580 Info | http://www.airwindows.com)
|
|
What if you're a business- or, hell, just _want_ to be a business?
I'm trying to get a recording studio off the ground (obMusicLink),
and putting a lot of effort into it. I _have_ to keep airwindows.com out
there publically and I get all its email, every dictionary-attack spam on
the domain- and I need a solid memorable unsurprising email address to give
people if they want one- chrisj@airwindows.com. It's like some of
the mp3-fan reactions to the threat of the format being suppressed- I don't
care if you can hide mp3s in zips, or hide email addresses in geeky obfuscation
or ever-changing 'stale address discard' rules. I don't have that luxury
and never will have it- I'm stuck operating on the outside with my domain
and my fledgling business (for which I keep all records of income and expense-
not gonna hide from IRS either). I have no option but to use email and web
resources straightforwardly and unobfuscatedly- and I won't be able to keep
up with the load of spam forever unless the spammers are cracked down on.
The spamload could easily just keep accelerating exponentially if nothing
is done to stop it- as it seems more mainstream, more will do it, and so
on.
(random side note- remember how mp3.com changed its agreement and made it evil? Well, a new music site called ampcast.com
recently changed their agreement- and, get this, changed it to be MORE favorable
to the artists! Color me flabbergasted. I'm still happy with besonic, myself,
but who knew? Kudos to ampcast, just found out about this today :) )
|
Re:SERVERS CAN STOP spam EASILY!!! (Score:2)
by Chris Johnson on Thursday December 14, @12:55AM (#560449)
(User #580 Info | http://www.airwindows.com)
|
|
No good- this is trivially hackable. Haven't you seen the spams with
either alphanumeric gibberish starting them off- or _language_ gibberish
in a subparagraph at the bottom? Spam is already avoiding this trap- the
whole purpose of randomly generated areas in spam is to bypass any such spamtrapping
code. I've seen this over and over. |
Re:What in god's name are you talking about? (Score:2)
by Trepidity (delirium4u@theoffspring.net) on Thursday December 14, @01:00AM (#560450)
(User #597 Info | telnet://127.0.0.1/)
|
This is just pure punishment, not even on the same track as trying to cut down on spam.
And that is why many of us dislike MAPS, because that is exactly what
they suggest. In fact that is the original method by which they operated
- the DNS method you mentioned was added later, and they still advocate the
complete BLACKHOLING of all traffic to the sites on their blacklist. |
Re:Exactly (Score:2)
by Trepidity (delirium4u@theoffspring.net) on Thursday December 14, @01:04AM (#560451)
(User #597 Info | telnet://127.0.0.1/)
|
And then, you can turn the RBL off. Victims of Censorware can't turn it off because they aren't allowed to do so.
I don't see how you can make that distinction. The only way for a user
to turn the RBL off is to switch ISPs to one that does not use it. If you
consider this a legitimate solution then censorware is perfectly fine too,
since you can always move to an internet connection which doesn't use censorware
(using one at home instead of the library, for instance). |
Re:MAPS != censorship. (Score:2)
by cduffy (cduffy at bigfoot dot com) on Thursday December 14, @06:09AM (#560452)
(User #652 Info)
|
|
It's not censorship if it's voluntary. If I decide not to read the /.
posts of anyone whose nick starts with 'd' and encourage others to do the same,
am I censoring you? No! Only if I start threatening people that if I see them
reading your posts I'll throw them in jail is censorship occurring. Until that
point, they make their own decision not to read your posts.
To quote from Webster's:
Censor \Cen"sor\, n. [L. censor, fr. censere to value, tax.]
2. One who is empowered to examine manuscripts before they
are committed to the press, and to forbid their
publication if they contain anything obnoxious; -- an
official in some European countries.
None of the other definitions given apply -- the first is the actual Roman
officials after whom the word is named, the third to a general fault-finder and
the fourth to a critic. This one, too, clearly misses the mark. MAPS is not
given any special empowerment to read content, and (more critically) cannot
forbid publication. All they do is publish a list, with no enforcement to back
it up; thus, they do not forbid anything.
If a user is being censored by anyone, it is not MAPS but rather the ISP who
chooses to use the service without their users' consultation. However, even
that doesn't hold water, as the user is not forced to use any given ISP. With
no forceful coercion involved anywhere down the line, any claim of censorship
is certainly far wrong.
|
Absolutely not. (Score:2)
by cduffy (cduffy at bigfoot dot com) on Thursday December 21, @10:25AM (#560453)
(User #652 Info)
|
The reason: the users are voluntarily paying the admins for their service.
If they don't like the service, they have easy recourse -- they can withhold
pay if their ISP violates the terms of its agreement, and can easily switch
providers. If there are no providers that don't censor, then there's a pretty
strong incentive to start one.
I'm pretty damn unhappy with my government; indeed, it's violated its
own Terms Of Service (Constitution) -- but if I stop paying taxes in protest,
I'll find myself in jail. And if I try starting a competing government here
in town, I'll find myself in pretty bad shape.
My ISP can censor me all they want -- there's an econmic mechanism to
keep it from being abusive; I'll just switch. If my government tries to consor
me, there's no such recourse -- then I get pissed. |
um, wrong thrice (Score:1)
by Tom on Thursday December 14, @03:45AM (#560454)
(User #822 Info | http://web.lemuria.org)
|
MPAA is not suing for *music*, and MPAA is not suing for copying of anything.
MPAA *is* suing for removal of a software program from various websites
(mine included). they are trying to make it *look like* piracy, but it's
not. we may or may not be selling burglary tools, but even MPAA hasn't yet
said we're burglars *in court*. what they're saying in their PR lies is a
different matter.
third mistake: you can NOT define whether or not peacefire.org will work
for you through your choice of ISP, because source-routing doesn't work reliably
anymore and thus even if you change ISP your packets may still travel over
the same MAPS-subscriber network.
|
Re:Bullshit (Score:1)
by perrin (permath-NOSPAM@idi.ntnu.no) on Thursday December 14, @12:10AM (#560455)
(User #891 Info)
|
>By your logic, the United Nations should start >killing Iraqi
men, women, and children until >Sadam Hussein steps down
Haven't you noticed - this is exactly what is happening now. The US is
still bombing Iraq occasionally, almost a decade after the war supposedly
was over, and the blockade has killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people
who cannot get food, clean water or medicines in a country where the infrastructure
has been completely devastated by bombing.
Wake up!
|
Tricky. (Score:2)
by pb (pdbaylie@eos.ncsu.edu) on Wednesday December 13, @08:33PM (#560456)
(User #1020 Info | http://www4.ncsu.edu/~pdbaylie)
|
Well, I agree that any site that sends spam should be blocked. Or, rather,
destroyed in a pilliar of fire whenever possible. But if it just sells spamming
software, and doesn't actually spam, I don't see a problem with that.
But then I went to their website.
My GOD, have you ever seen anything so awful?
So then I turned Java off.
There were still broken images, blinking links, I couldn't read the text...
Could we have a web proxy that blocks UGLY web pages? Becuase I'd blackhole these guys in a heartbeat!
Are they actually trying to run a business? If I saw a "business" site that looked like that, I'd run the other way!
Ugh. Unclean. Please block that site, whatever your reasoning.
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
|
Re:uhhh (Score:1)
by demon (dpates@DONT.SPAM.ME.dsdk12.net) on Wednesday December 13, @07:16PM (#560457)
(User #1039 Info)
|
That was my question. Of course, after the article Jamie posted recently,
with his whole vegetarianism rant, I have a _slightly_ hard time taking him
too seriously. Even if peacefire.org IS on the RBL list (which, yes, it IS,
I checked) - what proof exactly do we have that they were actually being
dropped via BGP? Everyone who's tried tracerouting via above.net, and posted
about it, hasn't had a problem.
Jamie, one word - PUH-LEEZE. If you checked yourself, media3 is a major
source of spam - why should we care if they're being RBL'd? And the guy you
talked to at media3? How do you know he wasn't just telling you what any
smart PR person would? It certainly looks that way to me. If they're serious
about being against spam, though, it looks to me like they need to get to
work ENFORCING that policy, instead of whining about how they're being abused!
_____
|
This really has gotten out of hand.. (Score:1)
by defile on Wednesday December 13, @05:37PM (#560458)
(User #1059 Info | http://michael.bacarella.com/)
|
|
I'm totally pro-blacklisting mail servers that are pro-spammer, but don't you think this is going a bit too far?
I certainly didn't think I'd be signing up for something of this magnitude by subscribing to these blacklists.
I'm sure Paul Vixie is a nice guy and all, but in my professional life
as a sys admin, whenever I come across his name I know I'm in for trouble.
cron and named holes? Vixie anyone? This just adds to his legacy, if you
ask me.
This is just a little vigilante group that has become obsessed with the
power they have. Maybe you've gone too far, guys? Spammers suck and deserve
to die, but censorship really does more harm than good.
|
MAPS RBL is essential for blocking spam (Score:1)
by ikluft on Thursday December 14, @04:25PM (#560459)
(User #1284 Info | http://www.kluft.com/~ikluft/)
|
|
Well, it looks like AboveNet caught some flack for BGP-blocking RBL-listed
sites. But that doesn't make MAPS RBL any less essential for blocking e-mail
spams. From what I read in this article, MAPS RBL was correct to pursue a
spammer-software site whose web site is what they advertise but is not where
they send their spams from. The Slashdot author who posted this story is
being naive about the war on spam and trying to make an academic argument
out of it.
Even for residential sites, RBL is one of a number of tools which block significant amounts of spam
when used in combination.
(If you're looking for censorship, you should pick on ORBS, not MAPS.)
It's very difficult to keep ahead in this battle. I condemn Slashdot for posting such a poorly-researched article to make life difficult on volunteers who are trying to help us all in the war on spam!
Be more careful with our volunteers.
Shame on you!
Ian Kluft
San Jose, California
|
Re:"Press time"? (Score:1)
by The Rizz (TheRizz@aol.com) on Wednesday December 13, @06:29PM (#560460)
(User #1319 Info)
|
|
So,
you decided to post the article anyway rather than wait for a response from
the individuals who you are attacking? That doesn't seem like very good journalism
to me.
And what would seem like good journalism? Never publishing an article just because someone doesn't ever get back to you?
|
Innocent victims of *a bad ISP* (Score:2)
by Per Abrahamsen (abraham@dina.kvl.dk) on Thursday December 14, @05:05AM (#560461)
(User #1397 Info | http://www.dina.kvl.dk/~abraham/)
|
The innocent victims are real victims, but not of MAPS but *their own
ISP*. We had a similar case in Denmark, where a ISP refused to throw out
a web hotel customer for spamming through other channels, and got a netblock
blacklisted by MAPS. This was problematic, because one of the major Danish
ISP's blocks all trafic to hosts listed by MAPS.
However the ISP in question they *did* move their other customers away
from the netblock, while reconcidering the case. Thus, only the spammer
was affected.
In general, users of ISP's who are both incompetent and refuse to cooperate
in the fight against spam *will* get hurt. However, they will be in a position
to do something about it, by using a competent ISP. |
Irony Alert: DeCSS (Score:5)
by chrisd (chrisd@dibona.com) on Wednesday December 13, @07:44PM (#560462)
(User #1457 Info | http://www.dibona.com | Last Journal: Monday August 20, @01:43PM)
|
|
I am probably not the only person who found it interesting that maps,
by banning an IP because of a company selling software to spam, is the moral
equivalent to the MPAA suing and taking down sites that host DeCSS. Do we
go after the tools to do "bad things" or do we go after those who do the
"bad things". Now, spamming software is sick messed up crap, but if we subscribe
to maps, then are we as bad as Jack Valenti and his pals in the entertainment
industry?
Chris DiBona
VA Linux Systems
--
Grant Chair, Linux Int.
Pres, SVLUG
|
More power to em! (Score:1)
by jmorris42 on Wednesday December 13, @06:00PM (#560463)
(User #1458 Info | http://www.beau.org/~jmorris)
|
Ok, a few innocent hosting customers are getting their MAIL blocked to
MAPS subscribers. If they don't like it they should either pressure their
hosting company to get get the spammers off their IP block or move their
account to a more reputable hosting outfit. Moving would probably be the
more effective option.
Hiding spammers among innocents is about as ethical as hiding military
targets in civilian areas and whining when civilians take collateral dammage.
Don't blame the fighter pilots whose bombs miss, blame the cowards using
their own civilians as a shield.
Personally I think that blocking ALL access to spam related address is
the only way to stop the problem. After all, AOL/MSN accounts are an inexaustable
resource to originate the crap from, but it has to be able to point to a
reasonably stable address if they are to profit from their wickedness. Blocking
access to sites that are promoted by spam or sell spam related products and
services is required for any campaign against it to succeed.
Spammers, and nobody else for that matter, has a RIGHT to send traffic
across or into another's network without their consent. If those of us who
detest spam wish to exercise our right of free association to choose NOT
to associate with someone, let nobody speak against it.
|
Disagreeable Volume vs. Disagreeable Content (Score:1)
by Xenophon Fenderson, (xenophon@irtnog.org) on Thursday December 14, @05:43AM (#560464)
(User #1469 Info | http://web.irtnog.org/~xenophon/)
|
|
It's one thing to block a site or cancel postings based on spam volume (ala
the Briedbart index of netnews, or refusing to carry alt.binaries.*), but
to block/cancel because one doesn't like what another is saying/selling/etc.,
that is obviously not content-neutral and is, in my mind, a Bad Thing.
Blackholing an ISP is something that requires both extraordinary abuse and
extraordinary evidence. I see neither here, so in this case I'm having a
difficult time supporting MAPS.
Rev. Dr. Xenophon Fenderson, the Carbon(d)ated, KSC, DEATH, SubGenius, mhm21x16
|
Re:This really has gotten out of hand.. (Score:1)
by Mark Pitman on Wednesday December 13, @09:23PM (#560465)
(User #1610 Info)
|
|
cron and named holes? Vixie anyone? This just adds to his legacy, if you ask me.
Is any software 100% bullet-proof? I think not... Give the guy a break!
|
Re:Huh??? (Score:1)
by Sabalon on Wednesday December 13, @06:01PM (#560466)
(User #1684 Info)
|
Let me explain it:
- peacefire is blocked by MAPS.
- anyone who subscribes to MAPS or whose ISP subscribes to MAPS will
not be able to get e-mail from peacefire. Sure - an individual may choose
not to use MAPS, but if you get your mail via your ISP and they use MAPS
- you're screwed.
- peacefire has not spammed anyone...they just happen to have an IP
in the same class C as some other domain that MAPS doesn't like.
As for the Website thing - I believe on that sentence where it says it
block innocent websites, it should have said innocent domains, or they were
just comparing what MAPS is doing to other censorware junk. |
Re:Not totally correct. (Score:1)
by Sabalon on Friday December 15, @08:53AM (#560467)
(User #1684 Info)
|
|
Where can one find info about the eBGP RLB? I looked on their website and saw nothing mentioned.
|
Is the RBL really being used for HTTP? (Score:2)
by copito (mcope02@earthlink.net) on Wednesday December 13, @05:39PM (#560468)
(User #1846 Info)
|
The author implies that Above.net is using the RBL to block HTTP access to websites. This is quite troubling if true.
It seems much more likely that Above.net and various other ISPs and users
are using the RBL to block email from the IPs in question (which would be
likely to be used by the website, but might not be). This is also troubling
if innocent machines are implicated but much less so and hardly rises to
the level of censorware since websites do not typically use email for only
a tiny fraction of their content.
--
|
RBL Usage info - READ THIS (Score:5)
by Acheron (acheron@acheron.com!SP.AM) on Wednesday December 13, @08:39PM (#560469)
(User #2182 Info)
|
|
There are three ways that RBL may be used, listed at this address:
http://mail-abuse.org/rbl/usage.html
ONLY
ONE OF THE USAGE METHODS results in blackholing all ip traffic, that is the
Subscription via BGP. This option is only available to larger networks with
routers which have an ASN (see whatis.com if you don't know what an ASN is.)
I
know of very very few networks which use RBL in this manner. There must be
a few, but it seems like a pain in the ass, and there are negative effects
of doing it, as indicated on the RBL description of the service. Anyone
choosing to implement such an esoteric blackholing system for all ip traffic
from RBL-listed hosts is likely FULLY AWARE that they will be dropping some
hosts, and must consider that an acceptable risk. If you are a client of
such an organization, and don't buy into that, then leave. My guess would
be that most that have successful implementations of BGP RBL subscription
had buy-in from their clients before they set it up. My guess is that 95% or more of RBL subscribers use the "Direct
usage via DNS lookup by mailserver" method of applying RBL blocking. This
method has ZERO IMPACT on http, ftp, dns, ICMP, or any other type of traffic
other than SMTP. This Slashdot article was written by someone who does not understand
the nature of the Internet and the RBL on a detailed level, and who is obviously
dipping into conspiracy theories a bit... his little diatribe on above.net
sounds like the manifesto of a lunatic. To the author: Get over it, sir.
You don't understand the technology, and you don't understand the decisions
made by ISPs who implement the RBL. I wish you well in your career, but this
isn't going to be the ground-breaking story you thought it was. Feel free
to write me if you'd like to speak to me further. Sincerely,
~Acheron
|
Re:Is the RBL really being used for HTTP? (Score:1)
by sjanes71 on Thursday December 14, @06:14AM (#560470)
(User #2217 Info | http://people.netword.com/~simon/ | Last Journal: Thursday August 30, @08:48AM)
|
Yes, it is. Above.net uses it to blackhole ALL packets to IP's listed
in the RBL. I have experienced this personally in the censorship of Steve
Forbes' 2000 Presidential campaign site.
_______
computers://use.urls. People use Networds.
|
Re:RBL Usage info - READ THIS (Score:2)
by sjanes71 on Thursday December 14, @06:07AM (#560471)
(User #2217 Info | http://people.netword.com/~simon/ | Last Journal: Thursday August 30, @08:48AM)
|
|
Unfortunately,
I am behind Above.net which I believe does subscribe to the BGP RBL-- not
something my ISP (Capu.NET) can change... During 1999-2000 MAPS RBL blocked
Steve Forbes' campaign website so I couldn't get to it from home, something
I found highly dubious. I've known that MAPS RBL has been Censorware for
a long time now. Whatever good MAPS RBL could have acheived has been lost with its
Ivory Tower administrators who slash and burn netblocks with no accountability.
"It's to fight spam" sounds more and more like "What about the children!?" to me from the MAPS people. They have made it an excuse to fuck with people's livelihoods. Pardon mon Français. That's how I feel.
_______
computers://use.urls. People use Networds.
|
Re:MAPS != censorship. (Score:2)
by Amphigory (malda@slashdot.org) on Wednesday December 13, @10:14PM (#560472)
(User #2375 Info | http://www.answers.org)
|
If a government library refuses to cary 'Hucklberry fin' because of it's
content then that's censorship. However private organizations should not
be forced to carry or not carry a given item. You cannot compel me to carry
a slashdot bumper sticker on the back of my car claiming that if I refuse
I am 'censoring' your right to free speech. No... If a government refuses you the right, with your
own resources, to purchase and read Huckleberry Finn, that's censorship.
Where on earth has everyone got the idea that, for the government
to fail to actively support something is equivalent to the government prohibiting
it?
--
|
Why the Hell Not? (Score:2)
by Amphigory (malda@slashdot.org) on Wednesday December 13, @10:22PM (#560473)
(User #2375 Info | http://www.answers.org)
|
By your logic, the United Nations should start killing Iraqi men, women,
and children until Sadam Hussein steps down. Hey, it would work. Once all
the citizens are dead, Sadam will have no one to rule over, and will thus
no longer have power.
Why Not? It worked to end World War II. Isn't peace worth a few cracked eggs?
(NOTE: this is called sarcasm. I am actually a philosophical pacifist, violently *ahem* opposed to violence.)
--
|
Re:There are no innocent victims (Score:1)
by David Jao (djao@dominia.org) on Thursday December 14, @01:05AM (#560474)
(User #2759 Info | http://dominia.org/djao/)
|
|
I understand your point and I guess their current course of action makes
sense in this situation, but I am concerned about where this course is heading.
In the inevitable future where POTS modems have been obseleted and
a gigantic merged company such as AT&T-AOL-Time-Warner-Verizon is the
sole provider of both cable modem and DSL services in the US, would it really
be the wisest course of action for MAPS to add the entire behemoth ISP to
the RBL, just to spite one spam-software website? Where do you draw the line at what constitutes spam software?
I can write a one-line shell script that bulk-mails a message to an ascii
list of addresses. (I can even imagine situations where this script could
be genuinely useful.) Does this count as spam software? What if I simply
post the mail (1) man page, together with a short shell script tutorial. Does this count?
Right now I use the RBL, and I understand full well that I always have the
choice of not using the RBL. However, as an RBL user I would prefer it if
the RBL remained a useful service. Blocking an entire megacorp can certainly
be very effective at times (e.g. Usenet death penalty), but the prospect
of abuse worries me. |
Re:The problem is the innocent victims (Score:1)
by David Jao (djao@dominia.org) on Thursday December 14, @06:56PM (#560475)
(User #2759 Info | http://dominia.org/djao/)
|
|
I
think it is OK to hit good customers at bad ISPs, as that is an efficient
way to make the bad ISP behave in an acceptable manner.
Implicit
in this argument is the assumption that people have the freedom to choose
their ISP. This assumption doesn't hold any water: I myself know several
people who consider themselves lucky to have even one broadband provider in their area, let alone two or three.
Although your guess is as good as mine, I predict that the lack of choice
problem will only get worse as more and more companies merge. When people have no choice of ISP, blocking innocent bystanders
accomplishes no productive purpose and serves only to piss off the good guys
and reduce the utility of the RBL. |
drawbacks of negative feedback (Score:2)
by David Jao (djao@dominia.org) on Wednesday December 13, @06:17PM (#560476)
(User #2759 Info | http://dominia.org/djao/)
|
|
IPv4 addresses are not so plentifully available that one can simply block
all questionable netblocks and expect there to be any unblocked addresses
left for the good guys to reside in.
Also, with the current pace of mergers in the telecom sector, it is becoming increasingly the case that many people simply don't
have the luxury of choosing their internet provider. Punishing innocent sites
by mere association in this case is a cure worse than the disease. |
The problem is the innocent victims (Score:3)
by David Jao (djao@dominia.org) on Wednesday December 13, @05:59PM (#560477)
(User #2759 Info | http://dominia.org/djao/)
|
|
Did you read the article by any chance? The problem being pointed out
is that organizations such as Peacefire, who do not spam or harbor spammers
or support spammers, are being blocked by the RBL, not for anything they
did, but merely for being on the same netblock as the spammer websites.
Such a gaffe might be understandable if the IP addresses in question were
dynamic, but they're not. They're static. There is no need for MAPS to list
peacefire.org in the RBL. |
Re:Huh??? (Score:5)
by jeffg on Wednesday December 13, @06:50PM (#560478)
(User #2966 Info)
|
|
There are many forms of the MAPS RBL subscription.
One form that appeals to some network providers is the MAPS RBL Subscription via Multihop eBGP4 .
This subscription option involves configuration within border routers of
a subscribing network provider. Any traffic that passes through a router
configured to peer with the MAPS RBL feed will null-route packets destined
for any host or network listed in the MAPS RBL. This includes ALL internet protocol traffic -- not just mail.
If
a network or host is listed in the MAPS RBL, and a router between you and
that host or network is configured to use the MAPS RBL BGP feed, you will
be unable to browse a website located there, you will be unable to ftp to
them, and yes, you will be unable to send them mail. And they will be unable
to send you mail, or browse your web site. Again, any traffic passing through
a router configured in this way that is destined for an IP in the MAPS RBL
will be null-routed -- for all intents and purposes, dropped on the floor. Asymmetric
routing and inadequate coverage on the border can be a noted hole, but in
cases such as these, the MAPS RBL BGP feed isn't really working anyways.
|
This isn't right (Score:1)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @05:27PM (#560479)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
Perens.com goes through Above.net to get to most of the net. I can get
to the RBL-ed sites just fine. The only thing those sites can't do is deliver
me mail. Thanks Bruce
|
Re:That was the old system (Score:1)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @05:34PM (#560480)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
No. I clicked on that list of links and viewed the pages. I ran traceroute
and saw that I was getting to them through above.net . Thanks Bruce
|
Re:Look again (Score:1)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @05:44PM (#560481)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
Look at the traceroute output I published above.
|
Re:That doesn't prove anything (Score:1)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @05:57PM (#560482)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
OK, publish the traceroute output so we can figure out where things stop.
I don't believe so much in my own fame that I think Above.net has special rules in its routers for me. What a laugh! Thanks Bruce
|
Moderate down, I'm wrong. (Score:1)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @06:10PM (#560483)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
Darn. I'm wrong. I typed in the wrong host. I'm human. Moderate down please. Thanks Bruce
|
Re:Moderate UP, he's right! - Proof (Score:1)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @06:45PM (#560484)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
Yeah, but I'd trust one from a customer wire more. Thanks Bruce
|
Re:Exactly (Score:1)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @06:49PM (#560485)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
My son's grandma is a webmaster.
|
Re:not the real Bruce Perens (Score:1)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @07:44PM (#560486)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
Everybody was getting tired of that. Note the ID number, it's stayed the same. Bruce
|
Re:Exactly (Score:1)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @07:46PM (#560487)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
No, not domain. 4-letter user name at a popular free public email site. Thanks Bruce
|
Re:Mill's tries to be an absolute (Score:1)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @08:29PM (#560488)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
Say I decided to deliver my free speech in your living room, day and
night, without cease, making your property unusable for your habitation.
Does my free speech right override your property right? We
all accept some reduction of our free speech right to live peacefully in
community. Free speech is irrelevant without community, because without community
there is nobody to speak to. So much for Mill's absolutes. Thanks Bruce
|
Re:services like this (Score:2)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @05:32PM (#560489)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
How else do you get the people with bad relays to fix them? Thanks Bruce
|
Re:A compelling argument... (Score:2)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @05:37PM (#560490)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
If you pay that much, you can put an SMTP MX agent somewhere that doesn't blackhole routes. Again,
I am not getting routes blackholed through Above.net today. I can click on
those links and see them. Traceroute tells me I'm going through above.net
. Bruce
|
Re:Exactly (Score:2)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @05:48PM (#560491)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
Well, if nothing else you can get an email address somewhere else that
circumvents the RBL. If you run your own MDA, you can get an MX somewhere
else that circumvents the RBL. Go into business today providing spam-unfiltered
email! Bruce
|
Re:services like this (Score:2)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @05:53PM (#560492)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
That would be a good analogy if the problem was only within your house.
A closer analogy here would be that your burglar alarm is going off at night
and waking me up. Can I compel you to fix it? Yes. Thanks Bruce
|
Re:RBL - What a hosed concept (Score:2)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @05:55PM (#560493)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
You don't have your name and email all over the web. Take pity on those who do and allow them some filters. Thanks Bruce
|
Oops. Big oops. (Score:2)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @06:08PM (#560494)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
It's marketingmasters.com, not mediamasters. I've led you astray. Sorry.
|
Re:No, you don't have the right (Score:2)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @06:14PM (#560495)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
Not in the town where I live, and not in the one where you live either.
The principle is simple: your right to swing your fist ends at my nose. Where
I live, I would call the police who would cite you under the noise ordinance,
they would fine you and require you to fix the violation, and if you did
not do so they would eventually get a court order. Then, if you violate the
court order you are in contempt and can be jailed. That's the way the law
works most places in the U.S. Thanks Bruce
|
Re:Exactly (Score:2)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @06:17PM (#560496)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
It's more likely that Grandma will stop using her email because of all
those junk messages. Try this experiment. Register a 4-character name at
some of the free mail services. Don't ever use it. See if it gets mail. It
will! They are scanning aaaa to zzzz and farther. Thanks Bruce
|
Re:That violates John Stuart Mill's liberalism max (Score:2)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @07:17PM (#560497)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
Mill's not an absolute. Not every annoyance is harm because there is
a level of annoyance that people tolerate in order to live in community.
It's when you exceed that level that harm occurrs. If you bloody my nose,
that's harm. If you wake me up at night once, you might be cursed out but
not hauled to jail. Do it 10 times, and it's a different matter.
Thanks Bruce
|
Re:Exactly (Score:3)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @05:29PM (#560498)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
And then, you can turn the RBL off. Victims of Censorware can't turn it off because they aren't allowed to do so. Bruce
|
Re:This isn't right (Score:3)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @05:43PM (#560499)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
traceroute to MediaMasters.com (204.101.215.149), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1 dnai-com.perens.com (216.15.108.185) 21.416 ms 0.832 ms 0.703 ms
2 dnai-216-15-96-1.cust.dnai.com (216.15.96.1) 22.975 ms 12.134 ms 16.915 ms
3 fe3-0-br-1.sjc.dnai.com (207.181.193.1) 22.722 ms 7.364 ms 7.759 ms
4 main2-249-152.sjc.above.net (209.249.152.3) 20.723 ms 9.060 ms 7.091 ms
5 core5-main2-oc3.sjc.above.net (216.200.0.205) 23.190 ms 7.470
ms 7.776 ms 6 core1-core5-oc48.sjc2.above.net (216.200.0.178) 23.403 ms
7.579 ms 7.755 ms
7 ord-sjc-oc12.ord.above.net (207.126.96.117) 67.590 ms 67.780
ms 68.573 ms 8 POS12-0-0.GW2.CHI6.ALTER.NET (157.130.111.89) 70.829 ms
69.470 ms 69.189 ms
9 112.ATM3-0.XR1.CHI6.ALTER.NET (146.188.208.186) 69.099 ms 67.905 ms 69.813 ms
10 291.ATM2-0.TR1.CHI4.ALTER.NET (146.188.208.250) 94.485 ms 95.112 ms 93.882 ms
11 106.ATM7-0.TR1.TOR2.ALTER.NET (146.188.142.74) 95.481 ms 102.600 ms 99.372 ms
12 299.ATM7-0.XR1.TOR3.ALTER.NET (152.63.129.149) 103.557 ms 98.535 ms 98.082 ms
13 190.ATM7-0.GW1.TOR3.ALTER.NET (152.63.129.233) 98.190 ms 100.049 ms 98.933 ms
14 205.150.221.230 (205.150.221.230) 114.641 ms 100.628 ms 103.484 ms
15 mediamasters (204.101.215.149) 102.729 ms 101.457 ms 101.752 ms
So, it's not happening here.
|
OK, I'm a dunce. (Score:3)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @06:06PM (#560500)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
Bruce perens is human. I typed mediamasters instead of marketingmasters.
I am getting to the marketingmasters class C through alter.net rather than
above.net . Bruce
|
Re:OK, I'm a dunce. (Score:3)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @07:21PM (#560501)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
Slashdot is so funny. I get moderated to +4 for admitting I'm a dunce :-) Thanks Bruce
|
I have to agree. (Score:5)
by Bruce Perens ([bruce] [at] [perens.com]) on Wednesday December 13, @07:06PM (#560502)
(User #3872 Info | http://perens.com/)
|
|
Signal-to-noise is a precious commodity. Of course, spam degrades it.
If spammers ran rampant (more than they do today), I'd not be able to have
this, an address that anybody in the world can use to reach me, even when I've never heard of you. It
happens that if you write me and I'm not at home, I get your mail via Palm
VII wirelessly. Whoever you are. Even if I've never heard of you. And sometimes,
that matters to people. Spam really is a problem on the Palm, because
it takes time to download it, there's only 2MB RAM so there's no space for
it, and so on. So, I want to filter spam, and I want to deter spammers
because deterrence is more effective than a filter. The RBL has been a positive
force for me, it's kept the S/N to the point that I can read your mail. Thanks Bruce
|
Re:Why should RBL block HTTP? (Score:1)
by Harik (Dan@Merillat.org) on Wednesday December 13, @11:23PM (#560503)
(User #4023 Info)
|
|
What really bothers me about this is that they're blocking all traffic to and from the IP addresses. Seems to me
like blocking port 25 (sending and recieving) would be plenty-- then, if they get a few innocent web sites that
don't do email it's no big deal.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Cluebat time.
RBL just lists IPs. There's two forms. One, a reverse-DNS lookup. Two, a realtime BGP4 feed.
Most ISPs (myself included) configure sendmail to check incoming IPs against
their reverse DNS. Therefore, it only blocks email coming from those specific
IPs, and not email going to them.
A few ISPs use the realtime BGP4 feed to blackhole
all traffic from those IPs.
Mind you, they are not REQUIRED to blackhole those IPs. They might just
use it to divert to a seperate mailserver for extra spam checking. The fact
is, the ISPs that do it agree with Paul Vixie and the rest of MAPS that Spammers,
Spam-tolerators, Spammer-services and the hosts of spammer-services are NOT
good for their network.
However, I doubt most people on slashdot are impacted by this. The worst you might be is
unable to recieve email from peacefire. Darn.
Perhaps Peacefire should choose a provider NOT
activly supporting 21 spammers.
--Dan
|
Re:can MAPS/ORBS be advisory to users? (Score:2)
by Howie (howie-news@thingy.com) on Thursday December 14, @04:47AM (#560504)
(User #4244 Info | http://wotsit.thingy.com/ | Last Journal: Thursday August 30, @04:18PM)
|
I've only got experience of this stuff with QMail, but for that MTA,
there are patches to add X-RBL-Hit headers or similar, as well as the more
common don't-accept-RBL-listed-connections type of thing.
I don't know if this is a specific qmail issue, but the way the server
works is to accept the mail if it for a local domain, queue it and then
figure out what to do with it in terms of the user to deliver to, since there
may be aliases and so on involved, which it doesn't want to spend time resolving
when accepting the mail. In the case where the spammer is just guessing usernames
en masse with a domain name on the end, all the 'misses' become bounces.
If spammers were at least halfway decent and mailed address known to exist,
the load on mail servers from spam would probably be considerably reduced.
So the difference is that the ISPs mail server will then spend a large
chunk of time generating bounce messages (which will typically also bounce
back, as the return address of spam is often faked), rather than refusing
to accept the single connection in the first place (a single connection can
spawn hundreds or thousands of queued items - a large BCC list effectively).
Obviously, the time spent by the mail server clearing queues of bounce
messages and double-bounces is time spent not delivering customers incoming
and outgoing mail.
Personally, I agree with the RBL in it's DNS form, but not the BGP version
- blocking routing to IPs and especially IP ranges completely is extreme
and harms much more than the intended target.
Of course, if you like the idea but not the politics, you could reasonably
easily set up a competing service - it's just DNS data. Maybe make it group-moderated
in some way - slashdot for spam-prevention. *shudder*. I believe there are at least a couple of similar things for usenet spam (can't remember the names though).
|
Re:"Press time"? (Score:1)
by jamiemccarthy on Wednesday December 13, @07:01PM (#560505)
(User #4847 Info | http://jamie.mccarthy.vg/ | Last Journal: Friday August 17, @09:48PM)
|
"So,
you decided to post the article anyway rather than wait for a response from
the individuals who you are attacking? That doesn't seem like very good journalism
to me."
I contacted them this afternoon (PST) and
said the story was time-sensitive. The PR person I talked to assured me someone
would contact me to answer my questions "in a few minutes." No phone call
or email for four hours, so I ran the story. Or maybe they tried but my email address was on the RBL...who knows...
Jamie McCarthy
|
Re:Moaning ninny USian teens (Score:1)
by jamiemccarthy on Thursday December 14, @04:05AM (#560506)
(User #4847 Info | http://jamie.mccarthy.vg/ | Last Journal: Friday August 17, @09:48PM)
|
"I
don't want to give up seeing all the YRO articles, but if I could filter
out all of them posted by Jamie, I'm sure that all I would be cancelling
is articles about these peacefire.org ninnies."
Go
here,
click on the box next to my name under "Exclude Stories From The Homepage:
Authors," then scroll to the bottom and click "savehome." Or, just ignore my stories, which works about as well :)
Peacefire was the one who drew my attention to this story which is why they got a mention.
Jamie McCarthy
|
Re:Good or bad, it's not censorware (Score:1)
by jamiemccarthy on Thursday December 14, @04:14AM (#560507)
(User #4847 Info | http://jamie.mccarthy.vg/ | Last Journal: Friday August 17, @09:48PM)
|
"censor: an official who examines material (as in
publications or films) for offensive matter
Are SurfWatch, CyberPatrol, etc doing this? Yes. [...]
Is MAPS doing this? No. They are completely content-neutral. They
don't examine anything for offensive material. [...] At no point is
the content of the blocked traffic an issue."
Censoring offensive material is exactly what MAPS is doing in this
case. Some censorware is offended by pornography or the Ku Klux Klan and is designed to block that.
MAPS is offended by websites which sell bulk email software, and is designed to block that.
For the twenty spam websites being blocked by MAPS customers
who use the BGP (including, until recently, AboveNet), the
content of those websites is the one and only issue.
The 1000 other, innocent websites being blocked as well
probably wish content was an issue for them, but,
unfortunately, they were caught in the crossfire...
"...they're not blocking innocent or guilty
websites, they're blocking the network.
Isn't this slicing it a little thin? When you find a website you
don't like, and then block all traffic from its IP number, I call
that blocking a website.
Jamie McCarthy
|
Re:I definately do not agree - (pro-MAPS) (Score:3)
by jamiemccarthy on Thursday December 14, @03:35AM (#560508)
(User #4847 Info | http://jamie.mccarthy.vg/ | Last Journal: Friday August 17, @09:48PM)
|
"Just
a correction, according to spamhaus media3 is hosting not 1 but 21 spam sites,
the largest on the list, and considering media3 is a grand total of a few
class C networks, thats a pretty high percentage of their customers being
spammers."
Just some corrections of your correction. :)
1. The Spamhaus list is
here.
2.
Not a single one of the IP numbers listed there sends spam. Let me repeat
that: you could drop every one of those IP numbers off your network and it
would not stop a single piece of spam from reaching you. Those are websites.
Spamhaus and MAPS don't like ths products those websites are selling and
that is why they (and over a thousand other websites) are blocked. 3. Media3 has 42 Class C blocks, which means that 0.2% of their
IP numbers house websites which sell spam-friendly software (but, again,
those IP numbers are not sending spam). I would not say 0.2% is a "high percentage."
The situation is analogous to a censorware company blackmailing
a service provider into removing Holocaust-denial material, by blocking thousands
of innocent websites. Now, I don't like Holocaust denial,
but standing up for free speech means standing up for speech I don't believe in.
This
situation is no different (except that, on my scale of evil, spammers aren't
even close to those who want to rehabilitate Hitler).
Jamie McCarthy
|
services like this (Score:1)
by Al Wold (alwold@inter-web.net) on Wednesday December 13, @05:27PM (#560509)
(User #5038 Info | http://www.inter-web.net)
|
|
I think services like this are really annoying. They are constantly
incorrectly filled with "good" hosts and they hardly help prevent any spam,
anyway. I especially hate ORBS, as I've had to deal with their crap on a
consistent basis. Since any mail that goes through your host that has been
through a bad relay causes you to get blocked, it really really sucks. |
Mill's *is* an absolute, but not how you think (Score:1)
by Old Man Kensey on Thursday December 14, @06:29AM (#560510)
(User #5209 Info | http://www.orion-com.com/)
|
|
An AC wrote:
Property,
like speech, is not a qualified right, and nor should it be. If you are allowed
to tell me what I can't do with my own property, then tomorrow you'll be
allowed to tell me what I can't do with my own mouth which, after all, is
just a property interest of mine.
You, as an advocate of property
rights, claim the right to own and use anything in any manner you want, without
interference. Fine. But I, as an advocate of property rights, claim that
same
right. You have no more right to interfere with my environment than I have
to interfere with yours. If your stereo is playing so loud that I cannot
hear the rare birds that I'm trying to record on my property, then you are
interfering with my right to enjoy my property as I see fit. Conversely,
I don't have the right to come over and demand that you stop smoking even
though it's not actually coming onto my property, simply because I dislike
smoking. When two equal and absolute rights are in conflict, both parties
should back off. Usually that means you run your stereo at a reasonable
hour, and I don't call the cops even though I find it slightly annoying that
I can hear you listening to nothing but, say, Ricky Martin all day. |
Re:Neural Net Spam Filtering! (Score:2)
by Kiwi (kiwi-nody4la@koala.samiam.org) on Thursday December 14, @09:56AM (#560511)
(User #5214 Info | http://linux.samiam.org/linux_links.html)
|
|
I looked at the C source of the filter, and it looked like a potential security hole. I saw a strcat(), strcpy(), system(), and insecure use of files in /tmp.
Also, while the neural network source is available, the java source code isn't, so this is not an open-source application.
I think this kind of technology has a lot of potential, and I hope to see
this implemented in a manner that can be used in a secure manner in the real
world.
- Sam
|
Re:MAPS != censorship. (Score:2)
by dwdyer (dwdyer@NpOoSbPoAxM.com) on Wednesday December 13, @09:24PM (#560512)
(User #5238 Info)
|
|
Sorry, but this hackneyed line about "only the government can censor" is utter bullshit.
Censorship is the deliberate attempt to block a flow of information. If
you don't let your 8-year old watch hardcore porn at home, you're censoring
his or her viewing. (Note that this is appropriate censorship, IMO) Look up "censor" in a dictionary. Look up its origin -- show
me where it means "an act committed by a government". I, as a consumer,
by buying a connection from someone who uses the blacklist, am authorizing
them to act as censor. Yes, it's voluntary, but it's still censorship.
If a public library doesn't carry a book, that's censorship because the
library is supposed to carry everything, not because the library is a government
entity. A private library operates under a different charter than a public
library does. They're different entities with different purposes. Likewise with an ISP. The blacklist is perfectly legal, and I
do have the choice of going to an ISP that doesn't use it, but the question
is about what the ISP is chartered to do, and what we believe an ISP should
do. Does the ISP provide information or access? If it provides information,
censorship is appropriate. If it provides access to information, then censorship
is inappropriate. The real issue is consumer education. When I buy a connection,
and I'm told that it's spam-proof, I might like that. Unfortunately, there
will be information I will be denied access to and I might never know that
I'm being denied. I thought I was paying for a data pipe, and protection
against unsolicited email, but how will I know that I'm paying for protection
against entire sections of the net that hold no threat?
|
Re:Fuck off, Commie Pinko (Score:2)
by Darchmare (jeff@velocinews.com) on Wednesday December 13, @06:18PM (#560513)
(User #5387 Info | http://www.vxreality.org/)
|
(I fear you're just trolling, but I have enough free time, so here goes...)
Actually, you got it backwards. It's your thesis that it closer to the socialist ideal.
Private companies choose to use the RBL to filter their
incoming mail. This is analogous to paying someone to throw out junk mail
before you get to it. It is a business choice they choose to do in order
to lessen the load on their business.
You as a private individual have the right to choose to do business with that company or not. But nobody has the right to tell that company that they can't block certain traffic from coming into their networks.
Whether or not you agree with spam is irrelevent. The RBL is totally in line with a free market.
If you don't believe the RBL should be allowed to do what they do, you are
essentually saying that someone shouldn't be able to kick unruly people out
of their place of business.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VxReality (BETA)
|
Re:RBL is for Mail-Abuse you Fools!! (Score:2)
by Darchmare (jeff@velocinews.com) on Wednesday December 13, @06:40PM (#560514)
(User #5387 Info | http://www.vxreality.org/)
|
---
People seem to keep saying that RBL is optional, well what about the
situation, where someone is using it on a backbone, as was the case in the
article? I dont see much choice in the matter then.
---
Maybe not, but who are we to tell anyone how they should treat the data flowing through their networks?
It's a free market - if enough customers of enough ISPs complain, those
ISPs will move the issue up the chain and market pressure may change their
mind. It's your right as a consumer to choose who you do business with, and
your ISP's right to choose who they do business with. It's really quite simple.
---
One thing, it does seem that a lot of people are mistakenly thinking
that it would block the website as well, but it will only prevent mail, however
some companies may rely on this for their ordering system.
---
Maybe, but if I control a significant amount of bandwidth, isn't it my right to allow that traffic to flow over it on my terms? Especially if the product of that bandwidth is using CPU and drive space on my servers?
I'm not necessarily saying that I agree with the somewhat over-zealous
ways in which MAPS operates (I'm in a position to utilize the RBL, but choose
not to), but I agree that they have a perfectly legal and ethical right to
offer their service if they wish. There is nobody forcing anyone to use them.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VxReality (BETA)
|
Re:Fuck off, Commie Pinko (Score:2)
by Darchmare (jeff@velocinews.com) on Wednesday December 13, @09:23PM (#560515)
(User #5387 Info | http://www.vxreality.org/)
|
---
not if the ISP has a monopoly on a certain section of your neighbourhood.
thats a bullshit argument that M$ was using in their anti trust trial.
---
A monopoly in your neighborhood? What are you talking about?
You can't extend the definition of 'monopoly' to any company you don't
like - even if they don't happen to have competition in your area. Microsoft
didn't get the smackdown because they're merely a monopoly. They got in trouble
because they allegedly used their monopoly in order to illegally squeeze
out any potential competition.
It is not illegal if there is only one provider in your geographic area.
It's quite possible that no real competition has even attempted to penetrate
your local market, or it's just not worth bothering with for various business
reasons.
And to be honest, in these days of Earthlink, Sprint, GTE.net, AOL, etc.
I kind of doubt very many people are stuck with only one provider. This is
a market segment that very clearly does not have a single monopoly controlling
it. The argument is a bit of a joke.
Face it: If you don't like the policies of your provider, you can feel
free to open up a competing provider or search for another. Under our current
(decidedly non-Communistic) system, you don't have a right to force the existing
players to do something with their own resources.
Of course, you can always vote with your wallet. If enough people agree
with you, it's quite likely you'll find success. Unfortunately more people
seem to think avoiding spam is more marketable.
...
Either way, my original point was that the guy saying that supporting
the RBL was 'Commie' had it all wrong and was talking out of his ass. Communism
would be more likely to support right control over the ability of people
to make things like blacklists.
Regardless of whether you are for or against strong 'market regulation',
you have to know that stopping MAPS from publishing their list is just like
banning Consumer Reports. This is definitely not in the spirit of our free
market system.
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VxReality (BETA)
|
Re:More power to em! (Score:1)
by buysse on Wednesday December 13, @09:21PM (#560516)
(User #5473 Info | http://r00tkit.com/)
|
|
Dammit, it's not just mail! BGP route drops. Look at the MAPS page. Above.net was dropping all packets, whether originating from their customers or not (!), that had a source or destination on the netblocks in question.
|
Re:RBL Usage info - READ THIS (Score:2)
by buysse on Wednesday December 13, @09:29PM (#560517)
(User #5473 Info | http://r00tkit.com/)
|
|
Anyone
choosing to implement such an esoteric blackholing system for all ip traffic
from RBL-listed hosts is likely FULLY AWARE that they will be dropping some
hosts, and must consider that an acceptable risk. If you are a client of
such an organization, and don't buy into that, then leave. My guess would
be that most that have successful implementations of BGP RBL subscription
had buy-in from their clients before they set it up.
I do agree with what you're saying... for a end-user ISP. But, if you are a backbone provider (as above.net is) and you are dropping packets that are passing across your backbone -- not from your direct customers, not to your direct customers you are WRONG.
|
Good or bad, it's not censorware (Score:1)
by jaffray (jaffray@pobox.com) on Wednesday December 13, @11:41PM (#560518)
(User #6665 Info)
|
Let's check the dictionary here.
censor: an official who examines material (as in publications or films) for offensive matter
Are SurfWatch, CyberPatrol, etc doing this? Yes. They spider the web
looking for offensive material, and sell software that blocks it. Their
software is a censor. Thus the term "censorware". (The fact that they make
fraudulent claims for their software is incidental here.)
Is MAPS doing this? No. They are completely content-neutral. They
don't examine anything for offensive material. They evaluate submissions
of networks that spam, that provide spam support services, or that maintain
open relays. They provide a list of such networks, and software to use that
list to block traffic from those networks.
At no point is the content of the blocked traffic an issue. Yes, this means that their list blocks "innocent websites"; they're not blocking innocent or guilty websites, they're blocking the network.
There is no deception here. They didn't claim to provide a list of spamware
websites and then add Peacefire; they claimed to provide a list of networks
that are friendly to spammers and added Media3, and Media3 is most definitely
friendly to spammers.
Is it a good tactic? Should people choose to subscribe to RBL? Maybe, maybe not.
But don't call it censorware. It's not.
|
Re:Good or bad, it's not censorware (Score:1)
by jaffray (jaffray@pobox.com) on Thursday December 14, @07:34AM (#560519)
(User #6665 Info)
|
Censoring
offensive material is exactly what MAPS is doing in this case. Some censorware
is offended by pornography or the Ku Klux Klan and is designed to block that.
MAPS is offended by websites which sell bulk email software, and is designed
to block that.
Let's look at what MAPS RBL is "designed to" do. http://mail-abuse.org/rbl/candidacy.html lists criteria for being in the RBL.
- spam origination - simple enough
- spam relaying - open mail relays
- spam support services
The last one breaks down into:
-
providing any service which uses internet resources to support spamming:
webpages or email or DNS or credit card handling for spam-promoted sites,
or anything-to-email gateways
- providing software or services for distributing spam, or providing connectivity to people who do
- providing lists of harvested email addresses, or software or services to create such lists
So what MAPS RBL is designed to do is keep a list of hosts and networks
that spam, or of hosts and networks that aid spammers. They are being added
on the basis of their actions. What they're saying is irrelevant. This is why they're content-neutral.
You are objecting to their inclusion of spamware as something which aids
spammers and should be blocked. This gets into two fairly tricky points.
First, if something is both speech and action (the "fire in a crowded theater"
example), where do you draw the line between allowing free speech and preventing
harmful actions? Second, to what extent is software speech, and to what
extent is it a tool? We probably agree that blocking spam is acceptable, despite the
weak argument that saying the same thing over and over is speech that should
be protected. And we agree that a list of techniques that spammers use would
be speech that should not be blocked. You could claim that spamware is like
the list of techniques. MAPS might claim that selling someone a software
package whose sole purpose is to spam is no different from taking their money
and doing the spamming yourself. You both have decent arguments. I do think, however, that even if you're convinced that there's
a free-speech right to distribute spamware, labelling RBL as "censorware"
based on a fraction of a fraction of the list violating this very debateable
"right" is massive overkill.
"...they're not blocking innocent or guilty
websites, they're blocking the network." Isn't this slicing it a little
thin? When you find a website you don't like, and then block all traffic
from its IP number, I call that blocking a website.
No, not at all. Look at Media3. They've found a network
they don't like, because it supports spamming in multiple ways. It hosts
sites which are promoted by spam, and it hosts spamware vendors. They could
change their AUP to prohibit this, but refuse to do so. And so they're blackholing
the network.
This is not an overzealous or overbroad block;
they are blocking exactly the network that they wanted to. They state in
the docs that this approach can lead to blocking non-spam traffic, and warn
you to use a different list; RSS for example; if you have a problem with
this. If you wanted to highlight the spamware free-speech argument,
you could have chosen a better example. Spamware is not the only reason
why Media3 is on the RBL, and there is no way to claim that hosting spam-promoted
sites is anything but a content-neutral blocking policy. |
Web Sites? (Score:1)
by cotcomsol on Thursday December 14, @07:32AM (#560520)
(User #7395 Info | http://www.cotcomsol.com)
|
|
Since when did MAPS block web sites? We use it on our mail servers,
and yes, it blocks email from the offending sites, but I certainly can still
visit their web sites if I wish.
This article makes it look like they are completely cut off from the world, which is simply not the case.
|
Exactly (Score:1)
by enterfornone (anonymouscoward@enterfornone.com) on Wednesday December 13, @05:27PM (#560521)
(User #7400 Info | http://www.enterfornone.net/)
|
Anyone who complains about censorware yet trusts MAPS to block spam is
a hypocrite. Any time you give someone else the power to control what you
can read you are allowing them to take away your freedom.
Remember, if you let them censor the stuff you don't like, soon they will censor the stuff you do. Simple as that.
|
The problem isn't the RBL (Score:1)
by enterfornone (anonymouscoward@enterfornone.com) on Wednesday December 13, @07:10PM (#560522)
(User #7400 Info | http://www.enterfornone.net/)
|
The problem is the attitude of people who are happy to sacrifice their
freedom to avoid things they don't like yet jump up and down when the freedoms
they do like are taken away.
If you want to defend freedom, you have to defend *all* freedom.
|
You don't have the choice. (Score:3)
by enterfornone (anonymouscoward@enterfornone.com) on Wednesday December 13, @05:29PM (#560523)
(User #7400 Info | http://www.enterfornone.net/)
|
Most ISPs will not tell you they are using MAPS. Even if they did, there
are still enough ISPs using MAPS to cause problems if MAPS decide to block
someone unfairly.
|
Re:Horay! (Score:1)
by Nermal (brad_stephenssmith@ifyoudon'tknowtoremovethisIcan') on Thursday December 14, @10:51AM (#560524)
(User #7573 Info)
|
|
About 7 months ago I submitted an Ask Slashdot about how I could take
action against above.net because of this very thing. I used to work at an
ISP that was regularly put on the RBL. When I moved and signed up for an
account with another ISP I asked them if they subscribed to the RBL and they
said no. Nonetheless, not only could I not get mail from my old ISP I couldn't
even see their web page. Traceroutes broke down at above.net so I mailed
them. Got one email back saying the they excercised the RBL to its fullest
abilities, ie blocking all traffic. All subsequent emails were ignored.
Anyway, my point is that when I sign up for an internet account, I want
the internet, not the Paul Vixie approved internet. I'll filter my own spam,
thank you. An upstream like above.net using the RBL like that means that
to possibly MILLIONS of users whole chunks of the internet just cease to exist. It is wrong, plain and simple.
That, and how come my story wasn't good enough for an Ask Slashdot but then shows up as an editorial 6 months later? =:\
"(no knowledge of subject matter) + (crack cocaine) = (journalism!)"
|
Re:Fuck off, Commie Pinko (Score:1)
by Jonathan C. Patschke (bofh.totalaccess@net) on Wednesday December 13, @07:50PM (#560525)
(User #8016 Info | http://celestrion.net/)
|
|
Not
to sound insulting, but there's nothing (well, short of capital, possibly)
to stop you from starting up your own ISP. That's what my company did (I'm
the senior network administrator for an ISP) four years ago because service
in our area sucked due to single-ISP monopolies.
We've
got several thousand rural-area customers in central Texas now. Now, we're
largely a monopoly simply because our service is better, and the other ISPs
lost too many customers to our (equally- or higher-priced) service. My point is that people will vote with their pocketbooks. If spam-filtered
email bothers people, they'll complain. As for us, we clearly and proudly
announce our use of the MAPS RBL (for email-only) and DUL to our customers,
and they love our hard-line policy on spam (esp. those coming from spam-ridden
providers). Say what you wil about ``pinko'' ISPs who use MAPS, but I've got
all the proof I need. The response from my customers when we added ORBS
(initially we used ORBS; switched to MAPS later after ORBS went insane with
blocking everything in sight) was overwhelmingly positive. After the announcement,
I got so many messages to the tune of "Hey, that was great move! All that sh!t stopped coming into my mailbox!".
As
someone else mentioned, the idea behind an ISP is that you get cheap Internet
access at the expense of a little freedom. If you get your own leased line
to the backbone, snag your own IP block from ARIN (or borrow one from your
backbone), you can run your connection how-ever you want. When
you buy service from an ISP, you are investing in their practices, nodding
your assent with a credit card or check. You pay less, of course, but you
are also giving up the freedom of running the connection yourself. If you
disagree with their practices, there's nothing to stop you from using (or
starting) another ISP. You can't have a monopoly in a service-market. If you piss your
customers off, they'll get together and fund a competitor. That's how we
got our start-up funds. That being said, if someone wrote a sendmail ruleset to allow activating/deactivating
the DNS-based spamhaus-lookup services (RBL, DUL) on a per-destination-address
basis, I'd install it in a heartbeat to give my customers the choice to unfilter
their mail.
|
Re:Fuck off, Commie Pinko (Score:1)
by Jonathan C. Patschke (bofh.totalaccess@net) on Thursday December 14, @01:19AM (#560526)
(User #8016 Info | http://celestrion.net/)
|
|
Yeah,
but we've already got a fairly-heavily customized (and stable!) sendmail
solution. We use accessdb (fed via MySQL) to add/remove spam entries (in
case we disagree with the RBL or DUL). What I'd like to see is a ruleset
run before the RBL-checks (ie: checks an ACL to see if a username/domain
is present, like accessdb) that determines whether or not the RBL checks
are even run. A little more enhancement, and our fussiest customers could
even switch back to ORBS (I know of at least one customer who gets a -lot-
of spam through <very-large-ISP>, who happens to be in ORBS). Switching MTAs seems pretty drastic, especially when what we're running now is very stable *knocks on wood*. I'd write the rules myself, but sendmail.cf isn't one of my areas of expertise. I'll gratefully accept any ideas on how to do this. :)
|
Re:"Press time"? (Score:2)
by waldoj (waldoNO@SPAMwaldo.net) on Wednesday December 13, @05:46PM (#560527)
(User #8229 Info | http://www.waldo.net/)
|
So,
you decided to post the article anyway rather than wait for a response from
the individuals who you are attacking? That doesn't seem like very good journalism
to me.
This is standard practice. For all that you know, Jamie contacted AboveNet
3 months ago, and still hasn't heard back. It's reasonable for him to contact
them, say that there's X days until he's running a story, and do so if he
hasn't heard from them. Surely you don't think that media outlets should
fail to run stories if the subjects won't talk to them?
-Waldo
|
Re:Huh??? (Score:2)
by waldoj (waldoNO@SPAMwaldo.net) on Wednesday December 13, @05:49PM (#560528)
(User #8229 Info | http://www.waldo.net/)
|
PD wrote:
2) Listing the website IP and blocking mail from that IP doesn't prevent anyone from seeing the Peacefire webpage, does it? No.
Jamie wrote:
Again, the blocking of that IP number, their website, does not stop
a single piece of spam from being sent or received. What it does do is punish
the folks at MarketingMasters, whose website can't be seen by RBL subscribers.
Any questions?
|
Argh... (Score:1)
by Pierre Phaneuf (pp@ludusdEINSTEINesign.com minus physicist) on Thursday December 14, @04:37AM (#560529)
(User #8433 Info | http://advogato.org/person/pphaneuf/)
|
My company web site, http://ludusdesign.com/, is on Media3...
--
|
Re:Irony Alert: DeCSS (Score:1)
by fidros (gilad.benyossef@com) on Wednesday December 13, @09:34PM (#560530)
(User #8566 Info | http://benyossef.com)
|
There is a big difference between trying to get the law to send someone
to jail or pay fines because of posting of tools you don't approve of (like
the MPAA) and volunterily saying: "I will not communicate with you, you support
SPAM" like MAPS are doing.
Anyone who can't see the difference needs to host a DeCSS mirror for a couple of months (I have ;-)
|
Re:Is the RBL really being used for HTTP? (Score:1)
by grahamm (gmurray@webwayone.co.uk) on Wednesday December 13, @11:51PM (#560531)
(User #8844 Info | http://www.webwayone.co.uk/)
|
|
But surely it would take much
much too much CPU power for a backbone router to consult the RBL. Or are
the static routeing tables updated periodically to incorporate the RBL data?
|
Re:So what do you propose? (Score:1)
by grahamm (gmurray@webwayone.co.uk) on Thursday December 14, @12:54AM (#560532)
(User #8844 Info | http://www.webwayone.co.uk/)
|
|
Should it not be up to the customer, not their ISP, what blocking to use?
|
Re:A Better Analogy (Score:1)
by grahamm (gmurray@webwayone.co.uk) on Thursday December 14, @02:38AM (#560533)
(User #8844 Info | http://www.webwayone.co.uk/)
|
|
Free speach implies the right for me
to have to right not to listen. It does not give anyone else the right to
censor/filter the speach and prevent me from listening. |
Re:Sounds like the role of the RBL has expanded.. (Score:2)
by scrytch on Saturday December 16, @02:17PM (#560534)
(User #9198 Info)
|
> I wonder if anyone's considered sort of a democratic RBL?
UseNet has something called NoCeM (pronounced No See 'Em), which is essentially
"advisory cancel messages". Instead of cancel messages being sent to control
by usenet admins, it has advisories sent to the newsgroup itself in periodic
postings, with the message id's of messages that get killed by a compliant
newsreader (such as gnus). These messages are PGP-signed to authenticate
the issuer.
It still requires a provider that doesn't itself honor NoCeM messages
on the spool, as some do, but the nature of usenet makes this somewhat more
feasable than it is with mail. The mail server I use (CommuniGate Pro),
has support for RBL, but sends all such mail to blacklist-admin, which I
can connect to a script that simply tacks on a "X-RBL-Listed" header and
sends it on to its recipient. It's a new site right now, so it hasn't received
any mail yet, much less spam.
And if I find my ISP, the phone company, is using the BGP RBL, I'll have the PUC on their asses ASAP :)
--
|
? stay of the inet if you don't like censorware? (Score:2)
by Barbarian (`conanford' `at' `yahoo.com') on Wednesday December 13, @10:36PM (#560535)
(User #9467 Info | http://barbarian.iwarp.com/)
|
b[If you don't want Cyberpatrol filtering your connection at the public library, stay off the internet!]b
In reply to:
i[If you use an ISP that has MAPS, it is your choice. Only ISP in the
area? Then stay off the net if it offends you. They are running a private
business and feel that the reduction in spam outweighs the complaints of
some users who don't like MAPS]i
|
Re:Huh??? (Score:2)
by Barbarian (`conanford' `at' `yahoo.com') on Wednesday December 13, @10:41PM (#560536)
(User #9467 Info | http://barbarian.iwarp.com/)
|
Right,
and I don't know of any tier 1 ISP that would be actually implement this.
There is just too many ways that this could hurt the ISP.
Maybe, but a backbone provider does. ABOVE.NET Read the article.
|
get YOUR facts straight (Score:2)
by Barbarian (`conanford' `at' `yahoo.com') on Wednesday December 13, @10:47PM (#560537)
(User #9467 Info | http://barbarian.iwarp.com/)
|
OMFG. MAPS can be fed into router tables, which is what Above.net was
doing. Read the other 20 comments that have pointed this out.
|
burn the witch! (Score:2)
by Barbarian (`conanford' `at' `yahoo.com') on Thursday December 14, @01:54AM (#560538)
(User #9467 Info | http://barbarian.iwarp.com/)
|
Why don't you open the commitee of unMAPS activities now?
|
Huh??? (Score:1)
by PD (pdrap@startrekmail.com) on Wednesday December 13, @05:40PM (#560539)
(User #9577 Info | http://www.geocities.com/pdrap)
|
So what if MAPS lists Peacefire's website?
1) It's just a friggin list. Individuals choose to block the IP's on the list.
2) Listing the website IP and blocking mail from that IP doesn't prevent anyone from seeing the Peacefire webpage, does it? No.
The article was damn confusing, claiming that the Marketing Master's
website cannot be seen by RBL subscribers. I thought the RBL was supposed
to block the MAIL, not the WEBSITE.
Chalk it up to "yet another dumass writes an ill-considered story."
|
Jamie, get a grip (Score:1)
by consumer on Wednesday December 13, @05:43PM (#560540)
(User #9588 Info)
|
|
Again,
the blocking of that IP number, their website, does not stop a single piece
of spam from being sent or received. What it does do is punish the folks
at MarketingMasters, whose website can't be seen by RBL subscribers.
There are several ways to use RBL. Using sendmail to implement RBL just
blocks e-mail from those sites. So, it's exactly the opposite of what you
said - it stops spam from those sites but doesn't block their web pages from
being viewed.
Maybe you should take a little more time to understand the story before you try to turn it into a piece of drama.
|
Re:This is exactly what we want them to do. (Score:1)
by Cederic (slashdot.UglyFatGuy@org) on Thursday December 14, @01:46AM (#560541)
(User #9623 Info)
|
Yes, but that's like all the photo shops in my town saying "We're boycotting you."
If I don't want to boycott them (maybe the guys making the paper are
selling it to hustler magazine, which I don't have a problem with, even though
all the local photo shops do) then I'm still shafted and still can't get
the paper, because all my local shops wont sell it.
Which is the same as, if I want to receive email from Peacefire, I can't,
because some backbone provider I don't even choose explicitly to use has
gone and 'boycotted' their packets.
~Cederic
|
Re:The RBL is supposed to be narrow (Score:1)
by /dev/kev (kev.pulo@com@au) on Wednesday December 13, @09:10PM (#560542)
(User #9760 Info | http://www.kev.pulo.com.au/)
|
The
fact that that few spams are caught in the RBL is ... a testament to ...
the success of MAPS of driving spam support services off of the web.
BZZZT!
10 years ago I wrote this program which stops elephants from walking
down the highway. Since there's only been a couple of elephants found walking
on the highway since then, my program must work.
Sorry, but few emails caught by MAPS is evidence both for and against
the success of MAPS. You can't use it for one or the other.
It is, however, evidence to restraint on their part.
|
Re:Thats not what its for... (Score:1)
by /dev/kev (kev.pulo@com@au) on Wednesday December 13, @09:12PM (#560543)
(User #9760 Info | http://www.kev.pulo.com.au/)
|
Fine. Put Media3 on the list. But what about PeaceFire? How would you
feel if your site was RBL'd by MAPS simply for having an IP next to someone
MAPS didn't like?
|
Re:Irony Alert: DeCSS (Score:2)
by /dev/kev (kev.pulo@com@au) on Wednesday December 13, @09:01PM (#560544)
(User #9760 Info | http://www.kev.pulo.com.au/)
|
The difference between DeCSS and spam software is that it's easy to find
geniunely good uses for DeCSS, whereas you'll struggle to find good uses
for the spam software.
It's okay to go after tools which can ONLY do "bad things", particularly
if that's all they're designed to do. But if there's significant "good things"
which can also be done with the tool, such as with DeCSS, then it's wrong
to stop those good uses, and so instead you go after those who choose to
use the tool to do "bad things".
Then, as always, you just have to worry about your definition of "good things" and "bad things". :/
|
Re:Sorry, Jamie, you are way off base (Score:2)
by /dev/kev (kev.pulo@com@au) on Thursday December 14, @03:26AM (#560545)
(User #9760 Info | http://www.kev.pulo.com.au/)
|
Ehrrm, it isn't a spammer, it is a seller of spamware.
Fine.
You don't need to. Just block the spamware seller's website. This still
cuts off the money - the spamware seller will get less, since they've been
RBL'd, and if the spamware seller goes elsewhere, then the ISP loses their
money...
If MAPS blocked the website, spammers could still reach the website, buy the spamware
If that is the case, then why does MAPS even bother with spamware sellers?
If they were only going to block the seller's site, then as you say, that
doesn't stop the spammers from getting their spamware, so would acheive very
little. MAPS goes after these sites because they want to see the sites taken
down, so that noone can access them (not just MAPS subscribers). They can't
do that by just blocking the site, so instead they're unjustly blocking whole
sections of the ISP, in an effort to submit and remove the sites. Make no
mistake, these are bullying tactics.
MAPS is not censoring, subscribers to MAPS have chosen not to spend
their money for the transport of packets send to or from Media3.
MAPS is doing more than this. They are trying to abuse their influence
to get the site itself shut down. You appear to have completely missed that
point. My point is that MAPS isn't "merely blocking for MAPS subscribers",
as you claim, but they are trying to get the site removed altogether, which
is entirely different.
A newspaper that doesn't put your opinion on its frontpage isn't censoring either.
No, but if the newspaper were to reject stories based on content, then
that would be censoring. Similarly, if some agency were applying pressure
to get the newspaper to not print particular stories, then that agency would
be attempting to censor those stories. In this case, the 'newspaper' is
Media3 and the 'agency' is MAPS. The analogy's not perfect, but it's a hell
of a lot better than yours.
|
Re:Sorry, Jamie, you are way off base (Score:4)
by /dev/kev (kev.pulo@com@au) on Wednesday December 13, @08:21PM (#560546)
(User #9760 Info | http://www.kev.pulo.com.au/)
|
So, what do you do to get Media3 to close down the spammer?
You don't need to. Just block the spammer's website. This still cuts
off the money - the spammer will get less, since they've been RBL'd, and
if the spammer goes elsewhere, then the ISP loses their money - but not at
the (unnecessary) expense of other customers. Repeat the process with wherever
the spammer goes next.
That's how MAPS should work, by blocking the bad stuff so that RBL users
just don't see it. There isn't any need to punish innocent sites who happen
to be on the same class C. MAPS should concentrate on blocking spammers
and their sites, not trying to twist ISPs arms.
If MAPS successfully got Media3 to shut down the spammer's site, then MAPS WOULD
be dealing in censorship, wouldn't they? They'd no longer be this optional
advisory guide you could use, rather, they'd be going around getting websites
they don't like shut down. If that's not censorship, I don't know what is.
MAPS seems to want to have it both ways - to the public: "Oh, we're not
censoring anyone", but to M3: "Shut this site down now, or we'll punish you
by blocking lots of your sites". I'm sorry, but to me, that's just terrible.
|
Spam Filtering Has *ALWAYS* Been Censorware (Score:1)
by AviN (avi.no@spam.ulag.net) on Wednesday December 13, @06:18PM (#560547)
(User #9933 Info | http://ulag.net)
|
You're trying to censor the content you don't want (spam), and in some
cases trying to censor it for other people (such as the MAPS RBL).
Now whether or not it's bad, I don't know. But it is censorware, and if you don't see that, you're terribly biased.
|
censor v's filter (Score:2)
by Kris_J (Kris_Johnson@yahoo.com) on Wednesday December 13, @11:01PM (#560548)
(User #10111 Info | http://krisjohn.cjb.net/ | Last Journal: Monday October 08, @04:25AM)
|
|
I think the emotive use of the words censor and censorship are counterproductive.
Censorship conjures up images of bookburning and government oppression --
and no-one wants to be associated with that. The
word "filter" is far more suitable. I have a personal proxy that tries to
nuke ads and protect my privacy. Does it censor web sites? Maybe. Does
it filter websites? You bet! I personally believe that the mechanisms
of filtering and the choice of what to filter should be separated so as to
remove the label "censorware" from what are otherwise just filters with rules.
Imagine that MAPS simply provides a mechanism to allow automated filtering
of content based on a list (or lists), but then creates a process whereby
anyone in the world can create such a list. In addition to subscribing to
MAPS, ISPs would also subscribe to one or more filter lists as per their
own values. Perhaps then these valuable filters could not be so easily condemned as an attack on free speech...
|
Re:Mill's tries to be an absolute (Score:1)
by DavidTC on Wednesday December 13, @09:44PM (#560549)
(User #10147 Info)
|
|
So...you're basically saying it should be illegal to block traffic on your own network?
Sorry, but ISPs don't promise you have access to any other computer in existance.
They don't even promise you have access to the one at the other end of the
phone line. Read the contract again.
Then ask yourself if it's legal for a group of storeowners to hire someone
to stand guard during the day and remove known criminals from their property.
Why, I believe it is. It's also legal for a mall to do that without informing
the stores inside it...and you know why? Because it's their mall, and it's
not specifically listed in the contract they have with the stores that they
can't do that.
Likewise, it's the ISP's networks, and they can do whatever damned thing they want with them they haven't agreed not to do.)
It would even be 100% legal for MSN, as an example, to block all access
to Netscape's site. You know why? Cause nothing in the contract says otherwise.
(Technically, they could get sued for restraint of trade, as could an ISP
if they blocked a competitier simply because they were one. But that's not
the case here.)
-David T. C.
|
Re:OK, I'm a dunce. (Score:1)
by DavidTC on Wednesday December 13, @09:48PM (#560550)
(User #10147 Info)
|
I am now offically scared by the moderators.
-David T. C.
|
Re:censorware. (Score:1)
by DavidTC on Wednesday December 13, @10:06PM (#560551)
(User #10147 Info)
|
|
ORB!=RBL
ORB are a bunch of wackos, they run though all IP addresses and see if they
find one that either an open relay, or refuses to allow them a connection,
then they block it. They have refused all arguements this is an attack, and
all arguements that that simply blocking their IP isn't a blockable action.
The MAPS RBL waits for people to forward messages from a spammer, confirm it, and then block it.
They also run the MAPS RSS, which, when people complain about a machine.
they, tries to relay a message though it. In no cases do they ever touch
or consider a machine unless someone has said that machine is forwarding,
and even then they investigate it.
They also run the MAPS DUI, which is simply a list of dial up IPs.
The ORBS people are completely seperate, and completly insane. I'm suprised you managed to get your server unblocked.
-David T. C.
|
Re:Is the RBL really being used for HTTP? (Score:2)
by DavidTC on Wednesday December 13, @10:28PM (#560552)
(User #10147 Info)
|
|
Sadly, it is you who are mistaken. Above.net not only blocks SMTP traffic to and from RBL'd servers, but they drop all traffic
to and from RBL'd server. Those addresses are routed to nowhere. For all
intents and purposes, those addresses do not exist if you are on above.net.
And, if your machine is used for spam, you you don't exist to any servers on there, also.
And the RBL has been putting the addresses of more then just mail servers
on their list for a while now. They also put hosting companies who refuse
to take down spammer's webpages, and any servers at all run by spammers.
And, BTW, I apporve of this all the way. Stopped the actual spam email is
just half the battle, we need to close down the ways that people can contact
them also. In fact, we need an 'Internet Death Penalty' for these people,
and not only block the spanmmer's spamming acounts, but also block the legit
accounts that the spammer doesn't use to spam, and their legit webpages.
We need to basically keep them from using the net in any form or fashion.
And block anyone willing to provide it to them.
-David T. C.
|
Re:What in god's name are you talking about? (Score:1)
by Dg93 (die@YouFuckingMoron.com) on Wednesday December 13, @08:26PM (#560553)
(User #10261 Info | http://www.silentnoise.org)
|
|
TROLL:
This only blocks SMTP ****MAIL****, not websites. What kind of bullshit
is that? "They can't go to their websites" blah blah blah, some more stuff
i made up, blah blah blah.
Let's respond to this one... You're wrong here. Very very wrong here,
and ignorant. If you couldn't be bothered to look up what you were blathering
about, what right do you have to rip the author of this article?
Let's see, look around the maps site, a little bit, ahhh, here it is... two clicks from the front page...
"Subscription via Multihop eBGP4. This is the oldest (and for a while,
the only) mechanism for MAPS RBL usage by third parties (which means anybody
other than us)."
Wow, they were doing this before the dns method you were talking about.
In the future, check your facts before spewing them out, in the case of
INFORMATIVE, your fingers, or in the case of TROLL, your ass.
|
Re:The problem isn't the RBL (Score:1)
by fb on Wednesday December 13, @10:08PM (#560554)
(User #10330 Info | http://blame.it.eu.org/)
|
>If you want to defend freedom, you have to defend *all* freedom.
No. Now *you* are asking me to limit my rights.
I reserve my right to fight for what I like and fight against what I
dislike. This is pretty much *my* own definition of freedom!
You have the right to disagree, but do not try to define freedom for me.
--
|
Re:The problem isn't the RBL (Score:1)
by fb on Thursday December 14, @02:48AM (#560555)
(User #10330 Info | http://blame.it.eu.org/)
|
>No. Now *you* are asking me to limit my rights.
Of course: that's because unlimited freedom is a contradictory concept
(the old "my freedom ends where your freedom begins" saying).
Freedom for all cannot be achieved without some compromises, that's why it is important to keep fighting to conserve it.
Getting back to the case at hand: there is a conflict between the freedom
of the ISP to voluntarily use MAPS BGP service to blackhole routes and the
right of customers to get connectivity to blackholed sites.
This conflict can be resolved by debate - not like the present one, one
between the ISP and its customers - by economic pressure or by a governmental
(i.e. legislative) decision.
--
|
Security Focus Listservs saw this comming (Score:1)
by LWolenczak (lw@lwolenczak.net) on Wednesday December 13, @05:44PM (#560556)
(User #10527 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
|
|
I remember maybe.... 6 or 8 months ago, One of the Security Focus listserves
had a decussion about realtime blacklists and weather they should be used,
I remember reading several opinions that said stuff like this would happen,
it seems they were right.. |
Re:A Better Analogy (Score:1)
by CodeMonky (paland@stetson dot e dee you) on Thursday December 14, @03:53AM (#560557)
(User #10675 Info | http://www.monkylabs.com/codemonky)
|
|
Who is forcing you to visit a website? The problem lies in the fact that when you do want to visit, you may not be able too.
|
Re:Irony Alert: DeCSS (Score:1)
by Omnifarious on Thursday December 14, @01:42AM (#560558)
(User #11933 Info | http://www.omnifarious.org/~hopper | Last Journal: Sunday August 19, @12:37AM)
|
|
I
feel this incredible urge to post a 'me too!' message because you are SO
right. What you just said is a lot of the reason for why I'm uncomfortable
about what MAPS is doing.
So, here it is. :-)
Me too!
|
Re:jamie has a point. (Score:1)
by Omnifarious on Thursday December 14, @11:05AM (#560559)
(User #11933 Info | http://www.omnifarious.org/~hopper | Last Journal: Sunday August 19, @12:37AM)
|
|
Opinion
based moderating. *chuckle* That was _not_ a troll by any stretch of the
imagination. I hope you get clobbered in meta-moderation.
|
jamie has a point. (Score:4)
by Omnifarious on Wednesday December 13, @06:29PM (#560560)
(User #11933 Info | http://www.omnifarious.org/~hopper | Last Journal: Sunday August 19, @12:37AM)
|
|
Arguments
about whether or not RBL is a censor because it doesn't wield the power of
a government are sort of missing the point. The point is if it provides
a useful list. Censorware is censorware because it provides a very unuseful
list. The fact that schools and libraries use it is almost irelevant to
its name.
From what jamie has said, it sounds like RBL isn't so much
trying to block spam as trying to apply political pressure to get an ISP
to do what it wants.
Essentially, they're using the fact that hundreds
of ISPs suscribe to them and trust them to help them block spam as a club
to beat other ISPs into doing what they want. That doesn't seem like a terribly
wholesome thing to do to me. I don't want my subscription to be used that
way. I simply want them to tell me what sites send spam.
|
Spam is censorship (Score:1)
by Buddy (sites-slashdot@niet.net) on Thursday December 14, @04:27AM (#560561)
(User #11994 Info)
|
|
This article has made me realize that 'censorware' isn't actually a bad
thing; as long as users are informed of the fact that it's being used (and
what caused something to be listed). I'm satisfied that MAPS excercises a lot of restraint when listing
IP's; in fact, I would like MAPS to be much more aggressive at times. If
MAPS didn't escalate to larger netblocks, companies like Media3 would only
move their spammers' IP's around, and they would still be profiting from
spam.
Yes, this causes collateral damage. In fact, it is intended
to cause collateral damage; people like the owners of peacefire.org should
be talking to Media3 about terminating spammers like the ones found at Media3's entry at the Spamhaus Project, all but one in the same netblock as peacefire.org.
Spam is
censorship; it fills up mailboxes and causes legitimate email to bounce.
It consumes network resources paid for by unwilling recipients; I think it
is not acceptable to ask these recipients to eat their spam because peacefire.org
doesn't want to move to a different hosting provider.
Have a look at the site that caused this netblock to be listed, and at Media3's Service Agreement. Media3 is obviously not willing to enforce that, so they themselves are supporting spam.
If MAPS' careful process of education, listing and escalation causes it
to be in the same category as the censorware, then so be it. I use MAPS because
it prevents my network connectivity from becoming prohibitively expensive;
as long as I can do that, I can avoid going to places that use censorware
to filter 'net access.
Goodbye, peacefire.org. See you when you've found another web host, or Media3 cleans up their act.
|
Re:Sorry, Jamie, you are way off base (Score:1)
by Buddy (sites-slashdot@niet.net) on Thursday December 14, @05:12AM (#560562)
(User #11994 Info)
|
"Interesting ... I always thought that self censorship meant that I decided what I did not want to see. Not that my
company made that decision, or my ISP, or their backbone ISP, or anyone else ... but me.
MAPS does not give you the choice of self censorship - it
gives service providers the choice of whether to subject you
to censorship or not."
And how does this prevent you from choosing service providers who don't use MAPS?
Why should I be prevented from deciding that I do want to use MAPS' lists to decide what I do not want to see?
Self-censorship, by the way, means that you decide what not to say, not see.
|
MAPS' list _is_ Free Speech (Score:1)
by Buddy (sites-slashdot@niet.net) on Thursday December 14, @10:52AM (#560563)
(User #11994 Info)
|
"The
situation is analogous to a censorware company blackmailing a service provider
into removing Holocaust-denial material, by blocking thousands
of innocent websites. Now, I don't like Holocaust denial, but standing up
for free speech means standing up for speech I don't believe
in."
So,
you're saying you don't like MAPS' published policy, and you don't like the
fact that MAPS has a list of network blocks that contain spamware vendors.
But as I understand your point, you will stand up for MAPS' right to publish this list, correct?
I feel the same way.
The right to Free speech is extremely important, but it does not, I repeat not impy a right to be heard, or a right to use other peoples property to make the speech be heard.
MAPS
and MAPS' users have the right to voice their opinion that the owners of
the netblocks in MAPS' lists are irresponsible, and that they feel responsible
admins should drop packets to and from those networks, or refuse SMTP connections
from them. Network and mailserver owners have the right to actually drop those
packets, and actually refuse those connections. Or do you feel that we don't
have that right? On my scale of evil, by the way, spammers are much worse than holocaust
deniers. Holocaust deniers are evil, and should be exposed. But most of them
limit their activity to speech, and nothing forces me to deal or argue with them. (I do, from time to time, but that's beside the point). Spammers are different. They attempt to make
me listen to their message, without my consent, and at my cost (and often
at the cost of irresponsible, but otherwise innocent third parties - open
relays). Spam costs me real money to receive, money I could have used to
excercise my right to free speech.
I have no choice but to defend myself from them - and MAPS' lists are some of the most valuable tools to do that.
|
Here's a first (Score:1)
by xrayspx (xrayspx@xrayspx.com) on Wednesday December 13, @06:14PM (#560564)
(User #13127 Info | http://www.arcaneimages.com)
|
I've never been one to complain about the articles themselves. Sometimes
they're spurious, sometimes they're wrong. But this is a boneheaded article.
Should a site be in MAPS or ORBS if it doesn't act as a relay, or actively
send spam? NO. But, the article clearly states that Peacefire is inaccessible
due to its being RBL'd. Not true, at all. None of these sites are inaccessible.
If www.myisp.com uses MAPS, I am more than free to browse to any site I
want. It's possible that I couldn't receive EMAIL from them, fine. But
the article tries to make MAPS out to be censoring web-content, which it
can't.
Lame article. MAPS did a REALLY bad thing, and there should be AN article
in YRO, just not THIS article. MAPS is so much of a PITA anyway, they almost
deserve their own subset of YRO, alongside DMCA and UCITA. Hmmm, sub-slashboxes.
Good idea. |
Re:services like this (Score:1)
by um... Lucas (lk@caralis.com) on Wednesday December 13, @06:01PM (#560565)
(User #13147 Info | http://homepage.apple.com/lucas_krupinski/)
|
you can get my number blocked, but if my friend also uses the same LEC
as you, you're not entitled to have him unable to receive my phone calls
as well. The RBL, as it's implemented, isn't granular enough. That's my issue
with it. The choice to use the RBL should be that of the end user (the person
who the email account was set up on behalf of), no one else.
|
Re:Exactly (Score:1)
by um... Lucas (lk@caralis.com) on Wednesday December 13, @08:05PM (#560566)
(User #13147 Info | http://homepage.apple.com/lucas_krupinski/)
|
Ahhh... so why aren't linux users using winmodems? Because it' "too hard"
to reverse engineer the chips themselves. Why does everyone complain about
Microsoft changing their file formats with every release of office? Because
it's "too hard" to create a new filter everytime there's a new revision to
word.
So many of the complaints around here are based on things being "too
hard" for linux developers to do. Don't bash the end user for having similar
issues.
|
Re:Mill's tries to be an absolute (Score:1)
by um... Lucas (lk@caralis.com) on Wednesday December 13, @09:03PM (#560567)
(User #13147 Info | http://homepage.apple.com/lucas_krupinski/)
|
Well, then i can lock MY door and keep you out. I might even tell my
neighbors about you if you're really annoying. But i'm not going to lock
my neighbors houses in anticipation of you arriving at their houses.
ISPs provide bandwidth. And that's all they should. People (mostly people
who work there) around here think that an ISPs responsibility should extend
beyond that. It doesn't and shouldn't. When people sign onto an ISP (aside
from AOL which eases people onto the internet) they're generally expecting
unfettered access to the internet. The terms of services' that i've read
at numerous ISP's all prohibit spamming. Fine. But they make no mention that
i might not be able to receive mail from friends of mine that happen to share
ISP's with a spammer.
Slashdot generally doens't like America Online and their potential to
either censor other sites or at least give their own sites premium placement
above others. If bandwidth or disk space is getting chewed up to the point
where they can't make a profit because of SPAM, they need to lower their
prices, not cut off service to the end user, especially without telling them
about it in advance.
Yes, we'd like to be a community. But with one small, unelected, unaccountable
group making decisions that can effect millions of people, that's not community
anymore. We're not cooperating. There's rows of thugs prodding, shoving and
herding people back into line. Stray outside the line, you're dead.
|
Re:Exactly (Score:2)
by um... Lucas (lk@caralis.com) on Wednesday December 13, @05:40PM (#560568)
(User #13147 Info | http://homepage.apple.com/lucas_krupinski/)
|
Say my ISP uses RBL, specifically how am i supposed to "turn it off"?
Switch ISPs? Not likely, because there's only a few DSL providers around
here and they all string lines from Verizon. And there's only two possibilities
(AFAIK) for cable access.
If they use MAPS and people in my address books' addresses get added
to list, then effectively i have no recourse. I can switch ISPs, but how
will i even know what's occuring until a couple days go by and i get a phonecall
saying "hey, why haven't you responded to my email?"
ISPs, sendmail developers, RBLer's, someone's got to make a system where
users opt in and opt out individually. For instance, when signing up for
an account of any sort with an ISP, their web page or CSR could plainly ask
"would you like your mailbox to be protected from spam using the RBL?", provide
an explanation if they don't know what it is and let each customer choose
for themself.
|
Re:services like this (Score:2)
by um... Lucas (lk@caralis.com) on Wednesday December 13, @05:42PM (#560569)
(User #13147 Info | http://homepage.apple.com/lucas_krupinski/)
|
Using a non-computer analogy: you don't. You can come over to my house
and say "Hey, you know your doors unlocked?" but you can't come in and change
the locks on me just to insure that you know that my house is now "safe".
|
Re:Exactly (Score:2)
by um... Lucas (lk@caralis.com) on Wednesday December 13, @05:57PM (#560570)
(User #13147 Info | http://homepage.apple.com/lucas_krupinski/)
|
Great advice to give my mother or grandmother one day...
"Yeah, I know you like using Netscape as your intenet application. And
yeah, i know, i took you a few months to learn that you could click an address
and it would be added into your address book, let alone how long it took
you to learn to create rules to filter your messages between your "personal",
"business", and "possible spam" folders, non of that matters now. You need
to use Hotmail from now on. Or yahoo mail. You can't bring your address book
or sent mail or received mail folders with you either. Oh no, don't worry
you didn't do anything wrong. It's just that someone else that happens to
use the same internet provider as you did, which is why none of your friends
can get your emails...."
Can you see my point from a less elitist mind set, now? And maybe help
come up with an idea that doesn't punish innocent people at the same time
as punishing "guily" people? Not everyone in the world knows works at an
ISP, or owns their own domain, or even edits their own DNS records. A solution
to SPAM take that into account.
|
MAPS RBL blocks MAIL, not the net! (Score:1)
by TA on Thursday December 14, @02:08AM (#560571)
(User #14109 Info)
|
I don't know how you are using MAPS if you think it disconnects WEB SITES
from the network! Are you using the RBL as your name server or something?
MAPS RBL is for sendmail, not for anything else. Sendmail blocks incoming
mail from the sites in the RBL, and that's all. Sendmail doesn't control
your Cisco router or your Netscape client! Get your setup fixed.
TA
|
Re:Idiot (Score:1)
by TA on Thursday December 14, @07:11AM (#560572)
(User #14109 Info)
|
|
Oh come on! Everywhere it said 'subscribes to RBL', not 'subscribed
to BGP'. When you say "subscribe to RBL" then that means the *mail* service,
not something else. The BGP is indeed some kind of censorware, however if
you use it then you have chosen to use it yourself. |
Bad experience with MAPS at our ISP (Score:1)
by jking (jk@kinger.dwave.net) on Wednesday December 13, @08:14PM (#560573)
(User #14538 Info)
|
I Work for an ISP and we were almost blackholed for not taking immediate
action when an individual emailed one of our admins claiming that one of
our customers was sending spam. The person who received the spam demanded
that we cancel the spammers account. Because the person provide no evidence
that the spam had actually been received from our customer and because we
have never received any other reports of this customer sending spam we did
nothing. After dealing with MAPS (who never even tried to contact us and
discuss the situation) we were able to be removed from the blackhole list
but the person we had talked to said that failing to take action is a good
enough reason to be blackholed. The worst part was that they were willing
to take the spam victims word without ever trying to fix the problem.
(Whoohoo, my first post after using Slashdot for the past 2 years)
|
There are no innocent victims (Score:1)
by Sloppy on Wednesday December 13, @09:08PM (#560574)
(User #14984 Info | http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Saturday August 18, @12:56AM)
|
|
The problem being pointed out is that organizations such as
Peacefire, who do not spam or harbor spammers or support spammers, are
being blocked by the RBL, not for anything they did, but merely for being
on the same netblock as the spammer websites.
But being on the same netblock as the spammers is something
that Peacefire did. They are keeping a spam-friendly ISP in business.
---
|
Re:This is exactly what we want them to do. (Score:3)
by Sloppy on Wednesday December 13, @08:53PM (#560575)
(User #14984 Info | http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Saturday August 18, @12:56AM)
|
|
This is the difference between locking up the kiddy
pornographer and locking up the people that made the high quality
photographic paper and the ink used to create the images!
No. There's one little flaw in your analogy, but it's important.
It's not like locking up the people who made the photographic paper.
It's like choosing to not do business with the people who made the
photographic paper, and telling them that you will remove your boycott
if they stop selling photographic paper to the kiddy pornographer.
Nobody's rights are being infringed. Nobody is having force used
against them. There's a huge difference between locking someone up and
boycotting them.
---
|
Re:Horay! (Score:1)
by Wiseleo (slashdot.talk@pctips.com) on Thursday December 14, @11:46AM (#560576)
(User #15092 Info | http://www.pctips.com)
|
Are these measures drastic?
Yes.
Are they necessary? You bet.
I have filed hundreds of spam reports. Would you care to guess what percentage of them is acted upon?
I'll give you a hint. UUnet (MCI Worldcom) currently is the #1 spammer
provider on the 'Net. They were warned repeatedly and most of their clients
have cleaned up their act. You will find that most of the spam comes from
da.uu.net and fl.uu.net.
I know who is behind those spams. I also know that UUnet simply refuses
to implement a technological suggestion to deal with the problem.
As soon as they do it, the volume of spam will drop dramatically.
Even if you can't read the headers, if you forward just about all spam
you get to abuse-mail@uu.net, you will find that most of it was originated
from there.
I am really looking forward to the day UUnet gets RBLed.
A typical report includes all parties involved unless they are the sender.
Media3 hosts spamvertized and spamware sites. Thus Media3 supports spammers.
Spam support promotes further network abuse. Mail Abuse Prevention System
is doing its job by listing Media3 in the RBL.
It's easy to get out of it once Media3 cleans up its act and joins other ISPs actively terminating spamware.
--
Leonid S. Knyshov
|
Re:Crime? (Score:1)
by Wiseleo (slashdot.talk@pctips.com) on Thursday December 14, @02:30PM (#560577)
(User #15092 Info | http://www.pctips.com)
|
Computer crime act 1030.
Avaiting a proper case to set a precedent ;-)
--
Leonid S. Knyshov
|
Re:Have you looked at the site? (Score:1)
by Nater (postmaster@yahoo.com) on Wednesday December 13, @10:11PM (#560578)
(User #15229 Info | http://www.movealong.org/~inkblot/)
|
Sendmail
is a piece of software that can be used to spam. The folks at MarketingMasters
offer software that is specifically designed for spamming, plus it comes
with a bunch of addresses, probably including yours and mine. You see the
difference?
Peacefire.org is a site about empowering people. They encourage people
to exercise their rights under the law and dig up dirt on the people who
would try to abuse their positions in the censorware market. Peacefire.org
is currently blocked by RBL because MarketingMasters is selling spamware
from a site hosted by the same service.
Put yourself in Peacefire's position. Suddenly your site is inaccessible
from large portions of the Internet. You have no idea why and the people
who are trying to connect to your site have no idea why. Some time later
when the situation develops enough that you can start to figure it out, you
realize that it's not related to your site at all. What would you do about
it? Yes, I understand that they voluntarily chose their web hosting service
over many many others, but in all honesty, are you going to tell Peacefire.org
to switch providers now because they're using the same service as MarketingMasters?
This is precisely how jamie has drawn this analogy. RBL is a service
that blocks access to sites, that makes it censorware. The fact that MAPS
has arbitrarily decided to block an entire web hosting service because of
one of their customers is abuse.
RBL needs to be replaced. The original intention was to keep it as a
list of sites that send spam. That why you could (theoretically) stop getting
spam by not accepting mail from those sites. That system has grown the point
that it can now be used to affect changes in IP routing. And now
that a significant population of net users are either directly or indirectly
beholden to RBL, MAPS has taken the power they have and abused it.
Let me repeat... RBL was a list of sites that send spam that you could use to block incoming spam. RBL has become
a list of sites that have disappeared from the net, and a lot of innocent
bystanders have just disappeared. You see the difference?
|
Re:MAPS != censorship. (Score:1)
by Nater (postmaster@yahoo.com) on Wednesday December 13, @10:36PM (#560579)
(User #15229 Info | http://www.movealong.org/~inkblot/)
|
Censorship
is something that can only be conducted by the government. Private organizations
such as ISP's or MAPS can choose to carry or not carry whatever they like.
The difference is of course that everyone 'owns' and funds the government
which therefore has no right to moral or policical content it makes available.
However private individuals have full discression over their own property
and how they choose to utilize it.
This is the sort of mentality that easily degenerates into... well, I'll be completely frank... fascism.
AboveNet is a backbone provider that RBL. Why is that a problem? Because
1) a lot of people's traffic crosses AboveNet without them knowing and without
them being able to do anything about it and 2) AboveNet won't carry certain
content. According to you that's Ok, because, hey, it's their equipment.
Imagine, for a moment that it's not spam that's at issue. Suppose that
some backbone provider subscribes to a service that blocks sites that provide
information about the assination of JFK. According to you that's Ok, because,
hey, it's their equipment.
Imagine for a moment that we're not even talking about the Internet.
Instead we're talking about the phone network. Suppose some phone company
decides to block calls to Russia, because in the opinion of the executive
board of that phone company "they're all a bunch of commies". According
to you that's Ok, because, hey, it's their equipment.
Do you get it now? Some services need to be universal, because if they
have the authority to block based on content, then whatever means they use
to do it is no longer voluntary by all parties involved. It's someone else
deciding what other people can't have.
By the same token you should not be able to force a private entity
such as an ISP to carry traffic they choose not to carry, i.e. traffic identified
by the MAPS RBL. If you don't like MAPS then don't use their service or use
the services of ISP's who do.
Services like RBL are supposed to end-user services. It's supposed to
be a list that individuals like you and I use to block incoming mail. When
backbone providers and ISPs use it, it becomes involuntary. You think it's
easy to switch ISPs? You think everyone chose their ISP? How about students
on the campus network? How about small towns with a local monopoly? How
about big towns where every ISP has chosen to use RBL? It's none of the
ISPs business what their customers are doing nor should it be. When an ISP
subscribes to RBL, that's censorship, and no, it's not just the government
that can censor.
|
Re:Have you looked at the site? (Score:1)
by Nater (postmaster@yahoo.com) on Thursday December 14, @12:03AM (#560580)
(User #15229 Info | http://www.movealong.org/~inkblot/)
|
I don't know if you've looked closely at any of your spam in the last couple of years,...
Yes, I have. And you know what? I control it using a method that is infinitely more accurate and infinitely less controversial than RBL. What is this godsend?
Delete.
|
Re:An old and silly argument (Score:1)
by Nater (postmaster@yahoo.com) on Thursday December 14, @05:20AM (#560581)
(User #15229 Info | http://www.movealong.org/~inkblot/)
|
what if your an ISP and your customers demand less spam?
That's like asking the postal service to deliver less junk mail. You
should point that fact out to your customers. As an ISP isn't your responsibility
to decide which mail your customers get and which they don't. If they don't
want to get spam, then they need to take the time to set up their own blocking
mechanisms. |
Re:MAPS = DOS (Score:1)
by Todd Knarr on Thursday December 14, @05:34AM (#560582)
(User #15451 Info | http://www.silverglass.org)
|
|
Yes, it's a denial of service. And yes, it will
prevent spam. What's been done by just attacking the e-mail accounts the
spammers use to send their mail is the equivalent of going after a car-theft
ring by trying to nail down the little guys who nick the cars. What MAPS
is doing is attacking the other end of the problem, the dealers who buy the
stolen cars from the ring, knowingly or otherwise, and resell them to the
public ( ie. the ISPs who host the spammer's Web sites ). Yes it'll be a
problem for everyone, because shutting down those dealers also stops them
from selling legitimate, not-stolen cars. Tough. If hosting spammer Web sites
starts costing ISPs larger amounts of legitimate business, maybe they'll
stop hosting spammer Web sites, and the spammers will have a lot more
trouble staying in business with nowhere to receive contacts. Certainly nothing
less seems to have gotten rid of the spammers, and I find it hard to have
much sympathy for Media3 who I consider an accessory after the fact. As for
Peacefire and the others, the best suggestion I can give is this: tell Media3
that they'll have to decide whether they want to stop doing business with
the spammers or stop doing business with you.
|
Re:MAPS = DOS (Score:1)
by Todd Knarr on Thursday December 14, @10:06AM (#560583)
(User #15451 Info | http://www.silverglass.org)
|
|
The
ISP is, as I said, essentially in the position of the dealership that buys
cars and parts from the chop-shop. MAPS is identifying not only the dealer,
but all the people who buy cars from the dealer. When I agree with MAPS,
I'm essentially telling everyone who buys cars from a dealer who is buying
cars from the chop-shop that, until they stop doing business with a supporter of and accessory to unacceptable things, I'm not going to do business with them.
And whether spamming is illegal or not depends on whether you consider forcing
me to pay for your mail to be theft or not. And whether or not it is doesn't
affect whether I consider spamming and supporting spammers acceptable behavior
or not.
Targetting just the spammer would be nice, but then there's
no incentive for the ISP to shut them down. They'll just move their site
around, the spammer doesn't suffer financially since they're still reachable,
and the ISP doesn't suffer from hosting the spammer since they still get
both the spammer's money and all their other customers' money. What MAPS
does, and what I do by using their RBL, is force the ISP's customers into
choosing between doing business with a spammer-friendly ISP and doing business
with me. Which hopefully will force the ISP into a choice between keeping
the business of the spammers or the rest of their customers.
|
Moaning ninny USian teens (Score:1)
by Taurine on Wednesday December 13, @11:43PM (#560584)
(User #15678 Info | http://www.taurine.demon.co.uk/)
|
So this becomes worthy of reportage the day that darling peacefire.org
gets blocked. Am I the only person sick of hearing about Jamie's pet project?
The article filter needs a new feature, the ability to filter the intersection
of two or more categories. I don't want to give up seeing all the YRO articles,
but if I could filter out all of them posted by Jamie, I'm sure that all
I would be cancelling is articles about these peacefire.org ninnies.
I mean what is this guy on? One day YRO is about what an infringement
of YRO it is to be spammed, the next it is about how YRO are being infringed
by people that are trying to stop the promotion of tools that make it possible
to spam - lets face it the only people that spam are actually those without
the ability to ever understand how it is done well enough to implement it
themselves. |
Re:You've totally missed the point... (Score:1)
by The Vorlon (vorlon@dodds.net) on Thursday December 14, @07:43AM (#560585)
(User #15731 Info)
|
Why would it not be ok to put this kind of pressure on Media3?
ISPs are driven by economics, just like any other business. A lot of
people like to think the Internet is as yet untainted by money, but the truth
is that if you see ISPs doing something that you find morally objectionable,
appealing to their conscience isn't nearly as effective as appealing to their
wallet. If we want Spam to stop, we'd damn well better be prepared to put
financial pressure on the people who are currently making money off of it.
Media3 is not exactly without recourse here, you know. If they don't want
to be on the RBL, the solution is simple -- get rid of the customer that's
selling spamware. But they'd rather sue MAPS than work with them, so tough
cookies to them.
Should their customers be caught in the crossfire? Well, don't the customers
have options, too? I haven't seen anything in this discussion to suggest
that the poor customers are tied into service contracts, and even contracts
can be broken.
And don't forget that the RBL only affects communication with sites that
have CHOSEN to subscribe to the list. Do you believe it's wrong for individuals
and ISPs to CHOOSE not to deal with those who make their money from Spam?
|
Re:Irony Alert: DeCSS (Score:1)
by The Vorlon (vorlon@dodds.net) on Thursday December 14, @11:11AM (#560586)
(User #15731 Info)
|
|
I have to disagree with the assertion that suppressing DeCSS is morally
equivalent to suppressing address-harvesting software. Crowbars are legal,
but weapons of mass destruction are not. Why? Because although crowbars
/can/ be used illegally, they also have uses which are legal, whereas land
mines and biological weapons can only be used for nefarious purposes. DeCSS
has a legitimate use: allowing DVD owners to watch their disks under Linux.
What are the legitimate uses of email-harvesting software? |
Re:You've totally missed the point... (Score:2)
by seebs (seebs@plethora.net) on Thursday December 14, @11:37AM (#560587)
(User #15766 Info | http://www.plethora.net/~seebs/)
|
>I'm amazed that so many readers here think it's
>ok to apply pressure to Media3 (who did support
>a spammers web site) by blacklisting a large
>block of Media3's legit customers, not just the
>spammer.
Well, look at it this way: What else can you do that Media3 cares about?
Media3 has made it clear that, as long as the spam *itself* doesn't go over
their network, you can host whatever you want on their pages, advertise it
in spam, advertise it in faxes, advertise it by printing your URL on the
flayed skins of your enemies, it doesn't matter, it's not *our* fault.
As long as they believe that, the spammers whose pages they host will
have a very compelling *reason* to send out spam - they will be able to collect
responses, collect money, and rake in cash, and they can do it because they're
getting cheap, reliable, spam-friendly hosting.
Media3 has nothing to lose if we block a few spammer sites; the spammers
don't care about a mere few percent of the net not seeing them, and since
they don't send mail over their Media3 connection, the rest of the RBL users
(those who just use it to block mail) aren't doing anything.
So, how do we communicate to Media3 that they are doing damage to the
network? How do we tell them we want them to be good neighbors, or no neighbors
at all?
We block *everything* of theirs. It's that simple. They won't *listen* to anything else.
If Media3 wins a suit against the RBL, I'm going to go add their blocks
to our *local* blackhole list. And they'll stay there. Forever.
Or, they can admit that this is a *cooperative* network (you don't cooperate,
we don't network with you), kick their spammers off, stop accepting spammer
cash, and *POOF* no more RBL listing.
Imagine if Peacefire had bought its connectivity from Cyberpromo. They
*did* host web pages, after all. Would you be surprised that they lost a
bit of connectivity?
When you pick a hosting provider, one of the things you need to look
for is "anti-spam policy". If they don't have one, you are likely to end
up on the wrong side of a number of blacklists.
|
You've totally missed the point... (Score:4)
by seebs (seebs@plethora.net) on Wednesday December 13, @08:18PM (#560588)
(User #15766 Info | http://www.plethora.net/~seebs/)
|
|
The problems with censorware are: 1. Inaccurate or undocumented listings.
2. Listings for things other than those said. The RBL has neither of
these problems. Media3 is actively and knowingly supporting the people who
flood your mailbox with all the crap we call "spam". Does blocking Media3's
sites, in many cases at the IP level, result in you getting less spam?
Today? No. Today, it just means those sites don't get as much traffic.
Tomorrow? Sooner or later, Media3 will have to decide whether it wants
to be on the network where spammers do business, or on the network where
RBL subscribers do business. If they pick the spammer network, they will
eventually be totally removed from the network, as they find their way into
more and more blacklists. If they decide they want the other network, they
will stop supporting spammers and people who sell spamware. With no way
to sell their products, the spamware vendors will stop sending you ads for
them. People will stop *buying* the products, because there will be no way
to buy them. You will get less spam. It's an educational tool. Media3
has the option of being on the network where you host spammer pages, or on
the network that RBL subscribers see. They have made their choice. Your
list of sites "also affected" misses the point entirely. Those people are
paying Media3, and as long as Media3 makes money, Media3 has no real reason
to care whether or not hosting spammer sites is damaging to the rest of the
network. If your hosting company is supporting spammers, you will be fucked.
Don't buy hosting from companies that are unwilling to terminate spammer
websites. The RBL isn't about stopping spam *today*. It's about encouraging
the policies that we *absolutely need* if we are to have less spam *tomorrow*.
Thanks to the RBL, a number of very large networks have put in strong, effective,
anti-spam policies. Every day, you don't get dozens of spams that would
once have been sent via netcom. Every day, hundreds of spams that would
have advertised sites hosted by companies with a policy just like the Media3
policy *aren't* sent, because those sites got taken down, because the policies
got fixed. Media3 is wrong. MAPS is right. Media3 is trying to support
the theory that, as long as the actual spam is relay-raped or sent via throwaway
dialup accounts, it's not their problem where the page is hosted. MAPS is
educating them. As soon as Media3 fixes its policy to unequivocally prohibit
the hosting of spamware sites, address list sites, and sites advertised in
spam, and starts enforcing that policy, everyone is happy. |
Re:This is exactly what we want them to do. (Score:2)
by Skapare on Wednesday December 13, @11:35PM (#560589)
(User #16644 Info | http://linuxhomepage.com/)
|
BS!
Kiddie porn is a miniscule use of photographic film or paper.
Spamming software has NO use but for spamming.
My RBL config stays ON!
|
Re:MAPS != censorship. (Score:2)
by Skapare on Wednesday December 13, @11:43PM (#560590)
(User #16644 Info | http://linuxhomepage.com/)
|
|
Maybe I just don't want this universal connectivity.
I
have been around long enough on the Internet to know what it was like when
"universal" didn't include scum. Things change. So I make my view
of the network the way I want, and MAPS RBL/DUL/RSS help me do that. It's
not perfect, but when weighing the tradeoffs, it is preferred to use it than
to not. If you think you can do better, and make something that would make
me interested in switching from MAPS RBL, by all means go for it.
And,
BTW, I do know how to make individual case exceptions to RBL/DUL/RSS in my
DNS server. Convince me that I should in this or any other case.
|
Re:Power, unchecked, corrupting as usual (Score:2)
by Skapare on Thursday December 14, @12:16AM (#560591)
(User #16644 Info | http://linuxhomepage.com/)
|
MattW (ma++@ender.com) on Thursday December 14, @12:29AM CST
(User #97290 Info) wrote:
(1)
If you're a bulk provider, with hundreds of web sites, it isn't even worth
batting an eye to keep hosting a spam software provider. If they wanted to
follow the money, they may refuse to remove them, but they certainly wouldn't
defend them when MAPS came knocking. MAPS scares providers.
I'm glad that it does scare them.
(2)
How much is enough? Should MAPS block every single IP address that the provider
has, just to force them to stop hosting the software seller? How many innocent
sites have to be taken down in the name of shutting down the spammers? And
do you really think people looking for spamming software won't be able to
find it because you shut this down? When these software sellers move, should
we shut down a thousand more? Will you feel the same when its YOU?
MAPS RBL may be doing exactly what I would do if I were running such a service.
What I would do is look up the ARIN/RIPE/APNIC records to determine the smallest level of IP assignment administration.
The theory here is that it is easy for a web site to get a new IP in the same block.
In fact, they may already have one.
It can be difficult to determine exactly which IPs are to be blocked if done invidually.
And it happens already that web customers to ask for IP address changes to try to get around various forms of being blocked.
If
the spam supporter is running their own network, AND if the ISP they use
properly registers their suballocation to the appropriate database at ARIN/RIPE/APNIC,
then I'm quite happy to block ONLY that customer and not the whole ISP.
But if the ISP can't be bothered to submit that information, then I can't
be bothered to pin down an exact network for them.
(3)
No one ever stops to think how insidiously powerful MAPS has grown. As their
filters have become useful, it has gone far beyond good sysadmins using them
to protect their users -- it has gone corporate, with millions of addresses
obeying the filters MAPS dishes out. What happens when it is abused?
You're
assuming that it will be abused. While I cannot say it won't be, I don't
see that trend at this time. The view MAPS uses is in line with my own.
If they do end up abusing it (by my definition) then I may quit using it.
That decision will be made on the basis of whichever choice has the better
results for me. If the choices are MAPS or nothing, then it will take quite
some abuse to make me choose nothing. If the choices are MAPS or someone
else's service that isn't doing the abuse, but is better than nothing, I
could be more likely to make the switch. Currently I see no other viable
choice (I don't like ORBS' approach).
Think
that won't happen? Wrong, it already has. MAPS blocked 209.211.253/24, because
it hurt a lot more than just blocking 209.211.253.68-89, or even 209.211.253.64/27.
I shouldn't need to repeat it, Jamie made a great point: Paul Vixie said
MAPS contacts all blocked websites before blocking them. Ah, but that must
date back to before MAPS was so powerful, such an icon of internet protection,
with supporters lining up to buy them lawyers.
I would need to see evidence that blocking 209.211.253/24 is an abuse.
I haven't seen any, yet.
(4)
MAPS is tied far too closely with AboveNet. The fact that Vixie was an Abovenet
VP (who knows what he is with Metromedia, who bought Abovenet), should absolutely
chill people. There's something absolutely creepy about the power to block
email to 40% of addresses being thus controlled. I'm sure the small-time
sysadmins would remove MAPS configs from sendmail if it were abused -- but
would corporations be so quick to follow? With change control procedures,
possibly even total apathy?
I'm small time, and from
reading all the information posted on /. I don't see any reason to not block
Media3. The current situation is commensurate with why I use MAPS RBL/DUL/RSS
in the first place. If you do decide to provide some evidence as to why
I should make an exception and allow Media3 into my network (which I know
how to do), please also tell me why:
- There are not IN-ADDR.ARPA reverse PTR records for these IP address that correctly resolve forward to that IP address.
- Media3 has not submitted SWIP records to ARIN to indicate a different administrative control over these addresses.
At
this point, a lot of these points have been intentionally sensationalized
to provoke a bit of thought. I think that MAPS has just selected an overbroad
block to filter this time -- and I agree with filtering spam software sales.
You support spam, down you go. But I also think that the cheerleading, here
and elsewhere, and the lack of concern over the fact that MAPS has run roughshod
over so many innocent sites, shows that people have a tendency to follow
net luminaries far too blindly. If you're going to run MAPS filters, then
you're handing that project power. Best keep an eye on that, if you don't
want to contribute to the abuse of that power.
I will keep a watch.
|
Re:Screw Vixie and his goon friends at Above.net (Score:2)
by Skapare on Thursday December 14, @12:33AM (#560592)
(User #16644 Info | http://linuxhomepage.com/)
|
My servers use his services so I guess I elected him policeman.
|
Re:Irony Alert: DeCSS (Score:2)
by Skapare on Thursday December 14, @12:43AM (#560593)
(User #16644 Info | http://linuxhomepage.com/)
|
|
MAPS
is an elective service which provides me with information regarding their
opinion about an address or domain. I choose to block or not block on the
basis of that information.
If MPAA or RIAA or anyone else sues, they
are effectively bringing in the (potentially violent) force of governments
to cause a web site to be unavailable to everyone.
The irony is I
can choose to block web sites hosting DeCSS if I wanted to. I've actually
made that choice for a select few sites which host "web bug" (ad banners
and undisplayed images designed to watch how long you are on a site or track
you around).
|
ASN is NOT required (Score:4)
by Skapare on Thursday December 14, @01:01AM (#560594)
(User #16644 Info | http://linuxhomepage.com/)
|
|
You
can use RBL w/o an ASN. You just have to run BGP4 and peer with the RBL
eBGP4 server and let it route to your black hole address. You then default
route everything else out your single backbone connection. No other BGP
peering is needed. Since you're not announcing routes (and RBL certainly
isn't taking them) you can use a reserved ASN to configure your router.
|
Re:A Better Analogy (Score:1)
by Felinoid on Thursday December 14, @01:30AM (#560595)
(User #16872 Info | http://www.meowpawjects.com/)
|
A perfict annolog.... Napster... DVD DeCSS Decode.
Ok not perfict... The tool is admittedly for spammers...
But they themselfs aren't spamming...
The software is insainly easy to write after all..
On the other hand the music industry has made up it's mind that Napster
IS a piracy tool. The movie industry has similer views about DeCSS..
At the same time anyone who'd like to voice discontent to the authors of this program won't be able to do so...
I personally would like to reverse engenear this program and see if I
can't just add something to my procmail filter so it'll reject e-mail sent
by this software. |
Re:A Better Analogy (Score:1)
by Felinoid on Thursday December 14, @01:36AM (#560596)
(User #16872 Info | http://www.meowpawjects.com/)
|
I hear that free software thing is really dangerous to the economy..
Big communist plot.. dangerous to capitalism and inovation..
We should crush it...
Just ban a few IPs at the DNS level...
That Linux thing is just far to dangerous..
|
Re:A Better Analogy (Score:1)
by Felinoid on Thursday December 14, @01:42AM (#560597)
(User #16872 Info | http://www.meowpawjects.com/)
|
|
Ahh so the lynch mob is more trustworthy than a cort order...
|
Pot kettle black (Score:1)
by Felinoid on Thursday December 14, @02:30AM (#560598)
(User #16872 Info | http://www.meowpawjects.com/)
|
As one website put it soo well..
Anyone who points out the flaws of the MAPS gets thrown in with the worst of spammers...
But I'll put in it my own more umm jerk knee.. way...
Blasphamy.. how dare he say something about our all perfict god Vixie..
The fact is Slashdot isn't above reproch.. Mistakes are made.. Taco and crew screw up..
But Vixie is put on a pedistal..
Mistakes are made... and when you ignore the mistakes it just gets worse...
As http://www.ifn.net/ puts it.. no accountability...
It wouldn't be a problem if he'd just make the effort to deal with defects
|
Re:Screw Vixie and his goon friends at Above.net (Score:1)
by Felinoid on Thursday December 14, @02:39AM (#560599)
(User #16872 Info | http://www.meowpawjects.com/)
|
You elected him to police your users..
AboveNet placed him in power over the whole Internet.
There is a diffrence...
Say AoL picks up a filter.. then any e-mail rejected by that filter dosn't get past that filter to AoL... fair enough...
Say AoL dosn't pick a filter but it's traffic passes through AboveNet... gets filtered FOR them...
Well thats not the case anymore becouse AboveNet dropped it's filter..
So now Vixie only polices ISPs the let him...
|
Re:You've totally missed the point... (Score:1)
by Felinoid on Thursday December 14, @03:27AM (#560600)
(User #16872 Info | http://www.meowpawjects.com/)
|
>The problems with censorware are: 1. Inaccurate or undocumented listings.
2. Listings for things other than those said. The RBL has neither of these
problems.
The RBL has quite a history of questionable listings and mistakes...
They deal with the problems in quite the same way as any censorware filter. Meaning they ignore it..
|
Re:Horay! (Score:1)
by Felinoid on Tuesday December 19, @03:28AM (#560601)
(User #16872 Info | http://www.meowpawjects.com/)
|
It's a fine tradition of USENET not of E-mail...
(I am refering to CancleMoose... His activitys has helpped battle spam on Usenet for years)
At one time the RBL was just a list of known spam friendly ISPs.
It has sence become a tool to force ISPs to comply to Vixies standards.
It was a feature to costummers.. they wanted spam free e-mail. They didn't care if they lost some lagit e-mail in the process...
Thats when spam was a major problem.. when CyberPromo was on the attack...
Now costummers don't care if they get spam.. they want to get all the e-mail ment for them...
yes ISPs have every right to provide whatever services they see fit.
Consummers have every right to know what "services" they are getting. ISPs
as a rule keep costummers in the dark about filtering policys.
Also the RBL has changed significantly over the years.
There was a time when backbones would kick off spam friendly ISPs..
They don't do that anymore.. becouse it isn't much of a problem anymore...
In the absence of a problem to solve.. the solution itself is a problem...
|
Re:A Better Analogy (Score:1)
by Felinoid on Monday December 25, @11:30AM (#560602)
(User #16872 Info | http://www.meowpawjects.com/)
|
|
You give them a chance to remove the item from the shelfs or your protest is slammed as a 'crank'...
|
Re:My objection to the MAPS RBL is over (Score:1)
by Felinoid on Monday December 25, @01:13PM (#560603)
(User #16872 Info | http://www.meowpawjects.com/)
|
>Do you believe everything you read on the web?!
No.. and I don't expect you to eather...
What I expect is for you to research this yourself. I hope you come to the same conclusions I have.
However I didn't need the webpage to convence me sence I was costummer of IFN at the time...
However... you seem willing to accept a third party repost of an auto-responder to usenet as "from the horses mouth"...
I went ahead and verifyed the text was infact athentic...
It is the last item in the e-mail just after this:
Please recognize that control of your online activities, including email,
belongs to you, not us. We are prepared to assist and take action when necessary,
but you must make the first attempt to solve the problem.
In otherwords... "We WILL do what WE can to eliminate spam but you have to do your part"
Given what IMAPS did to IFN I'm not supprised they are being more than a bit jumpy when it comes to abuse complaints.
Spammer sets up website on IFN..
IFN and IMAPS gets complaints...
IFN shuts down website.. IMAPS lists IFN anyway..
IMAPS refuses contact with IFN for almost a month.
IFN is delisted...
Spammer clames website is back...
I checked.. it wasn't back...
IMAPS acknoladges the website isn't at the advertised location.. lists IFN anyway..
Refuses contact....
I'll ask IFN to clarify it's policy.. it seems you don't get it...
They are charging a fee to help deal with abuse that is outside IFNs services...IE Spammers adveritsing fictional websites...
|
My objection to the MAPS RBL is over (Score:2)
by Felinoid on Thursday December 14, @02:09AM (#560604)
(User #16872 Info | http://www.meowpawjects.com/)
|
I've long had an objection to AboveNet filtering peer traffic.
I was once all for the RBL and MAPS before I discovered how they operate.
Basicly they have lost prospective. I still refuse to have anything to do with RBLs filters.
For more on RBLs past go here
Now that AboveNet has discontinued it's peer filtering it dosn't matter to me how slipshot the RBL is.
If ISPs willingly filter e-mail this way and users don't object then great..
Horray.. I myself will never trust my spam filtering to MAPS.
My ONLY objection is the packet filtering that AboveNet did..
They have stopped.. and my only objection to the RBL is gone...
|
can MAPS/ORBS be advisory to users? (Score:3)
by Lumpish Scholar (psrchisholm@yahoo.com) on Wednesday December 13, @09:24PM (#560605)
(User #17107 Info)
|
|
Can an ISP, instead of filtering mail from "bad" sites, add identifying
header lines to messages from such hosts? That way, users could add fiters
to block such messages, but have filters with a higher precedence to allow
mail from friends and family. (I know this requires a fair level of expertise.
Also not clear how you could set it up so users wouldn't even have to download
spam.) |
Re:Huh? (Score:1)
by boots@work (work it out from my url) on Wednesday December 13, @05:52PM (#560606)
(User #17305 Info | http://sourcefrog.net/mbp/)
|
|
Most subscribers use the RBL from their mail server as a way of deciding whether to accept connections or forward mail.
However, it can also be fed directly into routers through eBGP4.
I think larger networks might be more likely to use it that way. In this
case, the blacklisted addresses simply become unroutable, and not even web
access to the domain will work. This only happens if your network, or your upstream, voluntarily
and consciously decides they want to follow MAPS's advice about abusive networks.
--
Martin
|
Re:You can't fool all the people... (Score:1)
by Fishy (puppet@dial.pipex.com) on Thursday December 14, @02:38AM (#560607)
(User #17624 Info)
|
"I am all for blocking spam. But MAPS isn't about blocking spam, as this /. article points out"
Err, yes it is, the article was just plain wrong in that regard (well
in most other regards aswell). Supporting an incorrect assumption based
on that assumption is not a good idea.
"Technical people like us know that MAPS is a political organization out to stiffle speech they don't like"
*lol*, is that black helicopters I see....
F
|
Re:So? (Score:1)
by Adam J. Richter on Thursday December 14, @07:50PM (#560608)
(User #17693 Info)
|
|
Yes, it is relevant, because the chief technology office of AboveNet
is Dave Rand, one of principals of MAPS. Whether MAPS lists ORBS in their
database or not, they (through one of the principals) are censoring ORBS.
Of course AboveNet provides some lame excuse about how their blocking ORBS
is for our own good, but we have never been able to get AboveNet to unblock
ORBS from our class C. |
Re:So? (Score:1)
by Adam J. Richter on Thursday December 14, @09:38PM (#560609)
(User #17693 Info)
|
|
AboveNet has constructed their criteria so that they do have "fig leaf"
excuse for their censorship, as is done in virtually all real world examples
of censorship. If you want to be fooled in all of these cases, that is your
choice.
In this case, AboveNet's excuse is ridiculous, in light of the
fact that AboveNet claims to be doing this for customer welfare, and we,
the effected customer, do not want them to do it.
|
Re:So? (Score:1)
by Adam J. Richter on Sunday December 17, @11:45AM (#560610)
(User #17693 Info)
|
|
I am not saying that AboveNet is trying to prevent people from learning
about what relay blocking is. I am saying that they are censoring the specific
exchange of information needed to do the relay checking (albeit with some
lame excuse). This would be akin to allowing a few books on what democracy
is but not allowing people to actually communicate to implement it. In this
case, we have two consenting parties that want to communicate with each other
and an intermediary is actively blocking the communication.
Obviously, we cannot be the only AboveNet user that objects
to this given all of the discussion you say there is about the issue (not
from us). So, it would not be reasonable for AboveNet to claim that allowing
ORBS probes is just too much work for just one customer request.
And, yes, we do intend to vote with our dollars, losing our
setup costs after our annual contract with our AboveNet-based ISP expires.
|
Re:So? (Score:1)
by Adam J. Richter on Tuesday December 19, @05:04AM (#560611)
(User #17693 Info)
|
<P>
Again, the primary censorship in AboveNet's interfering with ORBS's ability
to test our gateway. (AboveNet's interfering with our ability to read the
ORBS information is also censorship, but that's another matter.)
</P>
<P>
Even when censorship is incomplete (for example, as you point out, we
can spend thousands of dollars to avoid this particular case), it is still
censorship.
</P>
|
Re:So? (Score:1)
by Adam J. Richter on Tuesday December 19, @05:30AM (#560612)
(User #17693 Info)
|
|
One more thing, for the benefit of other readers:
If you search for "AboveNet" or "Above.Net" in the spamtools archive at http://wx.iecc.com/cgi-bin/spamtoolsearch,
I think it's pretty clear that the only defense offered for AboveNet's activities
is that they have written their Acceptable Use Policy to allow it (again,
it's just their fig leaf excuse). |
Above.net IS STILL not routing to ORBS (Score:2)
by Adam J. Richter on Wednesday December 13, @11:49PM (#560613)
(User #17693 Info)
|
As
of 1:46am PDT, 14 December 2000, I still cannot traceroute from yggdrasil.com
(connected via AboveNet) to www.orbs.org, but I can from my personal Pacific
Bell DSL line:
traceroute to www.orbs.org (202.36.147.16), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 yggdrasil-port.yggdrasil.com (209.249.10.1) 0.348 ms 0.304 ms 2.811 ms
2 cisco-ethernet.yggdrasil.com (209.249.10.250) 2.676 ms 2.944 ms 2.260 ms
3 proteon-t1.yggdrasil.com (209.249.10.254) 291.109 ms 264.186 ms 264.251 ms
4 216.200.192.main.above.net (216.200.192.4) 315.453 ms 425.357 ms 361.949 ms
5 * * *
:
|
Re:Fuck off, Commie Pinko (Score:1)
by SpacePunk (sensei@techdojo.net) on Thursday December 14, @04:56AM (#560614)
(User #17960 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
|
|
"Neither do I see what communism has to do with it. This is the kind
of thing that would only occur in a near anarchic free market where lack
of any real, effective regulatory due process means that self apointed bodies
like this have to resort to bully tactics to get anything done." Bullies
always, inevitably, get their asses kicked. |
Re:A compelling argument... (Score:1)
by Wntrmute (ckloote@blacksoul.net) on Thursday December 14, @07:59AM (#560615)
(User #18056 Info | http://www.blacksoul.net)
|
|
Or,
if you're spending 5 digits each month, you won't notice another $20, so
you buy a dial-in or shell account with any fricking ISP of your choice on
Earth and access its servers via TCP/IP over your five-figure account.
Yeah,
ok, here's a hypothetical situation for you. Let's say I am paying 5 figures
for my DS-3, and in my building are several mailservers, for myself, my colo
customers, my webhosting customers, etc. I find out my provider uses the
RBL. (There are providers that will *not* tell you they use it. I personally
know of one, the only reason why I know they use it is because a new employee
at my company used to work there. I have friends who have had similar experiences.)
Now,
I don't want to deal with the RBL. It causes potential customers not to be
able to email me, or *my* customers. So you are seriously suggesting that
this is no problem, I can just go get a $20 account and use some other ISP's
POP3 server? Yeah, that one POP3 account will handle all the mail for the
several mailservers in my building with no problems... Right...
-Wintermute
|
Try *reading* the article... (Score:1)
by Wntrmute (ckloote@blacksoul.net) on Thursday December 14, @08:11AM (#560616)
(User #18056 Info | http://www.blacksoul.net)
|
|
Ahh yes, another /. poster that doesn't read
I have no sympathy for the author. His firm is hosting a site that is selling spamming tools.
The author
is *not* hosting a site that sells spamming tools. The author (Jamie) happens
to work with a site (Peacefire) hosted by a company (Media 3)that has another
customer (Marketing Masters) which is selling spamming tools. So he gets
his site blocked because of the actions of his provider's customer.
Reading comprehension. A valuable skill.
-Wintermute
|
Armchair QBing makes me sick. (Score:1)
by augustz on Wednesday December 13, @05:32PM (#560617)
(User #18082 Info)
|
|
I for one like that a few people with a vision are sticking to their
guns. They don't like spam and are working to stop it. If you don't like
spam, use the FREE product they offer, if you do like spam signup at hotmail.com
and disable the RBL on you account and you will be flooded.
Frankly, unless you've got a better solution, and are actually spending the time to do it, shut up.
I'm tired of hearing armchair quarterbacking by people who are probably sitting
in their armchairs. Especially if it is attacking one of the few effective
tools to combat spam. So right on to Vixie and the rest of the crew at MAPS. You've
got an opinion which you share on a list, and we can all choose to follow
it or not.
|
MAPS has the right spirit. (Score:1)
by augustz on Wednesday December 13, @05:41PM (#560618)
(User #18082 Info)
|
|
Voluntary opinions, no thugs at your door or lawyers involved. It appears
that the authors solution to Spam is to get rid of organizations like MAPS
and bring in something better. Either it'll be a group like OFTEL in the
UK which caves in to everyone, or it will be legislation and lawyers and
all the rest (and fat chance of those laws passing). Thank
goodness MAPS is sticking to their guns in the face of the legal crap they
are forced to deal with, and now the half-though out (MAPS does NOT block
packets, web access, etc, it blocks mail) ravings of this lunatic. Go over
their and donate some money to them and work to create a better internet.
|
Wannabe Actavisits and Bad Facts (Score:1)
by augustz on Wednesday December 13, @05:45PM (#560619)
(User #18082 Info)
|
|
How I wish facts where checked (or at least read) before this stuff gets posted to slashdot. Can we get an UPDATE on this?
"And
here's a heavily abridged list of the sites that cannot be accessed via AboveNet,
or any of the other providers who use the RBL -- just a few of the sites
on just one blacklisted Class C:" MAPS does not block web sites. If
your looking for something to be an activist over, pick something worthwhile
and get your facts straight.
|
To Contribute to MAPS Legal Defense Fund (Score:1)
by augustz on Wednesday December 13, @06:00PM (#560620)
(User #18082 Info)
|
|
If you're like most of us, and want to allow MAPS to continue publishing its opinions, head on over to PayPal
and donate some money to their LDF. I have, and so should you. With MAPS
you get a clear benefit as well as knowing your doing the right thing.
|
Proof that Abovenet does not block: (Score:1)
by augustz on Wednesday December 13, @06:12PM (#560621)
(User #18082 Info)
|
|
Please try
this traceroute yourself.
|
Moderate UP, he's right! - Proof (Score:1)
by augustz on Wednesday December 13, @06:18PM (#560622)
(User #18082 Info)
|
|
Please try
this traceroute or this one yourself.
See?
|
Re:Sorry, Jamie, you are way off base (Score:1)
by augustz on Wednesday December 13, @06:31PM (#560623)
(User #18082 Info)
|
|
I say the same thing. Go donate to their LDF!
|
Re:MAPS has the right spirit. (Score:1)
by augustz on Thursday December 14, @02:02AM (#560624)
(User #18082 Info)
|
|
Certainly, but in this case they are not.
Please try
this traceroute or this one yourself.
Grow up, and get a life.
|
Spam: A Receiver Decision (Score:1)
by Codeine (q4ck4ouvmc0001@sneakemail.com) on Wednesday December 13, @11:11PM (#560625)
(User #18332 Info | http://web.codeine.net.nz/)
|
Spam is like porn, in that control of its distribution is the goal of some organisations.
Unfortunately the problem is always the same, what is spam/porn? This
problem is exacerbated by the fact some people want spam/porn.
Thus it is properly a Receiver decision, not a third-party one.
The trick, is to give the end-point control.
The difficulty with spam is protecting your email address.
This cannot be done easily, the answer is to have many addresses.
Many people use web-based email this way, dumping compromised addresses
and signing up with a new id. This is a temporary respite, as it starts the
cycle again and imposes the burden of notifying all your correspondents.
SneakEmail, on the other hand provides you with:
1. An infinite number of email addresses (that all deliver to a single email box).
2. The addresses can be filtered in such a way that email which doesn't come from an acceptable address is held, or dumped.
3. A range of useful management tools for the multiple addresses.
The important difference is it is the end-user, not some self-appointed group who makes the decision.
|
Re:Sorry, Jamie, you are way off base (Score:1)
by The Asmodeus on Wednesday December 13, @07:13PM (#560626)
(User #18881 Info)
|
|
I have to agree to this. Many of you newbies probably don't remember
Spamford and what a pain in the behind he was. It wasn't until Ageis's network
was basically lopped off most of the internet did they stop taking his dirty
money. This isn't censorship. This provider isn't being blackholed for
saying or doing something certain people may disagree with. They are involved
in criminal activity. Spammers are criminals (theft of resources), those
that harbor them are, by association, criminals. Saying otherwise equates
spam with protected free speech which I don't think any of you are dumb enough
to do. |
Re:A Better Analogy (Score:1)
by winnetou (erik@flits102-126.flits.rug.nl) on Thursday December 14, @01:59AM (#560627)
(User #19042 Info | http://erik.selwerd.nl/ipw.cgi)
|
|
In
fact, bust down the doors of all their neighbors, yank those folks off their
couchs and their kids away from their game consoles, and lynch them too.
Noone is lynched, it is only IP packets that aren't accepted. Free speech also implies the
right not to listen.
They're
living in same appartment complex (Class C IP address range), so let's crucify
everyone in the surrounding area, so that the apt complex managers who tolerated
the porographers will lose money and noone will move back in.
Why do want to force
me to visit someone that chose to live in a slump? I don't deny them the
right to live there, but I have no obligation to go there. |
Re:Sorry, Jamie, you are way off base (Score:1)
by winnetou (erik@flits102-126.flits.rug.nl) on Thursday December 14, @02:20AM (#560628)
(User #19042 Info | http://erik.selwerd.nl/ipw.cgi)
|
|
You
don't need to. Just block the spammer's website. This still cuts off the
money - the spammer will get less, since they've been RBL'd, and if the spammer
goes elsewhere, then the ISP loses their money - but not at the (unnecessary)
expense of other customers.
Ehrrm, it isn't a spammer, it is a
seller of spamware. If MAPS blocked the website, spammers could still reach
the website, buy the spamware and spam from dialups.
MAPS seems to want to have it both ways - to the public: "Oh,
we're not censoring anyone", but to M3: "Shut this site down now, or we'll
punish you by blocking lots of your sites". I'm sorry, but to me, that's
just terrible.
MAPS is not censoring, subscribers to MAPS have
chosen not to spend their money for the transport of packets send to or from
Media3.
A newspaper that doesn't put your opinion on its frontpage isn't censoring either.
|
Re:Irony Alert: DeCSS (Score:1)
by winnetou (erik@flits102-126.flits.rug.nl) on Thursday December 14, @02:59AM (#560629)
(User #19042 Info | http://erik.selwerd.nl/ipw.cgi)
|
|
I
am probably not the only person who found it interesting that maps, by banning
an IP because of a company selling software to spam, is the moral equivalent
to the MPAA suing and taking down sites that host DeCSS. Do we go after the
tools to do "bad things" or do we go after those who do the "bad things".
The MPAA tries to forbid everyone to connect to a site hosting DeCSS, MAPS
only advises providers not to connect to netblocks hosting spamware. A provider
can choose to ignore MAPSs advice, it would be forced by law to follow the
"advice" of the MPAA. Now, spamming software is sick messed up crap, but if we subscribe
to maps, then are we as bad as Jack Valenti and his pals in the entertainment
industry?
Chris DiBona
VA Linux Systems
That is the same VA
Linux that sent unsolicited email with an 1MB attachment to people that couldn't
even accept the offer, that offered shares for $30, shares that are traded
at $13 today? <g,d&r>
|
Re:You can't fool all the people... (Score:1)
by winnetou (erik@flits102-126.flits.rug.nl) on Thursday December 14, @03:20AM (#560630)
(User #19042 Info | http://erik.selwerd.nl/ipw.cgi)
|
|
There
are lots of dangerous people in the world. Spammers count, but really they're
just vermin in need of some better legislation. The people you really have
to watch out for are the ones who tell you "the ends justify the means,"
or "we just have to take a tiny bit of your freedom to make you safer."
MAPS doesn't take anything
of your freedom, if you don't like their decisions, you just don't subscribe
to the RBL. If you aren't an ISP, you can choose an ISP that doesn't subscribe
to the RBL.
OTOH, if there would be a law against spam, it would probably
tell that pr0n is forbidden, but that big companies could spam you as much
as they wanted.
To summarize: if you don't like the decisions of MAPS, start a better list
yourself. If it really would be better, more ISPs would subscribe to your
list and you would be more influental than MAPS. |
Re:Huh??? (Score:1)
by winnetou (erik@flits102-126.flits.rug.nl) on Thursday December 14, @03:50AM (#560631)
(User #19042 Info | http://erik.selwerd.nl/ipw.cgi)
|
|
Right, and I don't know of any tier 1 ISP that would be actually implement this.
Teleglobe.net does:
traceroute to marketingmasters.com (209.211.253.74), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 129.125.101.252 (129.125.101.252) 0.788 ms 0.618 ms 0.6 ms
2 AR1.Groningen.surf.net (145.41.81.133) 1.008 ms 2.312 ms 0.862 ms
3 BR2.Enschede.surf.net (145.41.7.241) 4.877 ms 3.87 ms 4.026 ms
4 BR7.Amsterdam.surf.net (145.41.7.169) 7.638 ms 7.382 ms 7.328 ms
5 BR2.NewYork.surf.net (145.41.0.90) 81.094 ms 82.464 ms 84.262 ms
6 if-1-9.core1.NewYork.Teleglobe.net (207.45.196.69) 81.191 ms 79.558 ms 80.556 ms
7 if-7-1.core1.Montreal.Teleglobe.net (64.86.80.29) 86.712 ms 87.256 ms 86.903 ms
8 if-1-0-0.bb1.Montreal.Teleglobe.net (207.45.221.163) 148.554 ms 96.395 ms 107.36 ms
9 * * *
10 * * *
snip: it goes on to 30 hops.
I am glad they do, it makes a big difference in the amount of spam. DUL, RSS and ORBS take care of the small spammers.
|
Re:Additional data (Score:1)
by Black Parrot on Wednesday December 13, @09:50PM (#560632)
(User #19622 Info)
|
> Here's some other interesting data on Media3
Could we get a recount on that, please!
--
|
Re:OK, I'm a dunce. (Score:1)
by Black Parrot on Wednesday December 13, @09:53PM (#560633)
(User #19622 Info)
|
> Slashdot is so funny. I get moderated to +4 for admitting I'm a dunce :-)
See, none of us knew that, so you got the +4 for being informative.
--
|
Re:Irony Alert: DeCSS (Score:1)
by HugoRune (pharrison@ramtop.demon.co.uk) on Thursday December 14, @12:17AM (#560634)
(User #20378 Info)
|
|
I
am probably not the only person who found it interesting that maps, by banning
an IP because of a company selling software to spam, is the moral equivalent
to the MPAA suing and taking down sites that host DeCSS. Do we go after the
tools to do "bad things" or do we go after those who do the "bad things".
Not really, because all MAPS are doing is providing a list of
people that they consider to be encouraging spam. It is up to individual
administrators whether or not to use the MAPS service.
I'm sure that nobody would object to the MPAA creating a list of sites
that it didn't like, although they might have a tougher time persuading admins
to use it. |
Most odd - why the /24? (Score:1)
by kieran (slashdot2@twisted.org.uk) on Thursday December 14, @04:57AM (#560635)
(User #20691 Info | http://www.twisted.org.uk/)
|
(Point of view of me as a Network Admin...)
From the MAPS evidence file:
> Here is what I am aware of:
>
> http://209.211.253.68/
> http://209.211.253.69/
> http://209.211.253.70/
> http://209.211.253.71/
> http://209.211.253.72/
> http://209.211.253.73/
> http://209.211.253.74/
> http://209.211.253.84/
> http://209.211.253.88/
> http://209.211.253.89/
So really, MAPS should be blocking something like:
209.211.253.68/30,
209.211.253.72/31,
209.211.253.74/32,
209.211.253.84/32, and
209.211.253.88/31.
Blocking the whole /24 is punitive, and if you're going to act like that
why not block the whole AS? That said, I'm not exactly bursting with sympathy
for Media3, and as for peacefire.org: perhaps they could put their business
in the way of a more responsible provider?
My personal view on these lists has long been that ORBS is not worth
using but is worth listening to (to aid in hunting down customer relays before
they get abused), MAPS is worth taking as a BGP feed (so that all traffic
to those hosts is blackholed) and the DUL (dialup-list) is worth setting
up on your MTA so that mail directly from those hosts is refused. |
A regex that matches 90% of spam I receive (Score:1)
by Fiery (sla@shdot@isat@crys@tal@fla@me@.net@but@remove@the) on Thursday December 14, @04:13AM (#560636)
(User #21015 Info | http://www.crystalflame.net/?slashdot)
|
|
Someone's been surfing ebay and collecting spam addresses, and sending me
lots of spam from different accounts at yahoo, msn, hotbot, compuserve, etc.
Fortunately, I found a way to collect all their spam into one mailbox.
Here's the perl regex for it. This matches about 90% of the spam I receive,
but I guess I'm too careful with my email address - I only get 4 or 5 a week,
max.
/^Subject: .* {20,}\[[a-z0-9]{5}\]$/
|
Re:Irony Alert: DeCSS (Score:5)
by adolf on Wednesday December 13, @09:29PM (#560637)
(User #21054 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
|
Spam is bad, to some people. To some others, it is ok. And still others appreciate it.
Pornography is bad, to some people. To some others, it is ok. And still others appreciate it.
DeCSS is bad, to some people. To some others, it is ok. And still others appreciate it.
We here at slashdot tend to view a given subject only from the perspective
which best serves our own interests. We are as selfish, prejudice, maliciously
reactionary, and sublimely manipulative as any of the MPAA, the spamware
folks, or the extremist portion of the Christian Right.
Rather than attempt to remain reasonable and retain even a hint of impartiality,
we react viciously to anything deemed to be infringing upon on our rights,
with absolute disregard to the rights of any others who might be in the way.
We do this as we sit high upon our assumed intellectual high horse/flimsy
house of cards, shouting banters about freedom, goodness, and The Right Thing
To Do; cries which typically fall upon deaf ears.
Witness our views on DeCSS, Censorware, Spamware, MP3 encoders, MP3s
themselves, the iOpener, or TiVo's 'exploitation' of the Linux kernel, and
try to visualize the other parties' justification (which, in these cases,
is -always- legitimate) for whatever it is that they have done to offend
the horrid, arrogant, nonsensical beast that is slashdot. In other words,
put yourself in their shoes.
Those who are unwilling to do so are simply afraid of finding that said
shoe fits their own foot perfectly, and that they'd hence not be able to
remove it from their mouth. This is an obviously unacceptable outcome, given
the clear superiority of the average slashdot user (let alone the top 5 percent).
With such bigotry abounding en masse, it's no wonder they can't hear us.
Choose your enemies carefully, because that is who you will become. --Lao Tzu
|
Re:censorware. (Score:1)
by matth (matth@nospam.syncwater.org) on Thursday December 14, @04:29AM (#560638)
(User #22742 Info | http://www.matthoppes.org)
|
Mine has never, to my knowledge, been an open relay.. I'm just saying
assuming it must have been open here or there and mAPS got it.. cause I was
on the list.. though to my knowledge I was never open... ARG! makes you
wonder if there are other innoccent servers on the list.
|
censorware. (Score:4)
by matth (matth@nospam.syncwater.org) on Wednesday December 13, @05:30PM (#560639)
(User #22742 Info | http://www.matthoppes.org)
|
I personally feel that MAPS, ORBs are more trouble then they are worth.
I used to work for an isp which used orbs and it was really truely nothing
more then a headache for the Tech people. People woudl call in wondering
why they were not able to get e-mail from someone, or why someone could not
get e-mail from them. And most of the time it was ORBS. Another example
is that open mail relays are blocked. My own mail server was blocked by
ORBS one day. it was fine.. the next day blocked. Never (except for perhaps
a few minutes here and there) had it been an open relay, yet orbs had blocked
it. When I requested they take it off, they promptly did, but again, there
was no reason for it to be put up there!
|
Re:A compelling argument... (Score:2)
by Tripster (john AT dynanet DOT ca) on Thursday December 14, @10:07AM (#560640)
(User #23407 Info | http://www.dynanet.ca)
|
I agree, I use RBL on all my mail servers, one server I also throw in
the DUL and RSS, that one is mostly for my own domain names.
It is effective, when I started getting over a dozen spams a day in each mailbox on my domain I figured enough was enough.
Sorry, but I don't really care if the odd person has trouble emailing
my domain, mostly they're trying from crappo free email providers anyways
and I tell them to find another one, their most compelling argument is "oh,
but this domain name is cooler than those other ones", franky I don't give
a damn how cool your email domain name is, if they've been branded as spam
sources I don't want mail from them.
I work with a hosting company, during the 2 years I've been here we've
had 2 spammers sign up, in the first case we shut them down within 6 hours,
zero tolerance, we didn't even receive a complaint but one look at their
log file showed they were hiding IP's and it was obvious coming from a spammed
email.
In the second case it was a newbie spammer who got right upset when we
cut them off, what we've learned so far is that most spammer types seem to
hang out in Florida, they're mostly dumb as rocks and are usually the type
of morons who fall for the "get rich doing nothing" schemes you see around.
Media3 are obviously spam friendly, hell we wouldn't even accept a client
who had "bulk" in their url and seemed to indicate that was bulk email, not
worth the hassle of getting blacklisted and that should be enough to police
the rest of the ISPs out there.
Chances are Media3 are owned and operated by spammer types to begin with,
these marketing geniuses always seem to group themselves together so they
can pray on the weak and stupid side of society, which is really their only
clientelle.
|
Email, now page viewing (Score:1)
by searcher (searcher&billy,org) on Wednesday December 13, @05:36PM (#560641)
(User #24154 Info)
|
Using MAPS blocks email from that particular
domain. While it may block email from other domains
on the same box, if used properly, it doesn't
block viewing of the page. Which is what this
article seems to imply.
|
Re:MAPS is in the right (Score:1)
by searcher (searcher&billy,org) on Wednesday December 13, @05:56PM (#560642)
(User #24154 Info)
|
Once you have seen spam from an ISP's angle you
realize how beligerant something like MAPS
must be in order to be at all effective.
Agreed.
Spam is horribly abused. Harsh methods are sometimes necessary.
If MAPS claims to contact providers before adding
them to the blacklist, that is wrong and can be abused as well.
From my perspective, MAPS has done
more help than harm.
|
Re:That doesn't prove anything (Score:2)
by BlueLines (jon at divisionbyzero dot com) on Wednesday December 13, @05:59PM (#560643)
(User #24753 Info | http://www.divisionbyzero.com)
|
Not true. My company has several racks worth of machines at above.net, and i can see these ip's fine:
traceroute to mediamasters.com (204.101.215.149), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1 main4-216-200-18.sjc.above.net (216.200.18.3) 0.460 ms 0.548
ms 22.097 ms 2 core5-main4-oc3.sjc.above.net (216.200.0.213) 0.438 ms
0.707 ms 0.329 ms
3 core1-core5-oc48.sjc2.above.net (216.200.0.178) 0.748 ms 0.435 ms 0.476 ms
4 ord-sjc-oc12.ord.above.net (207.126.96.117) 60.749 ms 60.551
ms 60.689 ms 5 POS12-0-0.GW2.CHI6.ALTER.NET (157.130.111.89) 62.042 ms
62.046 ms 62.066 ms
6 112.ATM3-0.XR2.CHI6.ALTER.NET (146.188.208.182) 61.435 ms 62.329 ms 61.414 ms
7 190.at-2-0-0.TR2.CHI2.ALTER.NET (152.63.65.102) 63.525 ms 63.280 ms 62.999 ms
8 126.ATM6-0.TR2.TOR2.ALTER.NET (152.63.7.102) 75.048 ms 74.651 ms 74.853 ms
9 198.ATM6-0.XR2.TOR3.ALTER.NET (152.63.129.201) 75.971 ms 75.700 ms 75.437 ms
10 191.ATM6-0.GW1.TOR3.ALTER.NET (152.63.129.237) 75.506 ms 75.527 ms 76.023 ms
11 205.150.221.230 (205.150.221.230) 89.191 ms 89.263 ms 88.758 ms
12 mediamasters.com (204.101.215.149) 88.596 ms 88.603 ms 89.945 ms
|
Re:Oops. Big oops. (Score:2)
by BlueLines (jon at divisionbyzero dot com) on Wednesday December 13, @07:30PM (#560644)
(User #24753 Info | http://www.divisionbyzero.com)
|
No problem, that one works too:
traceroute to 209.211.253.74 (209.211.253.74), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1 main4-216-200-18.sjc.above.net (216.200.18.3) 0.694 ms 0.960 ms 2.204 ms
2 core5-main4-oc3-2.sjc.above.net (208.184.102.193) 0.829 ms 0.403 ms 0.416 ms
3 core3-core5-oc48.sjc2.above.net (208.184.102.206) 0.626 ms 0.973 ms 0.462 ms
4 core5-core3-oc48.sjc2.above.net (208.185.156.66) 0.516 ms 0.772 ms 0.454 ms
5 nyc-sjc-oc12.nyc.above.net (208.185.156.162) 89.743 ms 89.731 ms 89.742 ms
6 qwest-nyc-oc12.above.net (208.185.156.26) 90.390 ms 90.437 ms 90.125 ms
7 jfk-core-02.inet.qwest.net (205.171.30.17) 90.164 ms 89.947 ms 90.264 ms
8 jfk-edge-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.30.94) 90.205 ms 90.032 ms 90.410 ms
9 205.171.38.14 (205.171.38.14) 97.493 ms 97.652 ms 97.937 ms
10 209.211.253.74 (209.211.253.74) 97.647 ms 97.949 ms 98.726 ms
|
Re:MAPS != censorship. (Score:1)
by lytles on Wednesday December 13, @07:28PM (#560645)
(User #24756 Info)
|
corporations are liscenced by the state, and as such should have similar responsibilities as the gov'ts that liscense them.
furthermore, the corporation has become the most likely path to totalitarian rule in america.
|
Re: Above net do not block them, only ORBS... (Score:1)
by @madeus (ku.gor.yretsanom-lived-yracs@hfob) on Wednesday December 13, @11:58PM (#560646)
(User #24818 Info | http://www.scary-devil-monastery.org.uk/)
|
Above.net block only domains relating to ORBS.org AFAIK (As do, it would seem, a growing number of backbone providers) See:
http://www.above.net/cgi-bin/trace?www.orbs.org
http://lg.carrier1.net/
While I do not believe the idea of an RBL is bad one, it must be run responsibly.
Not the way Alan Brown (who in a very real sense *IS* ORBS) does it
|
Re:We're a victim too.... (Score:1)
by Menthos (menthosNO@SPAMgnu.org) on Thursday December 14, @01:25AM (#560647)
(User #25332 Info | http://www.menthos.com/)
|
|
We
had the server open for a brief period after recompiling sendmail and having
a misconfiguration, the ISP catched it and informed us, so I think they do
a lot to make sure that doesn't happen.
Your ISP "taking care of"
open relays doesn't prove that they are opposed to spam. They might still
host spammer's web sites, and won't refuse to deal with that type of businesses.
In the later case, they still belong on the RBL, and personally, I have
no problem with that. They can't just say that they are fighting against
spam and on the same time be hosting the very people they say they're fighting
against. To me that would be the definition of hypocrisy.
|
Re:This is exactly what we want them to do. (Score:1)
by mwa on Thursday December 14, @05:53AM (#560648)
(User #26272 Info)
|
|
Or locking up the DVD pirate and locking up the author of DECSS...
|
Re:Horay! (Score:1)
by jpayne on Wednesday December 13, @08:42PM (#560649)
(User #26338 Info | http://www.sackheads.org/jpayne)
|
|
Umm, Abovenet make it clear on their website that they use the RBL.
Any customers or prospective customers that don't know that, didn't do any
research. |
Re:Horay! (Score:1)
by jpayne on Wednesday December 13, @08:45PM (#560650)
(User #26338 Info | http://www.sackheads.org/jpayne)
|
I doubt that anyone in a position to decide whether or not to use the
MAPS lists is foolish enough to take everything they read on /. without a
large pinch of salt.
I don't think its up to MAPS to contact the websites on the block they're
hitting. I know that they would have contacted Media3... so I submit that
it was Media3's responsibility to warn their customers of the pending lack
of connectivity. I also submit that the customers that suffered should claim
compensation from Media3. |
Re:Horay! (Score:1)
by jpayne on Thursday December 14, @09:02AM (#560651)
(User #26338 Info | http://www.sackheads.org/jpayne)
|
Abovenet's customer e-mails don't touch any abovenet mail servers. They're
not the type of ISP you can get DSL or dial-in from.
The *only* way they can reduce spam by utilising the RBL is via a BGP
feed, which blocks all connectivity to the RBL listed hosts. |
Re:Horay! (Score:2)
by jpayne on Wednesday December 13, @07:33PM (#560652)
(User #26338 Info | http://www.sackheads.org/jpayne)
|
Nope, this is another example of a poorly researched /. article. /.
is rapidly becoming somewhere to go for a laugh to see how badly wrong they've
got it this time.
RBL listing of spamware sites is a long established tradition, its public knowledge and is one of the listing criteria: Spam Support
Escalation of listings past single hosts is also known about, this happens
when the provider continues to allow the spamming to continue, or moves the
host around the netblock to avoid the RBL listing.
You have to go after what hurts the spammers. They don't care if they
lose their hotmail account, or their MSN dial up account... as long as people
can still view their website.
Oh, and BTW... ISPs have every right to decide what goes on their network.
Its *their* property. Abovenet have decided not to allow hosts that are
in the RBL to transit their network. Thats fine... as a customer of an Abovenet
customer, I'm ecstatic that they've done this, as it saves me a DNS lookup
for every e-mail that comes in :) However, its still their decision...
and its my decision to stay a customer of Abovenet's (albeit one hop removed)
|
Re:This is journalism? (Score:2)
by gmhowell (ghowell@olg@.com) on Wednesday December 13, @05:55PM (#560653)
(User #26755 Info | Last Journal: Tuesday October 09, @03:26PM)
|
In traditional journalism, this is more akin to analysis or editorialising.
In modern journalism, this is serious, hard-hitting investigative reporting.
|
Re:This is exactly what we want them to do. (Score:4)
by gmhowell (ghowell@olg@.com) on Wednesday December 13, @05:53PM (#560654)
(User #26755 Info | Last Journal: Tuesday October 09, @03:26PM)
|
>Nazis vs. Jews
And, in fine Usenet fashion, the discussion is now over!
|
BulkIsp.com (Score:1)
by Voivod (slash[NO]dot@blood[SPAM]letting.com) on Wednesday December 13, @11:26PM (#560655)
(User #27332 Info)
|
For proof positive that Media3 knowingly hosts sites which spam, visit BulkIsp.com. Some quotes from that site:
"The
agenda for our company is that 75% of our activities should be to promote
our own products and services. Thus you know that we have to be good at what
we do, as it is the way that we market business to business and
business to consumer for ourselves."
"We guarantee that the
mail that you hire us to send is based on the delivered
pieces. We also guarantee that your site will stay up the full amount of
time that you need to get the full results of the mailing."
So, to review:
- BulkIsp.com sends spam to promote themselves.
- BulkIsp.com sends spam for others for money.
- BulkIsp.com guarantees your site will stay up because they don't have to worry about any pesky AUP.
Media3 has gotten complaints about them, and has decided to leave them
running. To see some other spam sites Media3 is hosting, check out SpamHaus.org
where they are by far the leader in spam hosting.
I'm
amazed that the poster continues to quote the Media3 AUP and its CEO as if
they had any credibility. Media3 hosts Spammers. This is not being debated.
What this says about his character speaks far louder than his quibbling
over whether they actually "spam" from his "service" per se. The fact is
that Spammers pay a lot of money for bullet proof hosting of their mailservers,
and Media3 is only too happy to take their checks.
MAPS is just
a resource. We're the people who decide to apply their list on our mailservers
and routers as a boycott against bad Net citizens until they learn to play
by the rules. It works. I hope that PeaceFire chooses an alternative besides
all out war against this important tool and our collective decision to use
it.
|
Re:This is exactly what we want them to do. (Score:2)
by ibbey (mpaCOLAyson@runlinux.net minus caffeine) on Wednesday December 13, @06:22PM (#560656)
(User #27873 Info)
|
|
What an absurd analogy. This software is specifically designed to send
spam. It is actively marketed to send spam. It even includes 25 million email
addresses to get you started. Maybe if the film was marketed as "Perfect
for all of your child pornography needs" you'd have a case. Otherwise, you're
not even close. |
Re:Many use RBL to create black-hole routes! (Score:1)
by mistered on Wednesday December 13, @06:48PM (#560657)
(User #28404 Info)
|
|
Well, it wouldn't really be right for him to comment on what any ISP
is doing with the IP lists. He didn't tell them to blackhole either just
mail or everything from this host, that was their choice and they're the
ones that should explain it to the press if they want. |
Re:The problem is the innocent victims (Score:1)
by mistered on Wednesday December 13, @06:52PM (#560658)
(User #28404 Info)
|
|
I generally agree fully with what MAPS does, and I don't know the full
details of this issue but I have an issue with them listing IPs of non-spamming
and non-spam-hosting sites that happen to use the same provider. I believe
it's wrong if they're listing IPs of sites not associated with spam in any
way, if it's only to pressure the provider into dumping another customer.
|
Re:Huh??? (Score:1)
by halbritt (halbritt at harm dot org) on Wednesday December 13, @08:46PM (#560659)
(User #30189 Info)
|
|
Right, and I don't know of any tier 1 ISP that would be actually implement
this. There is just too many ways that this could hurt the ISP. I can believe
that above.net used MAPS to block spam by implementing the RBL on their mail
servers, but I just don't think there's anyway they would've blackholed this
traffic, particularly to their transit customers. Their customers would
be paying them to give them the whole Internet and probably wouldn't be too pleased to learn that they were blackholing traffic on the advice of some third party.
|
Re:You're way off base (Score:1)
by Kvan (kvan@kvans.dk) on Thursday December 14, @05:11AM (#560660)
(User #30429 Info)
|
|
You're
willing to shut off someone's connection for distributing spamming software,
but if someone posts instructions for making a bomb, that's free speech?
No, he's willing to let private entities use any kind of filter they want. The issue here is not
one of free speech. These are a bunch of people who have decided to use a
filter on their network. Hell, they would be perfectly within their right
to filter completely arbitrary IPs, or, to stay in your analogy, to filter
according to a list which someone claimed contained IPs of people who made
bombs (or had ever thought about making bombs, for that matter).
That said, this is very poor practice on the part of MAPS, and
definitely something which would make me find out whether my provider used
RBL, and switch if that were the case. But then, I wouldn't support a provider
who used any kind of filter.
"A *person* is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it."
|
According to S.P.(U.T.U.)M. (Score:4)
by Vryl (pedro@nospam.vrl.com.au) on Wednesday December 13, @08:47PM (#560661)
(User #31994 Info)
|
|
How, then, do we apply this strategic analysis concept to our enemy du jour: the Spammer?
First, we must translate the Five Spheres (or Rings) of the enemy system into modern Net.War counterparts:
- Sphere 5: Fielded forces-- throwaway AOL accounts, hired consultants, dedicated spam domains
- Sphere 4: Population-- Spam-related customers, support employees (secretaries, etc.)
- Sphere 3: Infrastructure-- Primary non-rogue ISPs, Websites, ftp sites, cgi scripts, mail relays, reputation
- Sphere 2: System Essentials-- Money, bandwidth, telco access, computers
- Sphere 1: Leadership-- the SpamBoy himself, his partners and business associates
By alliances, we mean those reciprocal relationships the spammer has formed with:
news media (Cyber-Clueless First Amendment activist newbie journalists, for example)
- other spammers
- ISPs, whether rogue or non-rogue
- hacker consultants
- fringe associates (Meowers, Kook Cabal)
- banks, business organizations, and other sources of economic power
- politicians
We must then examine our assumptions. If our Spammer runs his own ISP, then
attacking an AOL account he controls (by complaining to abuse@aol.com) will
be of negative value-- a waste of our time and resources. If his ancillary
server is somehow "taken down", but his primary SpamServers keep pumping
out ECP spam via open NNTP ports worldwide, what will we have gained? If
he is (like Gr*bor or our own deeply psychologically troubled Doktor Funway)
only marginally rational, abuse and punishment that would persuade a reasonable
Yeti to leave the field of battle may only enrage the Bull(shitter) like
the pricking of a picador. Finally, if we do not have the necessary intelligence
to pinpoint our enemy and her crucial Strategic systems exactly, our efforts
will either be wasted entirely, or increased by orders of magnitude over
what they could have been with accurate and timely information. In our
final strategic translation matrix, we shall endeavor to identify what we
mean by a Spammer's Political, Economic and Military powers; as well as the
proper role of the semi-tautological Net.War attribute of Information.
- Political power: news media (online and traditional), lawmakers, friends and acquaintances, usenet Kooks
- Economic power: cold hard cash earned both legitimately and by Spam; frivolous lawsuits (to tie up opponents' assets/time)
- Military
power: Net.war capabilities of spammer's own systems (mail bombs, Usenet
binary bombs); hired gun hackers; open NNTP and mail servers ripe for exploitation
- Information: Positive and Negative--> Positive: Spammer's ability
to gather intel on foes; ability to adapt to changing laws, standards, and
software affecting/enabling internet communication; ability to slander and
defame enemies and thus provoke them to rash deeds;
- Negative: the ability to cloak himself in anonymity, pseudonymity,
and false faux-open identities, thus denying his enemies that first prerequisite
of strategic analysis: identification.
Freely stolen from:
http://www.radix.net/~revjack/snotwad/snotwad3.htm
|
Re:This is exactly what we want them to do. (Score:1)
by rking on Sunday December 17, @02:16AM (#560662)
(User #32070 Info)
|
And,
just for the hell of it, I'd like to point out that MAPS has effectively
become socialist thanks to their discrimation by association [to a given
IP network number].
I think maybe you should invest in a dictionary, or better still an education,
before trying long words like "socialist". You clearly have no idea what
it means. |
Re:This is exactly what we want them to do. (Score:1)
by rking on Sunday December 17, @03:32AM (#560663)
(User #32070 Info)
|
After
arguing philosophy with you and trying to persuade everyone else listening
in, the next thing is to apply the similar pressure to you that you are applying
to them.
At this point I'm dropping RBL, and I won't deal with anyone who is using it.
Ah.. I can't honestly say thatv I feel "pressure" from your er.. was
it suposed to be a threat? But goodbye and good luck all the same :)
|
Re:Irony Alert: DeCSS (Score:3)
by crazy_clyde on Wednesday December 13, @10:09PM (#560664)
(User #32777 Info)
|
The idea that a tool can ONLY do "bad things" is absurd. A tool is a
means to an end. AN END. Not a specific intentioned "good" or "bad" end,
just AN END. This means the tool has no say in what it actually does, nor
the moral consequences of such an act. The tool can only influence how well
it performs at that act.
It's NOT ok to "go after" tools, because it doesn't solve anything.
If someone wants to do something, they're going to do it. You can make it
difficult by trying to remove a tool that makes that end easy, but two things
happen:
1) A new tool takes it's place.
2) The general populace stays ignorant of why the end is "bad". All
they learn is that the tool that does it is bad, which we've already pointed
out to be wrong. |
Re:MAPS != censorship. (Score:1)
by itachi (mwegner&cs,oberlin,edu) on Thursday December 14, @03:17PM (#560665)
(User #33131 Info | http://www.oberlin.edu/~ocrp/)
|
Well, in response:
1) Just because the courts have said they aren't common carriers doesn't
make the courts right. I would agrue that backbone providers should be common
carriers for situations such as this. If then end user wants to filter based
on content, that's fine - you or I can very easily screen phone calls based
on caller ID, but think about what life would be like if telcos decided that
the 212 area code was offensive and wouldn't get to your phone for you to
deice. I wouldn't mind, but you might.
2) RBL is based on the netblock, but the decision to carry or not carry
the netblock is based on contect originating in the netblock, therefore it
is making a decision based on the content at a fixed point in time. It's
still a content based decision, it's just a question of when the content
was examined.
itachi, enjoying work through office party induced beer goggles...
|
Re:MAPS != censorship. (Score:1)
by itachi (mwegner&cs,oberlin,edu) on Monday December 18, @10:39AM (#560666)
(User #33131 Info | http://www.oberlin.edu/~ocrp/)
|
Re: common carrier status, iirc, a company has to apply for common
carrier status, and they give up certain rights when they do so, although
it gives them a number of privledges as well. In this case, I feel that
backbone providers should be asked to apply for common carrier, since they
fit the definition.
But you can't change phone companies if you don't like the service.
If I don't like the service that Verizon provides here (Philly), I can deal
with it or lose the landline. There is no other company providing POTS.
(btw, 212 is new york) There are still areas where the same is true of
ISPs. Also, MAPS offers the BGP based spam blocking, where spammish netblocks
are null routed in BGP. Without a valid BGP entry, you obviously can't talk
to that netblock. Using netblocks is simply not granular enough. Even basing
it on IP might not be granular enough, as one host might be serving several
domains through aliasing.
Arguing that MAPS only publishes the list isn't a valid argument,
because of the ways that the list is published and the methods suggested
for blocking. Either way, the RBL is based on content - spam is content,
too. If the list is overly broad, as it may be in this case, then stuff
that isn't spam is getting blocked on content as well, however invalid the
content judgement. If the RBL was only available as a procmail filter, this
problem wouldn't exist. Offering it as a BGP filter is just plain wrong
- everything on the netblock gets filtered based on partial content, like
every other piece of badly specified censorware. A better design would be
a procmail filter, because that will do the filtering and leave the option
of still receiving the mail in case it truly isn't spam and it wouldn't interfere
with other traffic from the offending netblock. Blocking the website because
the website offers spamware is just as much (corporate/organizational) censorship
as blocking a website because it offers porn or viewpoints offensive to the
local admin/manager.
itachi
|
Re:MAPS != censorship. (Score:1)
by itachi (mwegner&cs,oberlin,edu) on Friday December 22, @11:50AM (#560667)
(User #33131 Info | http://www.oberlin.edu/~ocrp/)
|
Right, but blocking all of 123.456.0.0/16 because you don't like the
spam you get from abc@xyz.com is still wrong. You can procmail the spam
away, or you can filter sendmail, or you can refuse SMTP from xyz.com, but
null routing the netblock's BGP advert is wrong.
itachi
|
Re:MAPS != censorship. (Score:5)
by itachi (mwegner&cs,oberlin,edu) on Wednesday December 13, @06:40PM (#560668)
(User #33131 Info | http://www.oberlin.edu/~ocrp/)
|
Censorship
is something that can only be conducted by the government. Private organizations
such as ISP's or MAPS can choose to carry or not carry whatever they like.
It's not quite that simple, though. Common carriers, although private
organizations, don't have the choice to carry or not carry based on content.
Now a local dialup provider is hardly a common carrier, but I would say
that a tier one provider really should be a common carrier. After all, a
local dialup in Peoria can't reach Bangladesh without crossing some backbone
provider's network.
itachi
|
[OT] Bible reference (Score:1)
by Pont (a@b.c) on Thursday December 14, @10:16AM (#560669)
(User #33956 Info)
|
|
And God said, "It is easier to port Linux to a TI93 than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven"
|
Re:A Better Analogy (Score:2)
by segmond (segmond[at]hotmail) on Thursday December 14, @08:00AM (#560670)
(User #34052 Info | http://www.rageout.net/~segmond/)
|
I hate spam as much as everyone, but please don't attack who ever makes
the software, especially not after we have defended encryption, decss, napster
and such, it doesn't matter if those software are designed specifically for
spamming, we can't step on other people's freedom and try to preserve ours.
If you think and firmly believe that those softwares are illegal, then
all people who believe that napster, decss, gnutella, pgp, etc are illegal
are correct...
|
unwelcomed opensource tools? (Score:2)
by segmond (segmond[at]hotmail) on Thursday December 14, @08:10AM (#560671)
(User #34052 Info | http://www.rageout.net/~segmond/)
|
As I read most of the posts, I was not surprised to see how many people
hated spamware. It got me thinking tho, if someone was to write an opensource
spamming tool, what will the community do? I mean, can it be hosted at sourceforge?
If so, will sourceforge make it to the blackhole? Will sourceforge refuse?
If so why? Why would they then host something like napster/gnutella clones?
I hate politics, but I do like to know how much the community fights for
the rights of others even if we don't agree. Or is this all about "us"?
|
Re:Software DESIGNED to spam (Score:1)
by X-Nc (godNO@SPAMx-nc.net) on Wednesday December 13, @08:47PM (#560672)
(User #34250 Info | http://www.x-nc.net)
|
|
Sendmail could be used to spam. This website sells software that is DESIGNED
to extract email addresses and then stealth email them, most likely through
hijacked mail servers with forged headers and from addresses. So!?!
What's this got to do with the price of tea in China? Yes, spam is a Bad
Thing©. Yes, the people who write and sell software to harvest email and
send spam are bad. Hasen't anyone ever heard of the phrase "Vote with your
feet!"? If spam generating software is bad, don't buy or use it. Help others
to understand why it's bad. Education is the way, not wholesale draconian
domain blockings. Additionally, RBL should be blocking domains/IP's from addresses that actually send spam. If an ISP has an entire Class B and one
IP/domain is sending spam then that should be the only one blocked. Even
if the ISP will not do anything about the spamer. It's not the job of RBL
or ORBS or any of the anti-spam projects to decide what others can and can't
do. They should only block IP's and domains that send spam. Period! This article just reaferms the old addage that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
---
|
Re:Bullshit (Score:1)
by tiny69 on Thursday December 14, @03:52AM (#560673)
(User #34486 Info | http://www.linuxdoc.org)
|
|
Thanks. I couldn't remember.
|
Re:Bullshit (Score:2)
by tiny69 on Thursday December 14, @03:00AM (#560674)
(User #34486 Info | http://www.linuxdoc.org)
|
|
How did this get modded up? While the original posters "logic" leaves
something to be desired, your reasoning has fallen into a logical fallacy
itself.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc - "after this, therefore because of this"
You are assuming cause-and-effect relationships were there are none. You are assuming
one event presedes the other, the first being the cause of the second. i.e.
- you are making shit up that has no possible way of being related to one
another or being true.
"Assumption is the mother of all fuckups." - quote from some movie.
When people start using "logic" as an argument, they usually have no idea what logic is themselves.
|
Re:Exactly (Score:1)
by gimpboy (harrold@ude.ttip.ehc.egas) on Wednesday December 13, @05:39PM (#560675)
(User #34912 Info | http://sage.che.pitt.edu/~harrold/dbpack)
|
And then, you can turn the RBL off. Victims of Censorware can't turn it off because they aren't allowed to do so.
perhaps you work at your isp but most people don't. most people wouldn't
even know who to complain to, what to complain about, or even when to complain.
they would hit the message listed above cock their head to the side and move
on.
use LaTeX? want an online reference manager that
|
Re:Exactly (Score:2)
by tbo (norvis@earthling.net.nospam) on Wednesday December 13, @05:49PM (#560676)
(User #35008 Info)
|
And then, you can turn the RBL off. Victims of Censorware can't turn it off because they aren't allowed to do so.
Only if you happen to be the head sys-admin for your ISP... If my ISP
subscribes to MAPS, I might never even know that my content was being filtered,
let alone have any control over it.
What I don't understand is why anybody is using MAPS for anything other
than their mail server. I used to do IS at a software company, and we set
up our mail server to reject mail from IPs on the RBL. Other than that, we
didn't use RBL. The purpose of RBL is blocking spam, so why should we use
it to block anything other than SMTP? |
"I reserve the right to refuse service" (Score:1)
by Grand Facade (despaminator@spamcop.net) on Thursday December 14, @08:21AM (#560677)
(User #35180 Info)
|
Has something changed? Have I lost this right? Am I legally required to do business with anyone waving cash?
This lawsuit has no merit.....
RB
|
Re:Irony Alert: DeCSS (Score:1)
by travisd (travisd_no_spam@tubas.net) on Thursday December 14, @08:01AM (#560678)
(User #35242 Info | http://www.tubas.net)
|
Not the same at all - the MPAA causes the sited to become unavailable
to anyone. The RBL is an opt-in service and if you don't like the way they
run things you're free to ignore MAPS and access the spammer sites anyway.
Your ISP uses MAPS? Fine, find a new ISP or make a case to your current one..
|
Re:Neural Net Spam Filtering! (Score:1)
by look on Thursday December 14, @06:19AM (#560679)
(User #36902 Info | http://acm.cs.umn.edu/~look)
|
It looks cool to me. I'm going to check it out.
You could designate some one else to maintain it, if you don't have the time.
Luke Francl
|
Re:Fuck off, Commie Pinko (Score:1)
by Zurk (zurk42@SPAMSUCKShushmail.com) on Wednesday December 13, @06:55PM (#560680)
(User #37028 Info)
|
|
not if the ISP has a monopoly on a certain section of your neighbourhood.
thats a bullshit argument that M$ was using in their anti trust trial. |
Re:So you check up on it.. (Score:1)
by Zurk (zurk42@SPAMSUCKShushmail.com) on Wednesday December 13, @07:15PM (#560681)
(User #37028 Info)
|
|
you forget that in some areas customers have no option to decamp..the
ISP has a monopoly. and theres a financial cost to decamp too. this sort
of thing is *disgusting*. Block the single static ip thats being used for
abusing...thats ok..but blocking large groups of addresses is a DoS attack
and nothing else. your attitude to forced censorship of major routes/backbones
on the internet is totally disgusting. i dont know how you can live with
yourself. |
Re:So you check up on it.. (Score:1)
by Zurk (zurk42@SPAMSUCKShushmail.com) on Thursday December 14, @03:07PM (#560682)
(User #37028 Info)
|
|
no they most certainly do NOT have the option to decamp. if you do colo
you want to do it in your area since you might have to do emergency hardware
surgery on your server at 3am. blocking single ips DOES have impacts on the
ISP. MAPS isnt voluntary if its shoved down the throats of customers at an
ISP. |
Re:The problem is the innocent victims (Score:1)
by Tower (twrau.p.dueirml@eo) on Thursday December 14, @04:47AM (#560683)
(User #37395 Info)
|
no, no - it's more like tactical nuke... it only takes out a few mmediately surrounding square miles...
--
|
Re:This isn't right (Score:1)
by Craig Davison on Wednesday December 13, @05:38PM (#560684)
(User #37723 Info)
|
Are you thinking of the ORBS RBL? SecurityFocus.com is hosted at above.net
and poorly-configured ORBS users can't subscribe to BugTraq because of it.
|
I definately do not agree - (pro-MAPS) (Score:1)
by congiman on Wednesday December 13, @08:27PM (#560685)
(User #39253 Info)
|
After reading all this, I'm guessing it all boils down to this
1: There is 1 hosted site by this company that is a spam related site. (makes spam software, supports spam, spams etc).
2: The rbl has blocked 6 class C's belonging to this provider.
3: There are other sites that the provider hosts that have lost connectivity.
In the RBL's defense:
If you are a hosting provider and you were to have the IP address
of one of your servers blocked by the RBL, the most sensible thing to do
would be to move it to another IP address. This would only make sense.
So if the RBL blocks all of your netblocks, then you cannot move your offending
site around.
I see the RBL blocking the entire netblock as a good thing. It makes
the hosting company try and resolve the problem, rather than just rsying
the web site across to another machine, changing DNS and voila the site is
up again in just a few minutes.
The best way to make this problem be fixed is to have people take notice.
Rationale:
Now, back in the day, (and still) the rbl is also a BGP feed as well
as a DNS based subscription. That being said, what the RBL does is announce
the bad netblocks in a BGP feed,and in turn above.net subscribes to that
BGP feed and Null routes it (drops the traffic on their exterior routers).
The average companies just use sendmail and you see error messages like
"553 see mail.abuse.org". However with a null-route, you will see nothing,
traffic going to it, will get dropped, traffic from it, will never have an
established session.
As for the RBL being censorware, I do not see that. The message mentions samco and not peacefire or any other sites.
I believe that its more that peacefire has a bad provider that condones
spam. Reading the evidence file shows that. The true test of this of course
is either for
a: peacefire to move and see if their rbl nomination follows. My guess is not as they are not spam providers.
b: the offending sites to move and see if the RBL nomination follows them and media3 gets lifted.
Vixie has stated many times that the RBL does have its shortcomings,
that yes good mail can get lost along with the bad mail. However, it is
important to remember that the RBL is a full OPT in list. You can pick a
provider that subscribes to it (either via BGP) or by DNS for mail. You
as a company can choose to subscribe to it via BGP or by DNS for mail.
In my opinion the RBL is one of the best things out there. I use it,
all the customers I work with use it, and I set it up every chance I get.
I wish Paul and Nick and Crew only the best.
-- C
|
Re:Fuck off, Commie Pinko (Score:1)
by leighjames on Thursday December 14, @07:46AM (#560686)
(User #39576 Info | http://www.tay.hitz.gen.nz)
|
|
Unfortunately that is the way of it when talking about internet access.
<rant>
The local telco
here has what is essentially a monopoly on DSL internet access. They own
the lines, the equipment and the ISP service. Their service is priced such
($40/mo) that no other ISP could offer service and hope to make a profit.
Their service sucks for anyone who doesn't want just basic web browsing/email.
No static IP is available; no *routable* IP either. They have a "business"
offering which is the same, but at a faster speed for around $600/mo.
The alternative: leased line. Cost $500 for ISP service alone, plus whatever line charges said telco would impose.
For me to start an ISP (and I have looked into it) would be hideously expensive,
and I haven't a chance of making any money. If I thought I could break even,
I'd do it in a flash, but there's no way I could convince people to pay more
for the better service.
</rant>
To sum up: unless you have $$$$ you have to stick with what other people offer you.
|
Re:services like this (Score:2)
by Greg@RageNet on Wednesday December 13, @05:56PM (#560687)
(User #39860 Info | http://www.rage.net/~greg/)
|
but you can't come in and change the locks on me
If people come into your house constantly and make obscene phone calls
to me in the middle of the night do I have the right to have your phone number
blocked? I think so.
-- Greg
|
Re:MAPS != censorship. (Score:2)
by Greg@RageNet on Wednesday December 13, @08:34PM (#560688)
(User #39860 Info | http://www.rage.net/~greg/)
|
You are very good at reciting mindless socialist propaganda. Marx would be proud.
Technically you are 'licenced by the state', through the form of a birth certificate. So you have 'similar responsibilities'?
The only path to totalitarian or any other form of government is through
government itself or the application of (deadly) force to overthrow said
government.
Doesn't anyone realize, the more 'laws' you urge the government to make
to protect childeren, workers, minorities, turtles, ad nauseum the more power
you give to the politicians who you also accuse of abusing their powers to
'hold down the people' for the deep pockets of 'big [evil icon of the day]'?
-- Greg
|
Re: MAPS == censorship. (Score:2)
by Greg@RageNet on Thursday December 14, @08:08AM (#560689)
(User #39860 Info | http://www.rage.net/~greg/)
|
Would you be reffering to a public bridge built by the government? You prove my point.
-- Greg
|
Re:I definately do not agree - (pro-MAPS) (Score:2)
by Greg@RageNet on Thursday December 14, @09:59AM (#560690)
(User #39860 Info | http://www.rage.net/~greg/)
|
The
situation is analogous to a censorware company blackmailing a service provider
into removing Holocaust-denial material, by blocking thousands of innocent
websites. Now, I don't like Holocaust denial, but standing up for free speech
means standing up for speech I don't believe in.
MAPS only publishes a list of people who it views as spammers or those
providing assistance to spammers. Akin to someone, for instance, publishing
a list of people who run 'Holocaust denial' websites with their personal
view that they disagree with the authors of these sites. People can do with
that list what they wish.
Media3, on the other hand, is seeking to use the courts, and ultimately
the (physical deadly) force of government, to end publication of the MAPS
list.
Yes there is censorship going on here, but opposite way than which you
claim. You should be standing up for the free speech of MAPS to publish whatever
they want, in this case a list of who they belive are spammers; instead of
advocating the government censorship of these lists via the proxy of court
action.
Another analogy I'd like to put forward, in defense of ISP's using the
RBL, is to say that this is a 'consumer boycot' situation. If the ever popular
*snicker* starbucks coffee chose to no longer buy coffee beans from indonesia
because of it's human rights violations then is it justified for you to take
them to court to compel them to buy coffee beans from indonesia because you
happen to like indonesian coffee? After all, if you have to now go a mile
out of your way to visit a different coffee shop that carries indonesian
coffee then you are 'suffering at the hands of the tirranical starbucks corporation'.
If ISP's don't want to accept packets (coffee beans) from bulk-mailers
(indonesia) thats their right as property owners, and it's your right as
a customer to take your business elsewhere.
-- Greg
|
MAPS != censorship. (Score:3)
by Greg@RageNet on Wednesday December 13, @05:46PM (#560691)
(User #39860 Info | http://www.rage.net/~greg/)
|
Censorship is something that can only be conducted by the government.
Private organizations such as ISP's or MAPS can choose to carry or not carry
whatever they like. The difference is of course that everyone 'owns' and
funds the government which therefore has no right to moral or policical content
it makes available. However private individuals have full discression over
their own property and how they choose to utilize it.
If a government library refuses to cary 'Hucklberry fin' because of it's
content then that's censorship. However private organizations should not
be forced to carry or not carry a given item. You cannot compel me to carry
a slashdot bumper sticker on the back of my car claiming that if I refuse
I am 'censoring' your right to free speech.
By the same token you should not be able to force a private entity such
as an ISP to carry traffic they choose not to carry, i.e. traffic identified
by the MAPS RBL. If you don't like MAPS then don't use their service or use
the services of ISP's who do.
This also carries over to 'censorware'. Government institutions should
not censor internet content through manditory filtering. However it's morally
acceptable to me for a parent to by some software (that arguably does a poor
job) to filter the content on their privately owned computers.
-- Greg
|
Re:I definately do not agree - (pro-MAPS) (Score:5)
by Greg@RageNet on Wednesday December 13, @08:48PM (#560692)
(User #39860 Info | http://www.rage.net/~greg/)
|
Just a correction, according to spamhaus media3 is hosting not 1 but 21
spam sites, the largest on the list, and considering media3 is a grand total
of a few class C networks, thats a pretty high percentage of their customers
being spammers. My understanding is that it's a similar situation to the
AGIS thing awhile ago. media3 won't cancel sites who spam using other accounts
to advertise a site on media3. Because media3 won't wipe out these sites
it's become quite a spammer's haven.
-- Greg
|
MAPS vs ARIN: Round One (Score:1)
by mindhaze on Thursday December 14, @05:09AM (#560693)
(User #40009 Info | http://www.nosleep.org/~mindhaze/)
|
|
Here's lame:
Maps says this:
But then, MAPS also advises Web providers:
"If you host Web sites, we suggest that you use one IP per domain so that
if spam occurs for one Web site, we don't have to blackhole you or your other
customers to block access to the spamming site."
But then:
"ARIN (the guys who hand out IP addresses) has a policy change where they
will no longer allocate IP addresses for IP-based virtual hosting" ( read the slashdot story here)
Who's going to win? ARIN? or MAPS?
My vote is on MAPS!
|
Re:Horay! (Score:1)
by MadAhab (slasher AT ahab DOT com) on Thursday December 14, @05:56PM (#560694)
(User #40080 Info | http://www.ahab.com/)
|
|
The conception that they can block because it is *their* property goes
against thousands of years of social and legal tradition in most cultures.
For one thing, they don't own the wires. For another, as soon as
data is being routed *through* you on its way from one place not yours to
another place not yours, you essentially become a public thoroughfare, paid
or not. In order to guarantee the general public trust and public welfare,
not to mention the stability of the society that depends on these roads,
you give up certain controls over the traffic passing through your domain,
and must allow passage freely unless the rule of the greater society dictates
blocking passage to certain parties. Your concerns about certain controls
over the traffic that passes through must be arbitrated through the larger
society you have willing chosen to become a part of. There is an alternative;
parts of Africa today, many distant precincts of China, certain zones of
the former Soviet Union, and most of Europe through the dark ages exemplify
the right of local authorities to do whatever they fucking please - the rest
of you be damned. I am not sure that you really intend to promote barbarism
and savagery, but you are. AboveNet may have the right - for now - to arbitrarily victimize
innocent third parties, but thousands of years of human history show that
either they will lose this right, or the Internet itself is in danger of
falling into non-functioning anarchy. Having the "right" by "owning" a route
across the Internet as you claim (and that's a pretty thin example of "ownership"),
does nothing to justify the arbitrary excercise of power by AboveNet, nor
does this make it ethical or fair. It may yet be legal, but it's still medieval.
No one forces AboveNet to participate in the Internet. If they really hate
spammers so badly that they are willing to destroy the freedom of others,
perhaps they should disconnect themselves entirely, or at least give up routing
traffic anywhere but to and from their own customers, who have at least some
choice about whether or not to bow to these savage chieftans. Put another way, far simpler; what is different from their policies and China blocking 'net traffic they consider to be harmful?
It's worth noting that I don't use AboveNet, I do use MAPS filters in Sendmail,
I don't know these guys personally, and I don't know - or care - to detail
their actual motives or character. I do care about the effect of their behavior
on the Internet as a whole.
Boss of nothin. Big deal.
Son, go get daddy's hard plastic eyes.
|
Re:Is the RBL really being used for HTTP? (Score:1)
by BZ on Wednesday December 13, @10:08PM (#560695)
(User #40346 Info | http://web.mit.edu/bzbarsky/www/)
|
|
Read the update. Yes, the RBL can be used to block HTTP traffic and is commonly used in this fashion.
|
Re:This is exactly what we want them to do. (Score:1)
by befletch on Thursday December 14, @07:30PM (#560696)
(User #42204 Info)
|
|
What an absurd analogy. This software is specifically designed to send spam.
Software doesn't spam people. People spam people.
I love boilerplate rhetoric.
|
Re:The problem is the innocent victims (Score:1)
by alecto (mwp@acm.org) on Wednesday December 13, @06:05PM (#560697)
(User #42429 Info | http://2130706433/)
|
|
And what better deterrent to the owner of the IP block than to have them lose customers to someone with an IP block that isn't hosting spammers' websites? This is not censorship; it's providing negative feedback to people that don't play well with others on our network.
|
Re:This is exactly what we want them to do. (Score:1)
by alecto (mwp@acm.org) on Wednesday December 13, @06:16PM (#560698)
(User #42429 Info | http://2130706433/)
|
|
Calling that software that "could be used" to spam is like calling the
electric chair a device that "could be used" to kill. Did you look at the site, that caused the RBL nomination for crying out loud?
|
This is exactly what we want them to do. (Score:3)
by alecto (mwp@acm.org) on Wednesday December 13, @05:41PM (#560699)
(User #42429 Info | http://2130706433/)
|
|
They're put on the RBL to punish them for willingly harboring spammers
who advertise their sites with stolen services from other providers and clog
millions of mailboxes with crap. Those
who host websites for spammers even after its brought to their attention
that they're spamming deserve to be blackholed--I praise the RBL for their
continued action in this regard. Should they wish to rejoin the RBL
using net, they may terminate their spammers and tighten their policies.
For those who cry about "free association," remember that subscribing to
the RBL is voluntary, and using an ISP that subscribes to them is voluntary.
If individuals want their subscription fees to support spam and their packets
to be dumped, they're free to subscribed to an RBL'd provider. |
Re:An old and silly argument (Score:1)
by Jerrry on Thursday December 14, @08:31AM (#560700)
(User #43027 Info)
|
Sure,
you can use delete on your own inbox. But what if your an ISP and your customers
demand less spam? Will you delete for them?
No, if I were an ISP I would not delete spam for my customers. I'd operate
my ISP as a common carrier, just like the phone company. Just try calling
your phone company and ask them to filter out calls from telemarketers and
see how far you get.
|
Re:Huh??? (Score:1)
by thogard on Wednesday December 13, @07:16PM (#560701)
(User #43403 Info | http://web.abnormal.com)
|
Maybe peacefire should find an ISP with some ethics?
|
Re:I will continue to use MAPS RBL (Score:1)
by thogard on Wednesday December 13, @07:23PM (#560702)
(User #43403 Info | http://web.abnormal.com)
|
Chances are you use Paul Vix's root name server about 1/5 the time you
use a domain name. How about bind? Sure he is abusing his power on a number
of major routers but hes not getting any complaints from me. If there is
a "god of the net" Paul is it.
One common sense rule that most people in the real world know is "dont
fuck with the guy with the big stick". Paul has a big stick and I think
he needs to LART more bozos. |
Re:Screw Vixie and his goon friends at Above.net (Score:1)
by thogard on Wednesday December 13, @07:25PM (#560703)
(User #43403 Info | http://web.abnormal.com)
|
|
My servers use his services so I guess I elected him policeman.
|
read RBL's definition of blacklisting! (Score:1)
by vladkrupin (vksgenerichotmailcom) on Wednesday December 13, @08:51PM (#560704)
(User #44145 Info | http://students.washington.edu/vladk)
|
The article says:
"Spamware? Yes. Media3 does host websites which sell software that sends bulk email and harvests email addresses" Yes, that's right. Media3 itself does not spam. However, quoting from RBL description of what gets you blacklisted, "This
list is composed of IP addresses that are known to have generated SPAM or
Unsolicited Commercial Email, or provide SPAM support services" Doesn't
hosting SPAM'mers means providing "SPAM support services"? And what about
email addres harvesting software? What can you harvest them for except for
SPAM? (BTW, IMNSHO this software should be outlawed as well as SPAM itself
for it has ony one purpose - extracting addresses for SPAM'ming) Anyways,
you can't complain that RBL is not fair - Media3 falls right in their definition
for being black-listed, and if you don't like it - tough luck..:)
-------------------------------------------------
|
how legitimate is the intention? (Score:1)
by vladkrupin (vksgenerichotmailcom) on Wednesday December 13, @09:34PM (#560705)
(User #44145 Info | http://students.washington.edu/vladk)
|
Problem is... if I buy paper and ink I might do something legitimate
with it, like I can print a picture of my friend and post it on the wall
in my office. Now, give me *one* good reason for using a program that "harvests"
thousands of email addresses of people I never knew? Can I use it to invite
them over to my next birthday party? :) They're not harboring spammers!! This is about someone who makes a piece
of software that can be used to spam. This is the difference between locking
up the kiddy pornographer and locking up the people that made the high quality
photographic paper and the ink used to create the images!
-------------------------------------------------
|
Only 2%? What a load.. (Score:1)
by empath on Wednesday December 13, @06:11PM (#560706)
(User #44572 Info | http://junior.loungenet.org/~doug/)
|
At the ISP I'm a sysadmin for, we run MAPS RBL on our external mail gateways.
It blocks a good 4-6% of incoming mail (total of about 60k messages a day),
which is a *ton* more than the 2% of supposed "test spam" mails they claim.
I don't buy their test, only because of the real-life results that I
see every morning in my mailbox saying how well MAPS works.
To top it off, we get very few people asking "Why is my mail blocked?",
and they seem quite understanding when it's explained to them what we're
doing and why.
Just my thoughts..
|
On the picking of hosts to add to MAPS (Score:1)
by empath on Wednesday December 13, @06:17PM (#560707)
(User #44572 Info | http://junior.loungenet.org/~doug/)
|
You say:
don't like spam any more than the next person. But I also don't like censorship,
and I take a content-neutral view of these things. If someone delivers a
product to be used by Alice to block Bob from seeing website because she
doesn't like its content, that product is censorware.
I think this is quite a non-issue here, since MAPS states quite clearly
under what conditions hosts are tested, added, and removed from the list.
I happen to completely agree with this philosophy, so we subscribe. This
is not like most other censorware, where it appears that people randomly
pick things they don't seem to like and then sneak them into a subscription
servive.
It's just two different things, and I'm glad MAPS came together and that
they provide a well-defined service as a single tool that belongs in any
decent spam-blocking arsenal. |
Re:Huh? (Score:1)
by Afterimage (nwalls@@@dv8...org) on Thursday December 14, @09:31AM (#560708)
(User #44695 Info | http://ismedia.org)
|
|
Bulk friendly hosting... While i've not looked at Media3's AUP, I'd like
to think that a "hand's off" policy under other circumstances (they won't
kill your MP3's or your Unreal T. server) would be lauded. If the AUPmakes
provisions for shutting down a site based on violations of applicable law
(and that's a fuzzy area), and it's *enforced*, their business should be
allowed to continue. Basically, I think MAPS, to which I subscribe, is not
using enough discretion to prevent Media3's non bulk distributing customers
from being affected by other clients.
Nmap... Love the tool, use it freqently to check network security. But,
note the argument has been made that it is a "Script kiddie" tool and for
that reason, folks want to make it and other tools illegal, by international
treaty.
As for legit uses of bulk software (Millions Vol. 6, say) not sure. I think
it'd be interesting, from an administrative standpoint, to see what the main
domains listed are... Do AOL/Hotmail/Yahoo e-mail users fall prey to name
guessing schemes to be included in such a product? Are they careless about
posting their address in forums and in the clear on webpages? In essence,
use the tools the spammers use to limit your own vulnerability...
|
Re:MAPS is necessary (Score:2)
by Afterimage (nwalls@@@dv8...org) on Wednesday December 13, @07:40PM (#560709)
(User #44695 Info | http://ismedia.org)
|
|
I
had to chuckle at points throughout the article. I spoke with Joe Hayes at
Media3, and he told me that the company does not tolerate websites which
promote themselves through spam. Of course not! But software to spam the
customers of other ISPs, well that's just fine! So, and I'm drawing
some conclusions here, Napster should have been shut down because they provide
a service that enables distribution in methods that the rightful copyright
holder has not agreed to?
Censorware blocking of nmap's site is legit because it (conceivably) could
be put to evil uses. At least, that's what I think you're suggesting here.
The point is, while I don't know where you stand on the issue, it's hypocritical
to proclaim freedom for one favored product that can be used within the realm
of the law and say another product under different circumstances (but with
a potential legal use) isn't worth the same protection. Even if we disagree
with their philosophy.
|
Alternatives (Score:1)
by VaNTeCH (budgie-at-teuton-dot-org) on Thursday December 14, @04:06AM (#560710)
(User #44816 Info | http://www.teuton.org/budgie)
|
|
OK
the article made some valid points, I can't argue there. And I don't think
anyone can argue that SPAM is a real pain in the arse.
As
part of my job is sys admin for our main mail servers I need to look at options
that limit the amound of SPAM and crap that comes into our systems everyday.
I prefectly understand why MAPS blackholed the web services of Media3 and
I think it was fairly well explained by MAPS in their press release:
"The
proprietors of these websites send massive amounts of unsolicted mail from
an account with an ISP, then when that account is shut down for violating
that ISP's terms of service, they just move on to another ISP. In these cases
the only way to get them to stop sending the unwanted email is for the company
hosting the advertised site to get involved. If they don't, there is no incentive
for the unsolicited email to stop, and then we are forced to protect our
own mail servers from the onslaught of that unwanted email."
If
the owners of these websites were doing the spamming off the servers that
host their website they are bound to have the plug pulled on both their website
and their mail. But because they are abusing another ISPs services for just
their email they aren't having anything done to them.
Now
what MAPS did by blocking whole Class C netblocks is probably a bit of overkill,
but I am sorry if I had the choice of having to enter about 10 - 20 IPs in
a list or entering just one entery I would opt for the one.
I would
just like to query the author of the story and any other sys admins who thinks
what MAPS has done is wrong, with what should we do to stop the SPAM affectively?
The only suggestion I have seen is to use somehting like sneakemail.com.
but that is only viable for end users and not for network administration.
So instead of saying something is crap, why don't you work out a better way
of ridding the world of SPAM?
Graham
|
Re:Fuck off, Commie Pinko (Score:1)
by cicho on Thursday December 14, @06:13AM (#560711)
(User #45472 Info | http://www.lodz.pdi.net/~eristic/index_en.html)
|
Bzzt, wrong. Consider:
1) I have a list of domains that I block from my private machine. That OK?
2) Whenever the list is modified, it gets autoconverted to HTML and posted
on my site. On top it says: This is a list of domains I block (for whatever
reason). That OK, or am I not allowed to publically display a list of domains
I block for whatever reason?
3) Some people trust me to compile the list wisely, and use it for their
machines too, but they have to copy the list and write the rules manually.
I don't know who these people are and don't care. That still OK?
4) The same, but automated. Now you have MAPS.
If I post a list of "Places where I spent holidays and didn't have much
fun" am I "deliberately interfering with" hotel business in those places?
Shutting down MAPS - _that_ would be censorship.
|
Re:I have to agree. (Score:1)
by Stinking Pig on Wednesday December 13, @10:01PM (#560712)
(User #45860 Info | http://www.monkeynoodle.org)
|
Clearly this is a polarizing issue, and I have to say that I come down
on the side of the article writer. Let's look at the relative levels of injuries:
1) spammer (shorthand in this case for "vendor of address collection
software") is allowed to continue selling software. Many mailboxes get some
spam, including mailboxes on tiny and or expensive devices. Users are forced
to utilize their delete commands, develop RSI and brain cancer from the stress.
2) spammer's IP address is blocked. Spammer must seek another address with ISP or another ISP altogether. Process begins anew.
3) spammer's entire ISP is blocked. Spammer must seek another address
with another ISP altogether. Process begins anew. In the meantime, a ton
of non-related sites are blocked. Well, some of those sites are going to
be run by people who know all about these issues and can get switched somewhere
else quickly. But statistically, most of those sites will be run by people
who haven't got the knowledge to understand what the issue is, the inclination
to care, the money/time/inclination to switch ISPs, or any of the above.
So their sites stay down until the MAPS sentence is lifted.
Possibility 3 sounds like a great way to perpetuate the worst things
about the Internet: "B2B" usage in which people have to be paid to touch
anything and "geek's playground" usage in which a bunch of stunted people
bully others for lacking knowledge of the secret handshake.
I rather enjoy the fact that the Internet is widely used by lots of people
who don't know a damned thing about how it works. I'd like to keep it that
way. Breaking it for them because of things they know nothing about done
by people they have no control over is not positively reinforcing behavior.
|
Since when does MAPS censor websites? (Score:2)
by oneiros27 on Thursday December 14, @07:04AM (#560713)
(User #46144 Info | http://www.annoying.org/)
|
I admit that I haven't been keeping up on the spam filtering stuff as
much since I changed jobs, but from my reading of this article, the author
suggests that people using MAPS can't get to the sites being hosted by sites
blacklisted by MAPS.
Unless something's changed dramaticaly, this just isn't how MAPS works,
or any of the half dozen or so mail blacklists. They just keep people from
being able to send mail to the system using MAPS.
[It's actually more complicated than that, as it may just flag it as questionable, it may reject, etc.]
But I've never seen someone set it up to filter all traffic, not just
incoming SMTP. [That's not to say it happens, but I'm guessing that if people
do it, it's a small percentage of MAPS users, and so a fraction of a percent
of systems out there, and not the 2% claimed by the author]
Again, it's quite possible that I'm wrong, but this article just reeks of fishiness to me.
|
Re:Irony Alert: DeCSS (Score:1)
by BluSkreen on Wednesday December 13, @09:33PM (#560714)
(User #47256 Info)
|
It all depends on the intent, and comparing this to DeCSS is quite a
stretch. DeCSS is about a monopoly trying to constrain fair use rights and
decide what you can do with your own property.
One might own the servers in the cage at Above, but not the pipes or
the infrastructure. By comparison, I own the 100 plus DVDs and the players,
that someone else is trying to control.
Participation in the RBL is optional. There is nothing optional about
the MPAA and DVDCCA. Basically, if you want to watch a DVD, you have to
use some sort of CSS. Not true for accessing the Internet, you don't have
to use the RBL, and you can chose a provider that doesn't.
The guidelines for the RBL are pretty clear, and have been for years.
I'm surprised that someone such as yourself isn't familiar with what it
takes to get listed. They been sued before, by far bigger fish than Media
3.
Unlike CyberPatrol or other content restriction programs, MAPS tells
you who is on the list, and why. Since I subscribed our network, spam is
almost non existent. I'm not going to pay to support unsolicted email, and
if some sites that choose to do business with supporters or providers of
that type of thing, are inaccessable from my network, that's their problem,
not mine. People certainly have a right (in the US, anyway) to express themselves,
but that doesn't mean I have to be compelled to listen to them, and pay for
the medium on which they do it.
Dave
|
Voluntary (Score:2)
by Hard_Code on Thursday December 14, @04:22AM (#560715)
(User #49548 Info)
|
Um, isn't the RBL *voluntary*? So why the hell are we getting so worked
up? If the ISP is mindlessly blocking valid sites on the RBL, then yell
at them...or tell them to tell the RBL that those sites are OK.
|
Re:Bullshit (Score:2)
by Hard_Code on Thursday December 14, @04:29AM (#560716)
(User #49548 Info)
|
I thought the RBL was a list that ISPs could *voluntarily* use to blacklist
sites. So, if Iraq is brutal and violent, then the message is "stay away
from this country, do not make any deals with them, etc.". If Napster is
infringing on copyright wholesale, the message is "stay away from this service,
do not let any of your copyrighted materials pass through it". If you are
shooting people in your dorm, the message is "stay away from this dorm, it
has a bloody psycho in it running around and killing people".
Are those *unreasonable* precautions that can be voluntarily followed by subscribers? Man, it almost sounds logical.
|
Crying all the way to the bank (Score:1)
by dustintodd on Wednesday December 13, @07:55PM (#560717)
(User #50379 Info)
|
|
If you have never run the tech team for hosting company and been asked
by management to put aside your convictions to support a large $$$ customer.
Your not $$really$$ going to understand this post. The courts have yet to
set standard that really addresses the harm done by most spammers. MAPS as
grass roots effort by the sensible none greedy people running the gear is
logical out come of this gap in public policy. MAPS is the results of the
sensible, spam is result of the greedy, choose your team and start running.
|
No, this isn't censorship (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Wednesday December 13, @05:51PM (#560718)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
This isn't censorship, any more than banning spam is. Censorship is the banning of ideas, not of actaions.
They are blocking sites that sell spammer tools, which is providing support
services to spammers. They don't ban sites that talk about open relays or
holes in the e-mail system. They do not ban any of the organizations that
use reasonably safe versions of opt-in email. They also don't ban organzations
like the DMA, who advocate making spam legal. And as far as I know, they
don't ban any of the many frothing sites devoted to hating them.
The freedom to speak freely is vitally important to a democratic society, but I don't see that being infringed.
|
Evidence? (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Wednesday December 13, @06:06PM (#560719)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
This claim has often been made, but I've never seen anybody come up with decent proof for it.
The only remotely real thing I've seen is that above.net was, for a time,
blocking all traffic from ORBS, because they objected to the ORBS scanning
methods and didn't want their machines bugged. Unfortunately, ORBS gets some
of their connectivity from an ISP that uses above.net. This may not be very
neighborly, but I don't know how evil it is, either.
And either way, if you want to prove your claim that above.net is dropping all RBL traffic, you have some work to do.
|
Too cheap, eh? (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Wednesday December 13, @06:13PM (#560720)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
The only way that you get cheap internet service (or really, cheap anything)
is by taking advantage of economies of scale. That means a lot of users,
most of whom have different opinions from you about the tradeoff between
limiting spam and blocking a few sites. So if you want to get those economy-of-scale
DSL prices, you have to put up with what the vendors offer you.
If you want special, invidivualized service, you'll have to pay the price.
And if you think you aren't alone, start an ISP and make some money off all
those people who are being oppressed by the evil goons at MAPS. It looks
like it's easy to do. If there are enough of you, you'll get the price as low as your current options.
|
To ostracize spammers and their pals (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Wednesday December 13, @06:19PM (#560721)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
Note that a lot of people use the RBL in just that way. For my users,
I have it set up so that headers are added to each message indicating which
lists (ORBS, MAPS RBL, MAPS DUL, MAPS RSS) the message matches. That way
they can filter it as they please.
But we're considering moving to the more extreme version, where all traffic
gets dropped. Why? Because the people on the RBL are not good neighbors,
and we don't want to have anything to do with them. I don't want to hear
from a spammer; neither do I want spam-friendly ISPs using the stuff I offer
to the world.
As I mentioned elsewhere, this is analogous to the ancient greek concept of ostracism.
|
Ancient code (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Wednesday December 13, @06:55PM (#560722)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
The only reason you see his name on that stuff is that he wrote useful
code back at the dawn of time, stuff which has survived to this day.
Almost any code from ten or fifteen years ago was less paranoid than
modern code; it was written for a simpler, more trusting world. It wasn't
all that long ago that open relays became a problem, for example.
So don't knock him too much; it's just that most of the code that started
back then wasn't even good enough to be in use today. And as a recent Slashdot article shows, he's well aware that a ground-up rewrite is needed to fix the problem.
|
Sigh (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Wednesday December 13, @07:03PM (#560723)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
If you're willing to do business with a company that supports spammers,
then I don't want my boxes to talk to your boxes. But that's my choice to
make, isn't it?
I also boycott a couple of companies whose business practices I don't
like. Does this hurt their suppliers and their employees? Yes. Do I like
that? No. But it's a price I'm willing to pay to put pressure on people who
do things that I consider bad for society. |
Re:"Press time"? (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Wednesday December 13, @07:07PM (#560724)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
He had no "press time"; this is the web fer chrissakes. And there's nothing
urgent about this story; it'll be just as relevant next week as now.
If he did contact MAPS three months ago and still hasn't heard back,
then he should have said so. Journalists often write things like, "despite
repeated attempts to reach Paul Vixie and other MAPS spokespeople over the
last three weeks, this reporter's calls were not returned." |
Evidence? (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Wednesday December 13, @07:10PM (#560725)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
Who are these "many" ISPs that create black-hole routes based on MAPS RBL?
I know that some ISPs block RBL-listed machines talking on or through their networks, but I've never seen a credible case of an ISP advertising bogus routes to RBL-listed sites.
|
Works for me (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Wednesday December 13, @07:14PM (#560726)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
Punishing innocent sites by mere association in this case is a cure worse than the disease.
The goal is not to punish the innocent sites; it's to refuse to trade
packets with ISPs who support spam. If you want to show your support of such
ISPs by putting your web servers there, go ahead. But I reserve the right
to tell my computers not to talk to yours.
IPv4 addresses are not so plentifully available that one can simply
block all questionable netblocks and expect there to be any unblocked addresses
left for the good guys to reside in.
Well apparently one can do such a thing, as the RBL has been going
for quite a while. And last I looked, major ISPs were not turning away new
customers because they have run out of IP addresses. |
That's how the "marketplace of ideas" works (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Wednesday December 13, @07:20PM (#560727)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
MAPS isn't "hiding behind" free association. All they do is publish a
list; other people decide whether or not to use the list.
If indeed many people feel that MAPS is too extreme, then competitors
will indeed appear. But to date, the only serious competitor I've seen is
ORBS, which is more extreme than MAPS.
I agree that there is some collateral damage, but that strikes me as
necessary. I use the RBL because I don't want to talk to spammers or anybody
who supports them. This includes the ISP who is hosting the spammer software
site. How could you block an ISP but not block its IP addresses? |
Still not censorship (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Wednesday December 13, @07:26PM (#560728)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
They are blocking an ISP who is hosting a spamware site and is therefore spam-friendly.
It is true that this ISP has other web servers, but how can you block an ISP without blocking their IP addresses?
As a guy who donated money to Peacefire, I'm disappointed that they're
using a spam-friendly ISP. Hopefully they'll move to a more respectable service
shortly, and they won't have these problems. |
Caller ID is a great analogy (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Wednesday December 13, @07:30PM (#560729)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
Here in California, you can ask the phone company to set things up so
that anybody trying to call anonymously is automatically rejected. In a year,
this has caused only one problem with a legit caller, but I get telemarketing
calls maybe once a week now.
Hooray for voluntary blocking! I wish I could get a service like MAPS
for my telephone or my fax machine. Hell, I wish I could just block all phone
calls from Florida; I don't have any friends there, and about half of the
junk faxes I trace back come from there. |
They already have three different lists (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Wednesday December 13, @07:41PM (#560730)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
|
For just such reasons, they already have three different lists:
I
guess you're asking them to split the RBL into two or three more parts. I
personally don't see the need for this; in my eyes supporting spammers is
as bad as being a spammer. But opinions differ, and if enough people ask
for it I'm sure they'll add those lists (as they did with the DUL and RSS
lists). Have you asked them yet?
|
Flamebait? (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Wednesday December 13, @07:52PM (#560731)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
This comment was not intended to be flamebait, despite what a moderator
seems to think. I mean it as a serious and legitimate critique of the site.
Is this an article, and therefore theoretically objective? If so, it's
a pretty poor fit with what I like to see in my news sources.
Is this just the usual news commentary? If so, where's the news, the
carefully researched article by a journalist who has been picked by a publication
and helped by an editor?
Or is this an editorial? And if so, is it considered a Slashdot-approved
editorial, or just an opinion piece by some guy called "jamie"? And if so,
what are his qualifications to speak?
Personally, I like Slashdot best when it posts news articles from
other sources, possibly with a wry comment or two, and then lets us comment
on them. Journalism is a tricky thing, and I'm generally not impressed when
Slashdot tries it themselves. That's why I've turned off display of the Jon
Katz articles, for example.
If they think this is a news article or an opinion piece that's worth
publishing, then they should submit it to someplace like Salon or ZDNet or
Wired, rather then using the power of Slashdot to push their own articles
like this. They might discover that professional journalists and experienced
editors at real news sites would have some suggestions that they missed.
And once they get it accepted elsewhere, then they should by all means post
it back here for discussion. |
Have you looked at the site? (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Wednesday December 13, @08:06PM (#560732)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
These people offer "25 million free addresses" with the purchase of their
bulk software. They have ads for "bulk-friendly" hosting services. This site
is all about enabling spammers, bucko.
Sendmail is a piece of software that can be used to spam. The folks at
MarketingMasters offer software that is specifically designed for spamming,
plus it comes with a bunch of addresses, probably including yours and mine.
You see the difference?
|
The RBL is supposed to be narrow (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Wednesday December 13, @08:17PM (#560733)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
The point of the RBL, as opposed to the DUL or the RSS, let alone ORBS,
is to only block those who are known and recalcitrant supports of spam.
The fact that that few spams are caught in the RBL is either a testament
to their restraint in listing people or to the success of MAPS of driving
spam support services off of the web. Either way, I'm still very glad it
exists. |
It's called a "joe job" (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Wednesday December 13, @08:24PM (#560734)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
When that happens, it's called a "joe job". Generally, they're pretty
obvious; people who spend their time doing things like this are usually pretty
dim.
Occasionally, it's a real problem telling, in which case it's generally
up to the judgement of the ISP, which can go well or go poorly.
Note that the RBL generally only contains recalcitrant spammers; I'm
sure if they contacted somebody who said "it wasn't me", gave some reasonable
explanation, and then put up a note saying how deplorable spam is, then MAPS
would just keep an eye on 'em. |
You carefully choose who you do business with (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Wednesday December 13, @08:34PM (#560735)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
As with anything else, you should try to do business with reputable companies.
These days, this is much easier than before the internet.
With an ISP, the first thing to do is read their AUP and the other agreements
that you sign when you get service from them. Next, search for information
about them.
With Media3, for example, it's pretty easy to find that they are a known spam-friendly ISP. If you think that's cool, then by all means use them. If not, maybe you should look elsewhere.
|
Re:Have you looked at the site? (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Wednesday December 13, @11:24PM (#560736)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
[...]
in all honesty, are you going to tell Peacefire.org to switch providers now
because they're using the same service as MarketingMasters?
Yes. Although I support Peacefire's work (and even donated money to them),
they should move. And if they want to stick with their spam-friendly ISP,
then that's their choice, but my computers will stop talking to theirs. (And
I probably won't give them money again, either.)
MAPS has taken the power they have and abused it.
It's not like they're pulling these judgements out of their collective ass or doing something secretive. They have a clear policy on what gets you in. According to a recent press release
this ISP got listed for hosting spam-advertised sites. They are also clearly
continuing to host sites that sell bulk-mail software and addresses. According
to spamhaus.org, Media3 is the largest spam site hoster currently active.
RBL needs to be replaced. The original intention was to keep it as a list of sites that send spam.
I don't know if you've looked closely at any of your spam in the last
couple of years, but the the vast majority of it now is from dialups, open
relays, and weird foreign hosts. Making a "list of sites that send spam"
won't do much good anymore; that's why they have expanded it to include relays
and spam support services. As another poster mentioned, you have to follow the money to stop spam.
Still, if you think such a service would be more useful. you're welcome
to start one. Note, though, that the only serious RBL competitor, ORBS, was
substantially more aggressive than MAPS; I doubt an RBL-minus would be very
popular.
---
The point here is not to punish a single spammer site; it's to punish
an ISP that's been so badly behaved for so many months that there's nothing
left to do but to ostracize them. It's unfortunate that banning an ISP harms
their legit customers. (It's also unfortunate that boycotting, say, Microsoft
or Starbucks or Nike harms a lot of perfectly nice employees.)
But how else do you suggest that we deal with a rogue ISP?
|
Re:The RBL is supposed to be narrow (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Wednesday December 13, @11:37PM (#560737)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
BZZZT!
10 years ago I wrote this program which stops elephants from walking
down the highway. Since there's only been a couple of elephants found walking
on the highway since then, my program must work.
When MAPS started the RBL, a lot of the spam was direct and obvious,
coming straight from the spammer's network and advertising something on the
spammer's network. Now, almost all of it is cloaked in a variety of ways;
I almost never see a spam that obviously originates from the site that it
is pushing.
So if ten years ago highway elephants were a big problem and today people
were regularly caught disguising elephants as dump trucks, semis, and Yugos
because your program didn't catch that, then you could rightly feel that
you had made a difference.
And so it is with MAPS and the RBL.
|
Re:Sorry, Jamie, you are way off base (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Thursday December 14, @12:00AM (#560738)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
That's
how MAPS should work, by blocking the bad stuff so that RBL users just don't
see it. There isn't any need to punish innocent sites who happen to be on
the same class C.
Wrong. Media3 is currently the number one ISP for live spam sites accoring spamhaus.org. MAPS has been talking with these guys for months about their various spam-friendly activities. If an ISP keeps allowing spammers in, MAPS should block 'em.
If MAPS successfully got Media3 to shut down the spammer's site, then MAPS WOULD be dealing in
censorship, wouldn't they?
These aren't just people who say that spam should be allowed. They are
people who spam to draw traffic to their websites, people who sell spamming
software, and people who provide spam-friendly hosts services.
If MAPS blocked people for advocating spam, like, say, the DMA,
then they would be censoring. But they don't; they only block people who
spam or those who help spammers. Their criterion is based on an activity,
not an opinion. That's not censorship as far as I'm concerned.
In fact, MAPS even goes so far as to give links to its various opponents on its web site. Censors? I don't think so.
|
Re:can MAPS/ORBS be advisory to users? (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Thursday December 14, @12:18AM (#560739)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
|
Yes. I I use blcheck for this, with to put it right into the SMTP chain, although you can use it with procmail, too. That way users can use their mail clients to decide what to trash and what to keep.
|
Oops! Bad URLs (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Thursday December 14, @12:21AM (#560740)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
One URL there was mangled; here's the right post:
Yes. I I use blcheck for this, with qmail-qfilter to put it right into the SMTP chain, although you can use it with procmail, too. That way users can use their mail clients to decide what to trash and what to keep.
|
Huh? (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Thursday December 14, @12:41AM (#560741)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
And what would the potentially legitimate use of spam software and 25
million addresses be? Decorating your apartment? A little light reading before
bed?
And I'm sure there's a potentially legitimate use of "bulk-friendly hosting",
too. Web pages for my bulk foods business? A place where bulky guys can get
clothes?
Nmap is a tool which can be used for good or evil; I use it to check
up on my own hosts to make sure my users aren't running anything insecure.
Napster, as we've seen, is more ambiguous; it can be used for good, but the
bulk of the activity is copyright violation, which is why the courts have
taken such a dim view of it.
But bulk e-mail software that comes with millions of addresses and software
for spidering sites to get yet more addresses has no purpose but spamming.
There's nothing "conceivable" about the evil use here. |
An old and silly argument (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Thursday December 14, @12:47AM (#560742)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
Is this just a troll?
Sure, you can use delete on your own inbox. But what if your an ISP and
your customers demand less spam? Will you delete for them?
And really, this just ignores the potential size of the problem. Sending
a spam costs practically nothing to the sender. There are two million registered
businesses in the US alone. So if spamming isn't fought tooth and nail, how
many spams do you think you'll get once everybody does it?
Or another way to look at it: spamming a few million people costs about
as much as the smallest newspaper display ad. How many ads like that are
there in your daily paper? And how many daily papers are there in the world?
If you want to keep up with your "solution", you'll need to remap about half your keyboard to delete.
|
It's the ISP (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Thursday December 14, @12:51AM (#560743)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
They are blocking the ISP, which has hosted a whole mess of spammers for at least six months.
The ISP is the one who is violating the "cooperative spirit that makes
the Net work"; MAPS just lets us know who the bad guys are so we can block
'em if we choose.
Also, RBL is used in a backbone and those using it have no choice in the matter.
Many have made this claim; despite many requests, I still have seen no evidence. I say it's bunk.
|
Re:Evidence? (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Thursday December 14, @08:31AM (#560744)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
This could just mean that AboveNet uses the RBL to filter mail delivery
to their direct customers. That's what it usually means, as the bulk of RBL
subscribers just use it for SMTP as part of a Sendmail ruleset.
People have repeatedly made the claim that AboveNet internally null-routes
based on the RBL and then advertises those routes, thereby sucking innocent
packets in to their doom. That's the claim I was responding to, and that's the claim for which I still see no evidence.
|
So? (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Thursday December 14, @08:55AM (#560745)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
|
That may be true, but that has nothing to do with MAPS and the RBL; ORBS isn't even listed on the RBL. So even if above.net is choosing to block ORBS traffic on their network, that doesn't seem relevant to this discussion.
|
Put up or shut up (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Thursday December 14, @09:07AM (#560746)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
As other posters have mentioned, those of use who use MAPS offerings have indeed elected him policeman of the Internet.
Get off your high horse and try building a constructive way of dealing with spam that does not punish innocent users.
Given that you're shouting this from your own high horse, this is a pretty silly statement to make.
The people at MAPS have carefully thought out their stand on the issue,
and then offered their services to anybody who agrees with them. Name-calling
probably won't change their minds.
If you have a different view on things, then you're welcome to make your
own offering. Once you get it working, I may even subscribe. (Or I may not;
ORBS, for example, is to extreme for my tastes.) But put up or shut up; don't
just run your mouth telling other people what work they should be doing. |
Eh? (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Thursday December 14, @09:17AM (#560747)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
My recollection was that eBGP4 was the first format they offered it in; I have the notion that the DNS version came later. But either way, they've offered both for years.
In any case, using MAPS in this way is just plain wrong. I support only blackholing via mail, not anything else.
Well then you should certainly use it that way. I think it's probably
right, and I hope you support my right to make my own ethical choices.
Here's why I think it's probably a good call by MAPS: Banning an entire
spam-friendly ISP should be a solution of last resort, but MAPS has been
after these people for six months to fix things. And still, they are listed
as spamhaus's number one spam-friendly ISP. As an RBL subscriber, I fully support their action.
|
And the non-bad things are? (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Thursday December 14, @09:27AM (#560748)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
Since you have such a deep insight into this issue, perhaps you can enlighten
us as to the many beneficial uses to which a spamming program (plus 25 million
addresses, free with every copy) could be put?
And actually, going after tools solves quite a lot. The purchase of explosives,
for example, is highly regulated. This a) make it harder for people to blow
other people up, and b) makes it easier to track those who use explosives
to violate the law. And the purchase of, say, atomic bombs is strictly forbidden,
even though an A-bomb, like any other weapon, is just a tool.
Another fine example is the automobile. Before you are allowed to drive
one in almost any country, you have to prove that you can use it safely.
And before a car is allowed on the road, it has to meet many safety standards.
Sure, it's just a tool, but government regulation of this tool has saved
a lot of lives.
So which tool is it that has taken the place of the a-bomb or the automobile?
And how is the general populace ignorant of the possibilities of misusing
them? |
They're blocking the ISP (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Thursday December 14, @09:39AM (#560749)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
As I've said elsewhere, MAPS started by blocking the spammer site. But it turns out that Media3 is the most spam-friendly ISP around. And as the article mentions, MAPS has been after Media3 for months with no results; they've even taken on new spam-friendly clients in that time.
What do you want MAPS to do? Blow kisses at Media3? Send 'em cookies and say pretty please?
As an RBL subscriber, I'm glad they list spam-friendly ISPs. And maybe
Peacefire is an innocent bystander, although perhaps they stay there to make
a political statement. If they truly didn't know what was coming, then they
should yell at Media3, 'cause Media3 has known this was in the works for
months.
But if you don't like it, don't subscribe to the RBL. The Internet I
envision doesn't have spammers or their pals on it, and the RBL helps make
that vision a reality. |
Re:An old and silly argument (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Thursday December 14, @11:27AM (#560750)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
No, if I were an ISP I would not delete spam for my customers.
Then you should start your own ISP and see how far you get. Many large ISPs and mailhosts are very excited to tell people about their anti-spam efforts.
A lot of this is probably customer demand, suggesting that your style
of ISP wouldn't be very popular. And as others have pointed out in this thread,
spammers shift the cost burden to others, especially the destination ISP,
so any ISP takes your view of spam will end up with higher bills (and therefore
higher prices) than ISPs that allow their customers to block spam.
But hey, best of luck to you; if it turns out that you are right, then nobody will use MAPS anymore, making the argument moot.
|
Two? (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Thursday December 14, @01:28PM (#560751)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
I count at least three, maybe four. There's an outfit called SamCo that
has at least 8 IP addresses; another one called the PPM group with at least
three, somebody named Said Al-Zalzalah with at least two, and a guy called
Mike Zuber, with one.
How'd you get two?
|
Re:So? (Score:1)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Thursday December 14, @08:21PM (#560752)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
The notion that MAPS is some insidious conspiracy that uses its pod people
to push its secret agenda throughout the industry is not one I'm buying without
more proof than your assertion.
You should also be careful how you sling around that term censor. From
what I can tell, AboveNet blocked ORBS for their behavior, not their opinions.
Censorship is the suppression of ideas, not actions.
Personally, I think ORBS is a good idea, but that they go about it in
an agressively rude fashion. I wouldn't block 'em, but I see it as a reasonable
decision to keep their probes off of one's networks. I've seen no evidence
that AboveNet it doing anything more than that.
If you come back with some proof that AboveNet blocks, say, ORBS, mirrors
of ORBS pages, and usenet discussions that say nice things about ORBS, then
I'll take you a little more seriously. |
It's about who plays nice (Score:2)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Wednesday December 13, @06:01PM (#560753)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
As an RBL subscriber myself, I support this action, even to the extent of blocking other web sites.
When I started using the internet more than a decade ago, it was a neighborly place. When the green card lawyers did their massive spamming and followed it up with a big "fuck you", it was a shock to all of us.
To me, the RBL is about sorting out who has that old-school community
spirit from those who don't. The jerks and idiots are welcome to talk to
one another (and anybody else who cares to listen to them), but I want to
keep them out of my inbox. If an ISP isn't playing by the same anti-spam
rules, I cast my ostrakon
for them. And if people want to support that ISP by doing business with them,
that's swell too, but I don't much care to hear from them either.
As a practical matter, spam-friendly ISPs are often willing to move spammers
around in a netblock to avoid a ban, so it could well be that MAPS has given
up on anything less than netblock bans. Of course, we don't know the MAPS
side of the story, because you didn't take the time to talk to them. |
MAPS vs ORBS (Score:2)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Wednesday December 13, @06:50PM (#560754)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
You shouldn't tar MAPS with the ORBS brush. For the last year or so,
all of my mail gets extra headers added based on which of the lists (ORBS, MAPS RBL, MAPS RSS, MAPS DUL) it matches.
I frequently find that ORBS would block mail I'd like to receive, whereas
the MAPS RBL and RSS never do, and the DUL would only rarely. For a normal
ISP, I'd guess that ORBS would be a nightmare, but the RBL would be pretty
much OK.
Of course, for me, I keep all my spam so I can feed it to SpamCop.
|
Peacefire is fine (Score:2)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Thursday December 14, @08:51AM (#560755)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
I think Peacefire is fine, and I'm sure the people from MAPS like them, too.
But the point here is that the ISP has been spam friendly for ages, and they've been warned for at least six months. Despite that, they are still taking on new spam clients. And spamhaus.org considers them the the biggest host of spam-friendly domains.
The ISP, as far as I'm concerned, is spam-friendly. And I don't want
my boxes to talk to spam-friendly ISPs. If Peacefire chooses to to use a
spam-friendly ISP, that's their business, I'm not one to stop 'em.
Oh, you say the didn't choose? That they just didn't know? It's funny,
isn't it, that Media3 didn't even warn their clients about a possible loss
of connectivity to large parts of the Internet?
That's not the behavior of a reputable businessman; it's an ISP trying
to shield its spammer clients by mixing in legit sites. The ISP has known
this was coming for months; they should have warned their customers. |
New details on MAPS procedures (Score:2)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Thursday December 14, @01:33PM (#560756)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
One of the gripes in the article was that the MAPS evidence file for
these guys was scanty. That's because the nomination for the extension was
kept here:
http://evfiles.mail-abuse.org/rbl/ev/63.74.120-24. txt
This paints things in a pretty different light; it's a shame that this wasn't read by the author of this article.
|
Re:So? (Score:2)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Friday December 15, @10:12AM (#560757)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
AboveNet
has constructed their criteria so that they do have "fig leaf" excuse for
their censorship, as is done in virtually all real
world examples of censorship. If you want to be fooled in all of these cases, that is your choice.
Let's just say I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. I've
been reading SPAMTOOLS for years, and this issue got quite a bit of play
there, and I'd say that rational people can disagree over this issue. Although
like the goal of ORBS, I wasn't so sure about their methods. And I was very
sure I didn't like their stubbornly boneheaded refusual to see that there
might be other points of view.
If ORBS really wants to claim censorship, then they should move their
ideas (e.g. their website) away from their actions (their arguably aggressive
network probing). If AboveNet suddenly starts blocking their web server,
then I'd agree that they are after censorship.
You could also test things yourself. Use an external proxy server to
make a mirror of orbs.org on your network and announce it to the world. That
way, all AboveNet customers will have access to the ideas of ORBS without
risking exposure to what AboveNet sees as network abuse. If you get the smackdown
from AboveNet, then you'd have a reasonable claim
In this case, AboveNet's excuse is ridiculous, in light of the fact
that AboveNet claims to be doing this for customer welfare, and we, the effected
[sic] customer, do not want them to do it.
A quick check of ARIN shows that you guys are about 0.06% of their address
space. No offense meant, but I can see how they wouldn't be willing to futz
around with their routing tables for such a small customer.
If this is such an important issue to you, you should consider voting with your dollars.
|
Re:So? (Score:2)
by dubl-u (spamless-00AWoU9nJL@pota.to) on Monday December 18, @03:52PM (#560758)
(User #51156 Info | http://pota.to/)
|
I am not saying that AboveNet is trying to prevent people from learning about what relay blocking is. I am saying that they are
censoring the specific exchange of information needed to do the relay checking (albeit with some lame excuse).
Note that there are other relay checkers which they do allow, MAPS RSS
being the most popular one. What exactly is it that you feel they are trying
to censor?
Also note that what you consider to be a "lame excuse" is seen by a lot
of other people, including many strong anti-spam advocates, as a reasonable
argument. See, for example, the archive of SPAMTOOLS from around the end
of May. Your adamant refusual to see any merit whatsoever in their position
doesn't make you convincing; it makes you look clueless.
This would be akin to allowing a few books on what democracy is but not allowing people to actually communicate to implement it.
Well, you seem to be doing a pretty fair imitation of communicating about it.
Or if you wish to prove your point that it's the information rather than
the actions, then set up an ORBS secondary within AboveNet's network. I'm
sure ORBS would cooperate; you'd just need to find somebody to secondary
the data so you could reach it.
So, it would not be reasonable for AboveNet to claim that allowing
ORBS probes is just too much work for just one customer request.
Well, they still could claim that it's too much work (or, more likely,
too risky for their routers) to allow ORBS probes for just a few customer requests. Indeed, if routing table size is what worries them, then a larger number of requests would be worse, not better.
And, yes, we do intend to vote with our dollars, losing our setup
costs after our annual contract with our AboveNet-based ISP expires.
I'm glad to hear it.
|
Yawn! This is old "news" (Score:1)
by albin (chili AT withonions DOT com) on Thursday December 14, @07:39AM (#560759)
(User #52375 Info | http://www.withonions.com/)
|
Don't people get sick of complaining about the RBL? There's nothing
new in this article. When I read it through, I kept waiting for some big
news about the RBL that I missed when I read through all the MAPS literature
ages ago (hint, hint).
It's so easy to forget, I suppose, that the terms and implementation
of the RBL have been the same for quite a long time. I happen to love the
RBL, but if you don't like it, a) you have a lot of nerve being surprised
at this stage, and b) don't use it! And if your upstream uses it and it
actually prevents you from seeing websites, etc., then complain to your upstream.
It's not MAPS' fault if the info is used too strictly (to block
more than SMTP in inappropriate instances), and at the same time if the RBL
is to be effective it must adhere to its own terms, and that means putting
providers like Media3 on the list when they don't "play ball," that is, deal
responsibly with their customers who spam.
To me, complaining about the RBL is like panickingly posting about the Good Times virus.
|
Re:Huh??? (Score:1)
by noweb4u (paulNO@SPAMtimmins.net) on Wednesday December 13, @07:47PM (#560760)
(User #52880 Info | http://www.fuckmicrosoft.net/)
|
|
This is using the RBL at the router using my favorite protocol eBGP4....
It completely drops routes, making that portion of the internet as good as
someone cutting the fiber with a pair of scissors when someone tries to access
that site using any protocol. |
You're way off base (Score:1)
by cameldrv on Wednesday December 13, @11:25PM (#560761)
(User #53081 Info)
|
Perhaps signal-to-noise is a precious commodity. Free speech is a way
more precious one and to throw it away for something like this is outrageous
from the biggest free-speech advocates of them all. I don't like spam either.
I take measures to stop it, and when that doesn't work I hit the delete
button.
Let's put this in perspective. You're willing to shut off someone's
connection for distributing spamming software, but if someone posts instructions
for making a bomb, that's free speech? Free speech isn't always pretty.
Sometimes people yell in the street, sometimes the Nazis march around the
neighborhood. But what about when you have something to say? Who's going
to stand up for you when you agree to be a vigilante for mere association
with spammers?
Think about it.
|
Re:MAPS != censorship. (Score:1)
by robl on Wednesday December 13, @09:32PM (#560762)
(User #53384 Info)
|
Bullshit.
I remember back in my college days when the premiere of NYPD blue came
on the local ABC affiliate. The local affiliate decided to not air it due
to an apparently provocative scene which scared the moral minority, airing
in it's place some religious offering from the local churches. I distinctly
remember reading a newspaper story telling the reader that the station "censored"
the NYPD Blue premiere.
I'll play along for a sec. So I, the paper, and another 20 million americans
got our definition wrong. Apparently they merely "filtered" the "content".
Problem is, it's the same evil but with different words. You can call
it whatever you want, "removing morally objectionable content", "filtering",
"moral processing", whatever the hell you'd like to call it, but the word
that best fits it is still "censorship".
Any objection you raise to its proper place in the english language is
simply a technicality on proper usage, and not a centerpiece for an argurment.
|
Thats not what its for... (Score:1)
by Rix (mkirkland@sldakjlsdkjf.intrinsyc.com) on Wednesday December 13, @07:37PM (#560763)
(User #54095 Info)
|
They provide a list of IPs which are friendly or neutral to spammers.
Media3 is friendly or neutral to spammers, they belong on the list. I want
my subscription to be used that way. If you don't, make your own RBL.
Cheers,
Rick Kirkland
|
Re:Thats not what its for... (Score:1)
by Rix (mkirkland@sldakjlsdkjf.intrinsyc.com) on Wednesday December 13, @10:33PM (#560764)
(User #54095 Info)
|
Peacefire is funding a company that provides service to spammers, putting
them at least in the neutral, if not the friendly category.
If I was RBL'd in a similar way, I'd be pissed off, but with my provider,
not MAPS. And I'd have all the more reason to take my business elsewhere.
Cheers,
Rick Kirkland
|
Re:A compelling argument... (Score:1)
by QuoteMstr on Wednesday December 13, @05:36PM (#560765)
(User #55051 Info)
|
|
The problem is that you are forced to use it --- with abovenet using
it and broadcasting null routes, there is no way in hell you can avoid it.
|
Huh? (Score:1)
by ddmckay on Wednesday December 13, @05:41PM (#560766)
(User #56023 Info | http://www.net-kitchen.com)
|
Maybe I'm confused, but I thought the RBL is used to block e-mail, not
web access. I use it and I can view all of the sites listed.
|
Re:A Better Analogy (Score:2)
by Chalst (cas-at-achilles.bu.edu) on Thursday December 14, @04:57AM (#560767)
(User #57653 Info | http://achilles.bu.edu/cas)
|
Let me see if I understand you: you are saying that the rule of law
depends upon people regularly engaging in bullying, lynching and
illegal intimidation? And that this follows from the second law of
thermodynamics?
|
Free Speech & Spam (Score:1)
by multiopsys on Thursday December 14, @11:42AM (#560768)
(User #58935 Info)
|
A modest proposal for making spam easy to deal with while dodging free speech issues:
Pass federal and state laws requiring that the subject line of all unsolicited commercial email begin with the following:
UCE:
Add in jail time & big fines for noncompliance.
Anyone who doesn't want spam could stop it with one filter, or create
absolute hell for the noncomplying spammer; they've got to have *some way*
for people to contact them in the message.
The First Amendment guarantees a right to speak, not a right to be heard.
|
Re:Thats not what its for... (Score:3)
by radja (oldshoe@itookmyprozac.com) on Wednesday December 13, @11:38PM (#560769)
(User #58949 Info | http://www.mud.nu/dm/)
|
so now there is an effort to pressure on known spammers to stop. Not
by rules, regulations and law but by consumer pressure. Everyone here always
shouts about how bad regulation and law is.. This is what you get from it..
lawsuits, lawsuits and more lawsuits. make some bloody laws that mandate
opt-in for spam, and the whole thing becomes a moot point. But we want self-regulation
(well.. not me..). This is the internet self-regulating, and once again people
whine about it.
//rdj
|
Re:Exactly (Score:1)
by shadowspar (rick(at)shadowspar.dyndns.org) on Wednesday December 13, @07:40PM (#560770)
(User #59136 Info | https://shadowspar.dyndns.org/)
|
|
You
might want to let the folks over at Peacefire know how they can know how
they can know how they can turn the RBL off. Think about it.
They can turn the RBL off by switching ISPs.
Rather the point, don't you think?
|
Re:Exactly (Score:1)
by Trailer Trash (mdchaney@michaelchaney.com) on Wednesday December 13, @06:30PM (#560771)
(User #60756 Info | http://www.michaelchaney.com/)
|
|
And then, you can turn the RBL off. Victims of Censorware can't turn it off because they aren't allowed to do so.
You might want to let the folks over at Peacefire know how they can turn the RBL off. Think about it.
MC
|
Re:Fuck off, Commie Pinko (Score:1)
by ?erosion (moc.liamtoh@efinkrozar) on Wednesday December 13, @06:31PM (#560772)
(User #62476 Info)
|
|
Um, yuo spelled teh word 'fagot' wrong
|
Re:Sorry, Jamie, you are way off base (Score:5)
by Pseudonym on Wednesday December 13, @07:43PM (#560773)
(User #62607 Info)
|
Whether
or not you think it's right, it's still censorship. Someone is taking it
into their own hands to block us from seeing something they don't think we
should.
That couldn't be further from the truth. What's
happening is that I decide that someone else has sufficiently similar opinions
to mine about what I don't want to see, and ask them to do it for me. That's
not censorship, it's outsourcing. Well, I guess you could always call it
"self-censorship by proxy" or something equally convoluted.
Now if
the RBL isn't what it advertises to be, that's a different question. But
that wouldn't be censorship either, it'd be false advertising.
|
Re:This is exactly what we want them to do. (Score:1)
by cbull on Thursday December 14, @06:59AM (#560774)
(User #63145 Info)
|
So, ISP's should examine a site's content and determine what's appropriate
or not? Doesn't that go counter to a lot of what gets discussed here? On
one hand people claim censorship is bad. On the other hand, it seems that
you want ISPs to effectively censor their customers.
In general, I think the RBL is a good idea. However, stories over the
last 6-12 months have me thinking that maybe they're starting to get a little
overzealous in their policies and actions. |
Re:Exactly (Score:1)
by toast0 on Wednesday December 13, @07:31PM (#560775)
(User #63707 Info | http://shear.sourceforge.net/)
|
my four letter domain (advertised on /. no less) does not get a terrible
quantity of spam as compared to other addresses that get forwarded to the
same place (i check headers ever so often)
maybe it has to do w/ being a .orgy not a .com and having intermittent connection problems besides
|
Re:Exactly (Score:1)
by toast0 on Wednesday December 13, @08:09PM (#560776)
(User #63707 Info | http://shear.sourceforge.net/)
|
oh gotcha, yeah... a lot of my spam comes in on the snotmail address everything gets directed to :)
|
Sometimes, the best thing to do is nothing. (Score:3)
by Convergence (crosby@qwes.math.cmu.edu) on Thursday December 14, @09:22AM (#560777)
(User #64135 Info)
|
There are many evils in the world, but we let them continue because to
not let them continue would violate privacy, or freedom.
Incest happens, one way around it is to require that everyplace that
allows children is tape recorded to catch the bastards. A simpler and cheaper
alternative is to kill all children.
This is my solution.
Sometimes, when the only way to stop an evil is to do an even greater evil, the only sane thing to do is nothing.
|
You totally miss the point. (Score:3)
by dunster on Wednesday December 13, @06:18PM (#560778)
(User #66386 Info | http://www.abuzz.com)
|
You are quick off the starting line to point out that the RBL is a voluntary
thing. We've heard that before, and it is even true.
But, this article is about the fact that MAPS uses a very broad brush
to paint its spammers. In its zeal to stop spam, it is hurting people and
organizations that have never done anything wrong. MAPS has been accused
before of being arbitrary with its power, and this is some pretty compelling
backup to those accusations.
Frankly, I wish that a more moderate group than MAPS had taken the lead
in writing a blackhole list. I find their definition of spam to be to far-ranging.
I find their tactics to be abominable. I find their superior-that-thou
attitude to be offensive.
I hope that press like this will lead an alternative list-group to form, and more press will steer people to it.
MAPS can hide behind "free association" for a while. But if they continue
with practices and policies like this, I suspect that they will find few
willing to associate with them. |
As I read the %2 article (Score:4)
by z4ce on Wednesday December 13, @08:14PM (#560779)
(User #67861 Info)
|
|
I was rather shocked as I read RBL only blocks %2 of spam. I had heard
it blocked more around %90 of spam. As I clicked the article I learned the
"independent" study was sponsored by at&t's brightmail. Mindcraft anyone,
please? |
Re:I definately do not agree - (pro-MAPS) (Score:2)
by Zak3056 (phantomkell@yahoo.com) on Thursday December 14, @07:14AM (#560780)
(User #69287 Info)
|
Knowingly
distributing software to do that is like owning a gun shop; a customer comes
in and asks which gun and which bullet type go through flesh the best and
cause the most damage. Selling the gun to them is illegal because you know
they're going to use it to commit a crime.
Yeah, it's not like people lawfully use guns for self-defense, and
want the most effective weapon they can get for the money. Perish THAT thought,
anyone who cares about ballistics, velocity, energy transfer, or anything
else "technical" about the round MUST be a criminal, right?
|
Re:I definately do not agree - (pro-MAPS) (Score:2)
by Zak3056 (phantomkell@yahoo.com) on Friday December 15, @09:08AM (#560781)
(User #69287 Info)
|
|
For
the record, I live in Canada. I don't have to prove my point; Janet Reno
has already pointed out that Chicago and Toronto, two very similar (in population,
area, and climate) cities, have very disproportionate homicide rates: Toronto
in a bad year might have 75... Chicago has 1000.
It's interesting
to note that Chicago, IL, has some of the STRONGEST gun control laws in the
entire united states of america (being surpassed only by Washington D.C.,
another high crime area) and, in fact, handguns are COMPLETELY ILLEGAL
inside the city limits. One could therefore reasonably conclude that the
law has little, if nothing, to do with the rate of homicides in Chicago.
This truly begs the question: if the laws do no good, why did you pass them?
Why would you not repeal them? Why should law abiding citizens lose their
right to self-defense, when the criminals can carry any weapon they choose
to? The very phrase has become cliche, and is oft derided, but the simple
logic is hard to escape: When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.
As for the part about the guns, you bloody well know what I meant
Yes,
I did, and I am sorry for the heavily sarcastic response. It just pushes
my buttons to demonize an inaminate object (despite what some folks would
have you believe, guns do not possess the force of will) that over 80,000,000
people in the US use legally, without harming anyone. I'm sorry to have
vented on you.
|
I am on abovenet and have NO PROBLEM with those.. (Score:1)
by dynweb on Wednesday December 13, @06:11PM (#560782)
(User #69307 Info | Last Journal: Saturday August 25, @04:47PM)
|
I'm an abovenet customer and currently have NO PROBLEM contacting those
websites. Here's a traceroute from within abovenet if you care to see.
I only remove the first hop so I don't give away too much about myself.
Type escape sequence to abort.
Tracing the route to 209.211.253.38
1 mainx-xxx-xxx.sjc.above.net (xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx) 0 msec 0 msec 0 msec
2 core5-main2-oc3.sjc.above.net (216.200.0.205) 0 msec 4 msec 0 msec
3 core3-core5-oc48.sjc2.above.net (208.184.102.206) 0 msec 0 msec 0 msec
4 core5-core3-oc48.sjc2.above.net (208.185.156.66) 0 msec 4 msec 0 msec
5 nyc-sjc-oc12.nyc.above.net (208.185.156.162) 88 msec 92 msec 92 msec
6 qwest-nyc-oc12.above.net (208.185.156.26) 92 msec 88 msec 88 msec
7 205.171.30.17 88 msec 92 msec 92 msec
8 205.171.30.94 92 msec 92 msec 92 msec
9 205.171.38.14 100 msec 96 msec 100 msec
10 209.211.253.38 104 msec 100 msec 100 msec
|
You're still wrong (Score:1)
by mike_markley (mike@NOSPAM.markley.org) on Thursday December 14, @08:26AM (#560783)
(User #69586 Info | http://www.madhack.com/~madhack)
|
"But making these 1500 IP numbers vanish from the net -- which is exactly
what happens for any provider who subscribes to the RBL -- does not stop
any spam from getting through. They are not blocked because those servers
are sending unsolicited email, or any kind of e-mail for that matter." -
this is complete CRAP.
There are a number of ways to subscribe to the RBL. One is to BGP peer
with them and accept null routes to various places. Personally, I feel that
only a moron would pollute their routing tables like this, but here's the
sticking point: IT'S THEIR NETWORK. It's not your network. It's not the customer's
network. It's the provider's. You pay for the privelege of being allowed
to utilize your provider's network and servers. If you don't like how they
run things, try www.thelist.com and quit bitching.
Now, I first played with subscribing to the RBL over 2 years ago when
I got my first position doing postmaster duties. We came to the conclusion
that there were enough possible false positives that we didn't want to completely
block email from RBL'd (or ORBS'd, DUL'd, etc.) IPs, so we wrote a blockspam.m4
file for sendmail that adds an X-Spam: (RBL|ORBS|DUL) to each and every mail
that matches. This lets us set up filtering as need be, for ourselves and
for our customers. Currently, most popular mail servers (at least in the
*nix world, I don't know or care about the functionality of NT mailers) support
both using RBL-type services to block mail, and tagging mail with some sort
of header.
In short, jamie, you are full of shit. The difference between censorware
and MAPS is that censorware can only be used one way - you block stuff based
on some subjective definition of "offensive". MAPS just gives you the information
and lets you do whatever you want with it.
No MAPS subscriber has ever been forced to BGP peer with RBL, or even
to reject mail from MAPS-listed IPs. It's all about choice.
|
Additional data (Score:4)
by wowbagger on Wednesday December 13, @06:08PM (#560784)
(User #69688 Info | Last Journal: Wednesday August 29, @07:21AM)
|
Here's some other interesting data on Media3:
Spamhaus.org's ranking of spam supporters
Media3's list of active spamhausen
OK, on three, let's have a great big "Awww" for poor widdle Media3.
1....2....3.... BPPPPPPT!
|
Sorry, Jamie, you are way off base (Score:5)
by wowbagger on Wednesday December 13, @05:59PM (#560785)
(User #69688 Info | Last Journal: Wednesday August 29, @07:21AM)
|
Let's review:
- Media3 sells connectivity to a spammer
- Spammer sets up web site on that connection
- Spammer sends spam (by relay raping other peoples gear), advertising products that are sold on the Web site
Now, what can we do to end the spam?
- Play whack-a-mole on open relays? Nope
- Ignore it? Nope
No, you follow the money: the spammer makes his money when morons
go to the web site and by the spamware. Kill the web site, kill the cash
flow, kill the spammer's business.
Now, places like Media3 will say "But we aren't spamming!" No, but they are giving aid and comfort to the enemy. So, what do you do to get Media3 to close down the spammer?
Follow the money
You make it unprofitable for Media3 to host the spammer. You do this
by driving business away from Media3. You do that by blackholing enough of
their customers that Media3 says "We are losing money doing this. Let's not
do this anymore!"
Rememer Spamford Wallace, the uberspammer? Ageis communications was providing
cyberpromotions.com with bandwidth, and by God they weren't going to stop.
Then they got blackholed, and many of their customers left. Faced with losing
money, they dropped Spamford like a hot rock.
Remember: follow the money. It's always about the money. If somebody says it's not about the money, it's about the money.
I say, "GO MAPS GO!"
|
I will continue to use MAPS RBL (Score:3)
by Keefesis (xrrs@xrrs.lv.bet <-ROT-13) on Wednesday December 13, @05:48PM (#560786)
(User #70341 Info)
|
I run a mail server and employ the MAPS's RBL and ORBS's DULs to save
me the headache of some spam. A while ago I was informed of ORBS's encounters
with Above.net and Paulie Vix. I think Paul Vix is an incredible horrible
person and his methods are evil (Above.net routers were advertising routes
for ORBS, then dropping any packets they attracted according to the orbs
site.)ORBS
seems to have stopped proclaiming the evilness of MAPS openly, but you can
still see many statements on the site leading to that assumption. So,
this will not stop me from using RBL, it works for me, as my web traffic
is not in any way related to my mail traffic or MAPS. I don't endorse Paul
Vix or MAPS, but the level of spam I recieve is disgusting, anything I can
do to cut down on it I will. As a matter of fact, I personally block any
spamming servers (i.e. sprintmail.com) that the RBL's and DUL's refuse to
block, yet it seems I get more and more SPAM every day. Perhaps we need
more of those exocution-style killings of spammers like we had in MA a few
years back.
|
Re:MAPS != censorship. (Score:2)
by dbarclay10 on Wednesday December 13, @09:06PM (#560787)
(User #70443 Info | http://markybobdeb.sourceforge.net/)
|
That's like saying only a government can have an army and go out and raid people.
Sure, that's what it's supposed to be like, but something like that has to be enforced.
If someone is censoring someone else, it's still censoring, even if they're not the government.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
|
Re:Horay! (Score:1)
by plague3106 (ajj3085@rit.edu.no.spam) on Thursday December 14, @07:07AM (#560788)
(User #71849 Info)
|
Oh,
and BTW... ISPs have every right to decide what goes on their network. Its
*their* property. Abovenet have decided not to allow hosts that are in the
RBL to transit their network. Thats fine...
Oh no they do
not have that right. They lose that right when you start paying for internet
access. My apartment complex cannot tell me what kind of pictures (ie, of
flowers, car, etc) i can hang in my apt. They can only specify that i don't
hang them in such a was as to destory the apt. Sending and receiving data
is not destorying the network; in fact that is what its purpose is. |
Re:Horay! (Score:1)
by plague3106 (ajj3085@rit.edu.no.spam) on Thursday December 14, @06:17PM (#560789)
(User #71849 Info)
|
1) peacefire.org was not accused of sending spam.
2) MAPS blocks almost no spam.
I never said i liked spam. In fact, i was repsonding to someones comments
that the ISP can anything they like for any reason they like. |
Re:We're a victim too.... (Score:1)
by MKalus (`ten.amws' `ta' `ahcim') on Wednesday December 13, @08:16PM (#560790)
(User #72765 Info | http://www.swma.net)
|
I doubt that our ISP is a Spamhouse,
As far as I can tell the c class belongs to dedicated server, in which case they are only providing the pipe.
We had the server open for a brief period after recompiling sendmail
and having a misconfiguration, the ISP catched it and informed us, so I think
they do a lot to make sure that doesn't happen. |
We're a victim too.... (Score:2)
by MKalus (`ten.amws' `ta' `ahcim') on Wednesday December 13, @06:50PM (#560791)
(User #72765 Info | http://www.swma.net)
|
A couple of days ago one of my Co Admins found out that we where also
blacklisted, not we directly as our site / ip is not listed but the whole
c-class.
When we contacted them and asked to be removed we got sent to interliant
as they are the owner of the c class, and apparantly haven't reacted in the
past to certain demands.
So fine, we have apparantly 4 IPs in our C class that are an open relay or have been and we are now as f**** as they are.
Thank you.
Michael
http://www.swma.net
|
Re:services like this (Score:1)
by ahodgson on Wednesday December 13, @05:49PM (#560792)
(User #74077 Info)
|
Well, if by leaving your house open, you effectively make it easy for
a crook to get into my house without a key, then your analogy would make
sense. And you can be sure people would be running up and down the street
checking locks to make sure they work.
|
Re:My objection to the MAPS RBL is over (Score:1)
by Doug Lim (dlim@enteract.com) on Tuesday December 19, @12:50PM (#560793)
(User #74538 Info)
|
|
> Basicly they have lost prospective. I still refuse to have anything to do with RBLs filters. For more on RBLs past go here
Do you believe everything you read on the web?!
Here's something citing something straight from the horse's... er... IFN.
http://www.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=670664 883&fmt=text
In
particular, note the following excerpt of IFN's response to those who dare
complain about spam sent by IFN customers or spamvertising IFN hosted web
sites
Finally, we reserve the right to charge a fee to the
complainant to pursue complaints about email messages not in violation of
California or federal law.
Yep, since there's a lot of real spam that isn't considered
illegal under current California laws and there are currently no federal
laws stating that spam is illegal, that essentially boils down to, "Yes,
we know our customers may be responsible for spamming (directly from our
network or from elsewhere to promote their IFN-hosted web site), but we really
don't want to hear about it or take responsibility for our spamming customers,
and we'll do whatever we can to discourage people from even filing otherwise
appropriate complaints."
|
RBL gets my support (Score:1)
by bruns (bruns&2mbit,com) on Wednesday December 13, @07:27PM (#560794)
(User #75399 Info | http://www.2mbit.com/)
|
At the rate spam is coming these days, I praise RBL's attemps to block
some of it, even if it does get in the way of websites for innocents. Maybe
if these innocents all complained to their providers to dump the spammers
and their websites, the RBL would not have to block them.
The ISP where I work has a strict anti-spam policy - you do it once and
your gone. Website, mail, dialup, DSL, etc. GONE. You offer spamming tools
on your website hosted with us, get ready to find it gone the next day.
The only way to stop the spammers is to force the providers which host
them to dump them. I have full faith in RBL and its goals. I do NOT though
appreicate ORBS. Several times I have dealt with ORBS blocking out people,
refusing to remove them, and all sorts of fun stuff which makes that list
seem like something for revenge.
Oh well, its not like you are required to use RBL. If you dont like
it, find another provider who doesn't care about spam and enjoy. |
Re:So you check up on it.. (Score:1)
by Tau Zero ((Fake Email)) on Wednesday December 13, @06:47PM (#560795)
(User #75868 Info)
|
|
If the domain is being black-holed by the router, do you have any logs
to check? Would you have any content to examine to confirm that the mail
was spam?
Apparently this incident involves the global (not just e-mail) black-holing
of all IP addresses held by a spammer-friendly ISP. The ISP hosts a site
which sells spamware. Their placement on the RBL is designed to get their
customers to decamp; the ISP has the option of choosing to keep the spamware-providers,
or the rest of them. If the ISP is not pressured by hitting them in the
revenue stream, they have no reason to quit providing service to the spamware-provider.
I happen to agree with MAPS. This time.
"
/ \ ASCII ribbon against e-mail
\ / in HTML and M$ proprietary formats.
X
/ \
|
Re:So you check up on it.. (Score:1)
by Tau Zero ((Fake Email)) on Thursday December 14, @05:33AM (#560796)
(User #75868 Info)
|
you forget that in some areas customers have no option to decamp.
Web sites always
have the option to decamp. Content can be hosted anywhere. This is why
there is no excuse for the ISP to host the spamware-vendor. Block the single static ip thats being used for abusing...thats ok.
Is it only okay because it has no impact on the ISP?
your attitude to forced censorship of major routes/backbones on the internet is totally disgusting.
That got a chuckle. First, it isn't forced (MAPS is totally voluntary )
and second, it isn't censorship, it's a counter-attack upon an ISP committing
treason to the Internet (giving aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war,
and make no mistake, this is war). I don't see how you can live
with yourself when you are claiming up and down that SPAMSUCKS on the one
hand but defending an ISP's declaration of war on your mailbox on the other
hand. Isn't your head threatening to explode under the pressure of the contradictions?
"
/ \ ASCII ribbon against e-mail
\ / in HTML and M$ proprietary formats.
X
/ \
|
Re:Exactly (Score:2)
by Tau Zero ((Fake Email)) on Wednesday December 13, @06:15PM (#560797)
(User #75868 Info)
|
What I don't understand is why anybody is using MAPS for anything other than their mail server.
If the spam came through an open relay but the spammer's web site was on
the RBL, the spammer would not get any click-throughs nor would any of their
web bugs, Javascript/ActiveX exploits, or other tricks work. It's not the
best reason in the world for blackholing a site for all access, but it's
at least plausible.
"
/ \ ASCII ribbon against e-mail
\ / in HTML and M$ proprietary formats.
X
/ \
|
Re:Is the RBL really being used for HTTP? (Score:2)
by Tau Zero ((Fake Email)) on Wednesday December 13, @06:32PM (#560798)
(User #75868 Info)
|
There's a legitimate reason to do that, and that's to pressure the ISP
to stop hosting providers of spam-ware. Black-holing sites which provide
web-hosting for spammers is probably justified too; see response 162.
"
/ \ ASCII ribbon against e-mail
\ / in HTML and M$ proprietary formats.
X
/ \
|
About Damn Time (Score:1)
by TheShadow on Wednesday December 13, @11:14PM (#560799)
(User #76709 Info)
|
|
I'm glad someone has finally gathered up the balls to sue these bastards.
The RBL is a bunch of crap. If one (and I've seen this happen) website
in a class C is either spamming, allowing spam to pass through it's mailserver,
advertising any type of software that would be used to spam, or just generally
being in favor of spam, these fuckers blacklist the whole damn subnet.
It's like a teacher punishing the whole class because of the students wrote
a bad word on the chalkboard. It's simply not right. I don't give a damn
what you anti-spam zealots say. Punishing everyone because of one bad apple
is a load of crap. Everyone gets all pissed off about spam and this
and that. Just delete the fucking mail. It's not that hard... yeah it's
a pain in the ass but it's easier to hit 'D' in pine then it is to route
through your postal mail and throw away that junk. If we continue to let
the RBL and similar methods run their course, we will eventually just close
up port 25 and be done with it. In fact, they way things are going, we may
as well just shutdown the whole internet... Hey, at least there won't be
anymore porn for the little kiddies to get their hands on. Blacklisting
"spammer" IP subnets is just like any of the other censorware out there.
It's just like "targeted taxcuts", it's just like UCITA and the DMCA. It's
a bunch of crap that no one who was a brain in their head can do anything
about because the idiots have already ruined it. |
Re:Sorry, Jamie, you are way off base (Score:2)
by jesser on Wednesday December 13, @07:38PM (#560800)
(User #77961 Info | http://www.squarefree.com/bookmarklets/)
|
What if the spam is sent in a way that hides the originating IP address,
and then the owner of the website claims "I didn't send that spam; my competitors
sent it to try to get my site shut down"? What do you do in that case?
--
|
Re:Fuck off, Commie Pinko (Score:1)
by MemeRot (memerot@hotmail.com) on Thursday December 14, @07:38AM (#560801)
(User #80975 Info | http://www.acidplane...p?ArtistName=Memerot)
|
|
ARGGH!!! How is blocking peacefire.org, who has never spammed anyone,
or even been accused of it, stopping spam? And how is it not censoring? |
Re:You don't have the choice. (Score:1)
by MemeRot (memerot@hotmail.com) on Thursday December 14, @07:49AM (#560802)
(User #80975 Info | http://www.acidplane...p?ArtistName=Memerot)
|
I sent email to earthlink asking if they use MAPS when I first read about
it. The people answering me had no idea what I was talking about. They
thought I wanted help setting up my email account. After going back five
or six times and sending them a ton of info on what I was talking about they
said no. I don't believe them. I think they just got tired of me and could
tell that I wanted them to say no. I don't think my inquiry ever made it
to anyone who could tell me the answer to my question.
By the way.... DID YOU READ THE ARTICLE ASSHOLE? This wasn't
an issue of one ip being added, this was an issue of they added the first
three sets of numbers 999.999.999.xxx AND ALL THE POSSIBLE last sets of numbers.
So, to answer your question, it took NO EFFORT for peacefire.org to get
their ip added, because it was added wrongly. Not that anyone dares argue
with maps about it, lest they get added also.
|
Why don't you read the article? (Score:1)
by MemeRot (memerot@hotmail.com) on Thursday December 14, @08:40AM (#560803)
(User #80975 Info | http://www.acidplane...p?ArtistName=Memerot)
|
MAPS blocks nothing. It IS commonly used to drop email from ip addresses
in it. BUT THE POINT OF THE ARTICLE is that Above.net was using it in their
router tables to drop ALL packets, including http. Get it?
I hate people that don't read the article and then call the writer a lunatic. Does that seem like a sane thing to do to you?
|
Wrong. (Score:1)
by MemeRot (memerot@hotmail.com) on Thursday December 14, @08:53AM (#560804)
(User #80975 Info | http://www.acidplane...p?ArtistName=Memerot)
|
Do you know what peacefire is? You think they should switch isps because
they're being censored. Yeah, right. That's exactly what peacefire will
do, just roll over and do exactly what their censor wants them to. I don't
think so.
I saw nothing in this article about Media3 allowing spammers, nothing about
open relay mail servers, nothing like that. When did the RBL come to include
companies that sell spam software? I thought it was a list of spammers.
What else does this company sell? Do you know? Beats me. They probably
sell a lot of other evil shit, ways to track users, etc. The spam software
is probably a minor part of the company. I don't think this falls into the
original mission of the rbl. What about companies that sell real world mailing
lists? Should their ip be blocked? What about companies that do anything
else we dont like? It's a slippery slope. This company is never accused
of spamming. Just of provideing software. What about the companies that
sell the hardware the program runs on? Guess we'd better blacklist Sun and
Dell, someone could be using their machines to send spam. Once the mission
creeps, they lose credibility. Period.
|
Crime? (Score:1)
by MemeRot (memerot@hotmail.com) on Thursday December 14, @09:38AM (#560805)
(User #80975 Info | http://www.acidplane...p?ArtistName=Memerot)
|
Give me a break. Can you show me the law that's being violated? Guess
what buddy, intangible thing like network resources, intellectual property,
etc. ARE NOT covered by property laws.
I am amazed that you think that denying people whose http requests just
happened to pass through above.net's network access to peacefire.org's web
page is anything other than censorship. It clearly states on the MAPS page
'give each site an ip so that we don't have to block hundreds to block one'.
The assumption being that your entire client base wouldn't be added to the
list for the actions of one site - since just that site's ip can be added
to the list. You remind me of the hacker groups that are out shutting down
warez sites - who brag and brag about their severely criminal behavior in
shutting down international sites in countries that may or may not be signatories
to the treaties that make copyright infringement a crime at all.
The solution is worse than the problem. I think it has now been clearly
shown that the rbl list can be abused for purposes that have nothing to blocking
spam, the only reason anyone decided to implement it in the first place.
|
It's slandering the innocent (Score:4)
by kevin805 (kevin805@hotmail.com) on Thursday December 14, @12:21AM (#560806)
(User #84623 Info)
|
If someone took out an ad in the newspaper and said, "Bennet Haselton"
is a spammer, that would be libel. How is it different to say, "Here's a
list of sites run by spammers ... 209.211.253.169 ..."? Well, 209.211.253.169
is peacefire.org, Bennet Haselton runs peacefire.org, so they're saying he's
a spammer, which he isn't.
It's not about whether it's reasonable to twist the arms of the hosting
companies, it's about misrepresenting what it is you're providing. If a censorware
package included a category that said "anti-filtering sites or redirect services",
and said you better leave it turned on, that wouldn't be a problem. But when
they list all the anti-filtering sites, babelfish, anonymizer and so-on in
every category, that's misrepresenting what you're doing.
I read some of MAPS site and it implies that it's pretty hard to get
on the list without doing something you shouldn't be. But this isn't the
case. "A site being advertised as a target on multiple spam messages may
be placed on the MAPS RBL. We assume that the site knows that it is being
advertised in this manner". That's a pretty big assumption when you go blocking
class C's. I can't find any mention of using the RBL for punishing ISPs as
they seem to be doing in this case. Do all their subscribers know they are
using it to punish ISPs? Would those subscribers continue to use the RBL
if they knew it was blocking large numbers of sites that have no connection
to spam other than having the same ISP?
I'm really curious what MAPS contract looks like. They don't have it
up on their webpage, and it's the only thing that would exactly address what
they claim their service is. Personally, I'd love it if sites would cancel
an account if it's at all connected to spamming, even if it isn't where it's
sent from. I know geocities does because I've forwarded a few pieces of spam
to abuse there. I don't think I'd want the "feature" of being prevented from
viewing the sites of anyone hosted on a server that is also used by a spammer.
|
God bless the RBL!!! (Score:1)
by supabeast! (supabeast@supabeast.org) on Wednesday December 13, @07:40PM (#560807)
(User #84658 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
|
The RBL screws over all the customers of an ISP that hosts companies that sell bulk emailing software.
GOOD.
Eventually RBL use will continue to grow and grow, and the customers
of the blocked ISPs will find new ISPs that have the decency to tell anyone
who has anything to do with spamming just where to stick it.
I hope the RBL wins this case, and I hope Media3 finally breaks down
and kicks off the spammers, and spam software makers, who will in turn keep
getting kicked from one ISP to the next until they go under from lack of
a decent online presence.
|
Re:services like this (Score:2)
by mr on Wednesday December 13, @08:57PM (#560808)
(User #88570 Info)
|
And where does ORBS obtain the authority to probe *MY* machine?
What right does ORBS have in 'walking around my house and checking to see if I have open doors/open windows'?
|
sure, follow the money... (Score:2)
by god_of_the_machine (slashdot.SPAM.ME.NOT@ryanthiessen.com) on Wednesday December 13, @07:20PM (#560809)
(User #90151 Info | http://www.ryanthiessen.com)
|
You
make it unprofitable for Media3 to host the spammer. You do this by driving
business away from Media3. You do that by blackholing enough of their customers
that Media3 says "We are losing money doing this. Let's not do this anymore
Sure... now take the Above.net perspective. Their customers are complaining that they cannot reach non-spamming sites. Follow the money.
What does above.net (or another business) do? They have to ingore the RBL
or else their customers will get pissed off and leave(or route packets through
somewhere else). Follow the money. The RBL will lose all power if it blocks non-spam related sites or over-reacts too much.
-rt-
|
MAPS is *seige* *warfare* (Score:2)
by Seth Finkelstein (sethf [at-sign] sethf.com) on Thursday December 14, @12:20PM (#560810)
(User #90154 Info | http://sethf.com/)
|
|
MAPS is the equivalent of blockades and total
sanctions. Every man, women, and child (i.e.
site) in the targeted country (i.e. ISP) is
going to be made to suffer, under the theory
that they will then be motivated to fight
the enemy (the spammer or all supporters).
War Is Hell :-(
|
Strategic Hint: MRBL (Score:1)
by rakslice (amtonner@n_o_s_p_a_m.uwaterloo.ca) on Wednesday December 13, @07:38PM (#560811)
(User #90330 Info)
|
|
Time for a Meta RBL. Block known RBL-using sites. (Or hey, why not whole netblocks? =)
|
Duh. (Score:1)
by rakslice (amtonner@n_o_s_p_a_m.uwaterloo.ca) on Wednesday December 13, @07:41PM (#560812)
(User #90330 Info)
|
|
Ok, let's ban all sites about operating systems with sendmail ports because, woah, sendmail can be used to send spam!
|
Re:Horay! (Score:1)
by rakslice (amtonner@n_o_s_p_a_m.uwaterloo.ca) on Wednesday December 13, @07:56PM (#560813)
(User #90330 Info)
|
|
Escalation
of listings past single hosts is also known about, this happens when the
provider continues to allow the spamming to continue, or moves the host around
the netblock to avoid the RBL listing.
I agree on your assessments of the rights involved. Personally,
I didn't know about the "escalation" provisions (essentially massive provider
boycotting). I can see their point of view on the issue...
They could at least have the courtesy to contact the owners of the individual
sites, though. I don't particularly mind if they continue causing more and
more collateral damage... My guess is that the related publicity can only
shrink their userbase to virtually nothing.
|
Why can't you just switch ISPs? (Score:2)
by fhwang on Wednesday December 13, @05:52PM (#560814)
(User #90412 Info | http://metropolitic.net)
|
|
If I understand it correctly, you should be able to simply find another
provider who is not on the RBL, switch over, and change the DNS settings
for the domain name. A hassle, sure, but not the permanent clusterfuck you
portray it as. (And I'm quite confused as to why crossalizer.de moved to
crossalizer.com, too.) I work at a web shop, and when we make hosting decisions, we've had
to make the decision to switch away from an ISP that's on the RBL. Sure,
it's a little extra work, but I guess I'm happier that I know that the ISP
is harboring spammers, and that they're losing our company's business as
a result. |
Change WEB hosts. (Score:1)
by wharfrat (martin at mcwhorter dot org) on Wednesday December 13, @07:27PM (#560815)
(User #90464 Info)
|
It is simple. peacefire.org and all other legit sites should just dump there ISP if they get themselves in the RBL.
MAPS RBL may not be the best solution at blocking SPAM. But it scares the
hell out of spammers and ISPs that don't hold up there AUPs.
It is an easy answer. Just change your ISP. Simple.
|
MAPS is in the right (Score:1)
by bowood (bowood@faradic.net) on Wednesday December 13, @05:27PM (#560816)
(User #91384 Info | http://www.faradic.net/)
|
|
Once you have seen spam from an ISP's angle you realize how beligerant
something like MAPS must be in order to be at all effective. |
Re:Fuck off, Commie Pinko (Score:1)
by bowood (bowood@faradic.net) on Wednesday December 13, @05:55PM (#560817)
(User #91384 Info | http://www.faradic.net/)
|
|
Not only did I read the article but I've been using MAPS for years on
every sendmail server that I admin. In fact the most recent versions of
sendmail have MAPS turned on by default. Currently we have customers who
get 10-20times more spam then they get valid email. Without MAPS that figure
would be even higher. MAPS kills off the most egregious offenders. This
is not censorship of ideas or speech, it is a collective effort of ISPs to
defend against: 1. trespass 2. theft of telecomunication services 3.
harassment 4. denial of service attacks "The war won't be over until
the last spammer's head is stuck onto a spear at the city limits." [Paul
Vixie, NANOG mailing list, Sept.1997] |
Mission Creep (Score:3)
by frankie (yahoo_com@francis.uy) on Thursday December 14, @06:34AM (#560818)
(User #91710 Info | http://uyf.tripod.com/)
|
|
They aren't harboring spammers, but they are harboring spam-tool makers.
The main problem is that this level of blocking goes far beyond the original intent of the RBL. The Blackhole was only supposed to block known current sources of spam. Over the years it has experienced mission creep and now goes after spam accomplices (e.g. affiliated web pages & email boxes) as well as accessories (e.g. email harvesting software). That is too many tasks for a single list!
RBL's original mission is a good idea, and could even be palatable to major backbone providers. For example, imagine if Verizon and UUnet
were subscribers to the more-focused version. Millions of people would be
better off instantly. Within months, RBL would put itself out of business
-- anyone on the list would scramble like mad to get off or else go out of
business from lack of traffic.
MAPS has already implemented multiple
parallel lists -- RBL, RSS, DUL, etc. It's time to break up the RBL into
3 separate components with appropriately narrow targets.
|
Re:Works for me (Score:1)
by Deosyne (a_111@hotmail.com) on Thursday December 14, @01:21AM (#560819)
(User #92713 Info | http://smokedot.org)
|
But I reserve the right to tell my computers not to talk to yours.
And
to tell all of your customers computers not to talk to them as well. Unless,
of course, you are some insanely rich guy that has a pipe directly into a
backbone and doesn't pay for it by taking money from other people in exchange
for Internet access, in which case I revoke my last statement. Ain't it great
being an end user in these techie pissing contests; you just never know what
the fuck you'll be able to access because the people that you pay for service
have a personal agenda.
I hate spammers more than anyone I know,
and would love to execute every one of them personally, but the RBL is just
a tool for ISPs to screw their customer base as a means of making a statement.
Its using a shotgun to treat an parasite; sure, the parasite's dead, but
the patient is severely fucked as well. Being a tech support puke for an
ISP myself, the people I feel most sorry for are the support folk at the
ISPs who are RBL members once this shit hits the mainstream press, considering
the fit that customers will throw just because their access to some sites
is slower than others. When they find that they're being cut off from huge
numbers of websites because MAPS decided to start playing dick size games
with web hosting services... *shudder* The end and the means, blah, blah,
blah.
Deo
Terradot.org: Growing Awareness
|
So what? (Score:1)
by bradipo (nospam@spammaps.org) on Wednesday December 13, @07:54PM (#560820)
(User #94457 Info | http://www.xmission.com/)
|
|
So what? Even if someone thinks it is "censorware" there are still people
using it that see it as a viable alternative to combatting spam. It is their
choice, no one is forcing them to use it. In addition, if you subscribe
to an ISP that actively uses RBL and decide you don't like it, what's to
stop you from signing up with another ISP? If I tell my employees that they
can't view porno on company machines is this censoring? No, because I pay
their bills and I own the equipment, connection, facility, etc and they are
required to use it based on my rules and policies. Same holds for an ISP.
If I they don't like the rules they can find another job---if I don't like
my ISP using RBL, I can find another ISP. End of story. |
Additional source material (Score:2)
by Argy on Wednesday December 13, @09:18PM (#560821)
(User #95352 Info)
|
If you look at
spamhaus.org's page on marketingmasters.com,
in addition to tidbits like the last four ISPs from which they've been terminated,
you'll find the reasons cited for blackholing marketingmasters.com's IP address,
as well as blackholing Media3.net's other addresses. This is part of MAPS
RBL SOP (standard operating procedure). You may not like what they do, but
they're operating within their guidelines here.
Under MAPS
RBL clause III of Blackholing Due to Spam Support Services, the IP address
209.211.253.74 is now elegible for addition to the RBL.
Under
MAPS RBL clause IX of Blackholing Due to Spam Support Services, if the host
media3.net is knowingly providing Spam Support Services by knowingly hosting
the marketingmasters.com Spam Service Site, parts of (up to all of) media3.net's
netblock may be nominated to the MAPS RBL.
If you want to read the clauses directly, check out http://www.mail-abuse.org/rbl/candidacy.html#ByAss ociation,
which outlines the criteria and reasons for including spam support companies
in the RBL. The essence of their criteria is "providing any service which
uses internet resources to support spamming activity," although they go into
more detail as well. |
Re:Bullshit (Score:1)
by Temporal (temporal@[homepage]) on Thursday December 14, @08:26AM (#560822)
(User #96070 Info | http://www.gauge3d.org | Last Journal: Saturday August 18, @11:54PM)
|
Actually, yes I did know that. And it's wrong, is it not?
------
|
Bullshit (Score:3)
by Temporal (temporal@[homepage]) on Wednesday December 13, @08:38PM (#560823)
(User #96070 Info | http://www.gauge3d.org | Last Journal: Saturday August 18, @11:54PM)
|
|
By
your logic, the United Nations should start killing Iraqi men, women, and
children until Sadam Hussein steps down. Hey, it would work. Once all the
citizens are dead, Sadam will have no one to rule over, and will thus no
longer have power. By your logic, it is perfectly reasonable for the RIAA to shut down
Napster. After all, Napster is harboring far more copyright infringers than
Media3 is hosting spammers. By your logic, if I go on a shooting rampage and kill 14 people
in my dorm, not only am *I* to blame, but so is everyone else in the dorm,
as well as the dorm supervisor, the University of Minnesota, my parents,
my friends, and, hell, Slashdot even. I mean, I've seen double-standards, but this is rediculous. And you got score 5, even. Huh.
------
|
|
Power, unchecked, corrupting as usual ( |
MAPS RBL Is Now Censorware (Updated)