Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.
1822 views

Which DNSBL was bad again?

Was it zen.spamhaus.org?



Labels (1)
0 Likes
21 Replies
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Which DNSBL was bad again?

On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:05:37 +0000, Craig wrote:

> Was it zen.spamhaus.org?


What do you mean by bad? zen.spamhaus.org is valid but because of what it
does I personally fear it could be a bit overzealous, so I use sbl-xbl.
Now if by bad do you mean what's the one that says everything is
blacklisted, that's relays.ordb.org. If you use that one you won't get
any mail.

--
Joe
"Those of you who think you know everything are annoying to those of us who do."

0 Likes
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Which DNSBL was bad again?

That was it. I think it is overzealous, but was blending it and ordb into
one.


"Joseph Marton" <jmartonNO@SPAMhsemuni.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2008.07.30.17.10.25.975548@SPAMhsemuni.com...
> On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:05:37 +0000, Craig wrote:
>
>> Was it zen.spamhaus.org?

>
> What do you mean by bad? zen.spamhaus.org is valid but because of what it
> does I personally fear it could be a bit overzealous, so I use sbl-xbl.
> Now if by bad do you mean what's the one that says everything is
> blacklisted, that's relays.ordb.org. If you use that one you won't get
> any mail.
>
> --
> Joe
> "Those of you who think you know everything are annoying to those of us
> who do."
>



0 Likes
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Which DNSBL was bad again?

Craig wrote:
> Was it zen.spamhaus.org?
>
>
>


I hope for a future where blacklist die a horrible death and the people
who maintain them are run out of town. I don't like blacklist because I
believe the people who maintain them tend to use them to bully people.

I look forward to a day when we have a really good e-mail system that
thwarts spam in a way that doesn't cause collateral damage and doesn't
allow people to bully others.

That's just my opinion.

--
Matthew - The Great System Tyrant
--------------------------------------
http://www.mattography.net/
http://www.matthewdgood.com/
http://www.systemtyrant.com/
0 Likes
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Which DNSBL was bad again?

Craig spewed:

> Was it zen.spamhaus.org?


I used to use this one until they listed ATT. Started getting complaints
from field users trying to relay off my server with their phone that they
were being blocked.

Lance
0 Likes
grimlock1 Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Which DNSBL was bad again?

Matthew wrote:
> Craig wrote:
>> Was it zen.spamhaus.org?
>>
>>
>>

>
> I hope for a future where blacklist die a horrible death and the people
> who maintain them are run out of town. I don't like blacklist because I
> believe the people who maintain them tend to use them to bully people.
>
> I look forward to a day when we have a really good e-mail system that
> thwarts spam in a way that doesn't cause collateral damage and doesn't
> allow people to bully others.
>
> That's just my opinion.
>


You aren't obligated to use black lists and they block mail going to you
if you don't use them.
0 Likes
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Which DNSBL was bad again?

Patrick Farrell wrote:
> You aren't obligated to use black lists and they block mail going to you
> if you don't use them.


No I'm not obligated to use them.

Some blacklist maintainers have used those list to bully ISPs and even
business into doing what they wanted even though no spam had ever come
from their servers. Now I'm not saying that they threating to break
knee caps or anything like that, but maybe they don't like the way a
business has a online server setup so they add the IP to the blacklist
even though no spam has ever been reported from that IP address. That's
wrong. Period. I don't care if the server is an open relay.

And worst of all theres no legal recourse. Even if a blacklist
maintainer adds the IP address of a business it simply doesn't like to
it's list the business has no real legal grounds to stand on. Since, as
you put it, the blacklist maintainer doesn't make anybody use the list.

So in my opinion, whilst blacklist may be "a" solution, it is far from a
good one, but most people don't care until there e-mail get's
blacklisted for a week.

--
Matthew - The Great System Tyrant
--------------------------------------
http://www.mattography.net/
http://www.matthewdgood.com/
http://www.systemtyrant.com/
0 Likes
adrockk Contributor.
Contributor.

Re: Which DNSBL was bad again?

Patrick Farrell spewed:

> they block mail going to you if you don't use them.


How so?

--


0 Likes
Knowledge Partner
Knowledge Partner

Re: Which DNSBL was bad again?

Lance,

Lance Reynolds wrote:
>
> Craig spewed:
>
> > Was it zen.spamhaus.org?

>
> I used to use this one until they listed ATT. Started getting complaints
> from field users trying to relay off my server with their phone that they
> were being blocked.


Umm, that is precisely part of the purpose of that list.

CU,
--
Massimo Rosen
Novell Product Support Forum Sysop
No emails please!
http://www.cfc-it.de
CU,
--
Massimo Rosen
Micro Focus Knowledge Partner
No emails please!
http://www.cfc-it.de
0 Likes
grimlock1 Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Which DNSBL was bad again?

Adam Gabriel wrote:
> Patrick Farrell spewed:
>
>> they block mail going to you if you don't use them.

>
> How so?
>


Please insert "can't" between block and mail so that it makes sense..
0 Likes
michael8 Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Which DNSBL was bad again?

Patrick
>>> they block mail going to you if you don't use them.

>>
>> How so?
>>

>
> Please insert "can't" between block and mail so that it makes sense..


They block can't mail going to you if you don't use them?
Brilliant 😉

Michael
--
"This is the curse of Jeff Murdoch. I meet the woman of my dreams and I
can't take my trousers off."

"This is the curse of Jeff Murdoch. I meet the woman of my dreams and I can't take my trousers off."
0 Likes
adrockk Contributor.
Contributor.

Re: Which DNSBL was bad again?

MichaelC spewed:

> They block can't mail going to you if you don't use them?


But I need my "can't mail" !


--


0 Likes
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Which DNSBL was bad again?

Massimo Rosen spewed:

> Umm, that is precisely part of the purpose of that list.
>
> CU,


I know but these are my users, and they're supposed to be able to using SMTP
authentication.

Lance
0 Likes
Anonymous_User Absent Member.
Absent Member.

Re: Which DNSBL was bad again?

Perhaps you were thinking of SPEWS, which is no longer updated?

The real problem with DNSBL, as I see it, is that many web sites are hosted
on the same server these days.

Therefore, 200 domains, owned by different people, but sharing one IP
address, may get black-listed if just one of them sends spam.

Unless everyone hosts in-house on static IP addresses, there will be
problems with DNSBL.

I prefer programs which evaluate and score emails, such as SpamAssassin,
allowing you to choose your own threshhold. SpamAssassin uses black lists,
but only to form a part of the overall score.

-Bob Carroll

"Craig" <tech@no-spam-novoco.com> wrote in message
news:Bb1kk.13042$g35.5897@kovat.provo.novell.com...
> Was it zen.spamhaus.org?
>
>
>



0 Likes
Knowledge Partner
Knowledge Partner

Re: Which DNSBL was bad again?

Lance,

Lance Reynolds wrote:
>
> Massimo Rosen spewed:
>
> > Umm, that is precisely part of the purpose of that list.
> >
> > CU,

>
> I know but these are my users, and they're supposed to be able to using SMTP
> authentication.


But RBLs come first. You'll never have a chance to authenticate. You'll
need a seperate SMTP gateway for relaying.

CU,
--
Massimo Rosen
Novell Product Support Forum Sysop
No emails please!
http://www.cfc-it.de
CU,
--
Massimo Rosen
Micro Focus Knowledge Partner
No emails please!
http://www.cfc-it.de
0 Likes
The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of Micro Focus. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use and Rules of Participation. Certain versions of content ("Material") accessible here may contain branding from Hewlett-Packard Company (now HP Inc.) and Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company. As of September 1, 2017, the Material is now offered by Micro Focus, a separately owned and operated company. Any reference to the HP and Hewlett Packard Enterprise/HPE marks is historical in nature, and the HP and Hewlett Packard Enterprise/HPE marks are the property of their respective owners.