Results 76 to 100 of 182
-
10-19-2002, 03:47 PM #76Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2000
- Location
- Southern California
- Posts
- 12,136
Originally posted by trif
I have a perfect understanding of how spammers send spam.
There is only a limited amount of IP addresses, and with more and more spammers sending out spam, hopping from host to host, more and more of these IP blocks are going to be blocked until the list is completely useless (as if it isn't already). Sure you can block all IP ranges and that will stop spam, but that is the solution? You can't be serious?
As I said, anyone who uses SPEWS does not have an understanding of how spammers send spam, and does not have an understanding of how to block spam.0
-
10-19-2002, 04:04 PM #77Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2000
- Location
- Southern California
- Posts
- 12,136
Bob, we've discussed this before...
Originally posted by TMX
That someone can make a blanket statement like that shows that they have little or no understanding of why people use spews, why spews works the way it does...
It also illustrates how little they understand about the history of spam-blocking methods, what methods have been tried in the past, and which ones have failed spectacularly - chiefly, the listing of individual IPs. This was done for years, and look where it got us.
A - ISP wakes up and starts getting rid of spammers
B - Non-spamming customers leave irresponsible ISP for greener pastures
or
C: ISP does nothing, continues to allow customers to spam, and gets entire IP range listed as a result...
[quote]A recent (and ongoing) example:
<snip>[quote]
Great Bob, two cases where this worked. Care to list any cases where this doesn't work? Or are you telling me that this system always works? It doesn't.
You know Chicken, you're just wrong here, but if you feel that calling people with whom you disagree "hopeless and incompetent" somehow bolsters your argument, I certainly won't get in your way.
Your Domino crack deal analogy isn't worth addressing, sorry. Maybe someone else will point out why.
Finally, here's the biggie - just as you, as moderator, can ban individuals, words, and IPs that you feel don't belong here, I, as an admin, have the same right to protect my system from any ISP or provider who repeatedly throws trash at my system - to do anything less would be irresponsible to my clients, to myself, and to the other machines on my network. Until such time as ISPs and hosting providers are forced into common-carrier status, that's just how it is going to be. Frankly, I find the combined arrogance and ignorance of those who say I have no right to do this to be absolutely staggering.
You can do as you wish Bob. You don't even have to make sense or understand what you're doing. You can even understand that you're blocking innocent IPs and blocking IPs based on someone else's maintaining (or lack thereof) of a list. You can understand (or not) that SPEWS not only doesn't solve one problem, but they create another problem. That's up to you. Am I going to pat you on the back for a job well done? No.
Frankly, you have the right to block the entire internet from getting mail to you. Does that make you a competent admin? If you say so.0
-
10-19-2002, 04:09 PM #78Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2001
- Posts
- 1,210
Originally posted by masood
You are one good detective.
Just kidding.....
The IP which is currently blocked is a Cogent one and they have already contacted you, and the block you guys have put will go away in 2 weeks. Now my ranting has at least helped me to get your attention
Aside from that, I think Trif covered your other questions pretty well, so I'll leave them alone.
I believe it's time to bail out of this thread, as it's just giving me a headache anymore. I'll send you my email address via PM - I have no power with spews, but am pretty familiar with how things work, and would be glad to help you out in any way I can.
-Bob0
-
10-19-2002, 04:28 PM #79Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Aug 2001
- Posts
- 1,210
Originally posted by Chicken
Bob, we've discussed this before...
Note - please replace "uneducated" with "sheep"
Originally posted by Chicken in the thread "PollPEWS.org is it a Menace? You Decide! This could happen to you!"
I love the, "SPEWS doesn't block anyone, they just provide the list!" argument.
There's no denying that the spews list has a broad reach. People who use it know the ramifications of using it - at least, they should. If they don't, they're fools who have no business trying to administer a mail server in the first place.
It is great in theory only, but the fact that it is impossible to execute when run so poorly makes it worthless, and the people who use the lists merely uneducated.
Really? I know what the list does, I agree with the methods used by spews to determine who does and does not get listed, and I am willing to take the bad along with the good. Furthermore, I do not use the spews list on my clients' inbound mail unless they request it. I have several clients who use it, and several more to whom the spam flows freely. I don't like it, but if they're paying me for the bandwidth, they can have as many J-lo porn spams and "get rich quick" schemes in their inbox as they want.
Now, given the above, please tell me specifically what makes me "merely uneducated"?
when something you've created is used by many people then you have a responsibility to it
As someone said, look up those spammer's web sites -are they still up and active? Are the spammers dead? Have they actually stopped one spammer from spamming?
Where spews has made some real progress is in getting some of the larger providers to start actively booting spammers from their networks instead of turning a blind eye while at the same time accepting spammer money. They have learned that there will be some very real consequences for allowing spammers to operate from their netspace with impunity. It is also beginning to show some progress in making it harder for spammers to find a host that will have them in the United States and Canada in the first place. And finally, yes, some spammers have given up trying to dodge spews and called it a day.
Nope, they just forced them to move around a bit, which they are better at doing than any legit web site operator. Meanwhile they get IPs blocked.
I'm not saying that fighting spam is a bad thing, just that SPEWS doesn't solve one problem while creating another problem.
But spews IS solving a problem for those of us who choose to use it.
I asked this of someone earlier, but don't recall whether or not I got an answer - if your provider allows spammers on their network, and as a result, your email traffic is negatively affected, don't you think your provider should be held responsible? If not, why?
So because of SPEWS we have spammers still and blocked legit email.
As for blocking legit email, yes, that is an unfortunate part of spews' method. However, listing a single IP was tried for years, and just did not work. Providers simply moved their spammers to an un-blocked IP and let 'em loose until the next listing, whereupon they got moved yet again. It's called "whack-a-mole, and it's an old, tired game.
Then we had MAPS, who tried a process of blocking combined with "education". Their problem, and the thing that made them wholly innefective, was that it would take days, weeks, or even months for maps to actually list someone. By then, the damage was done - the spammer had thoroughly reaped the benefits of the extra time afforded them by MAPS's overly-cautious way of doing things, and moved on to the next sucker. Ultimately, MAPS caved to legal pressure and has been useless ever since.
So, what does that leave us with, but two poorly implemented methods to stop spam that never did much to begin with. Spews is making a difference where these other failed.
Spam is bad.
This isn't a good way to solve the problem.
Something else is.
Figure it out and stop using lists that block legit mail.
Spam is bad
Stop giving your business to providers who support spammers.
If an alternate method of any effectiveness is so easy to come up with and implement, why don't you figure it out?
Any way, it is like arguing over something that is so obvious that you wonder why you're wasting your time.
Chicken, I would love to find a better way to deal with the problem. I'm afraid though that it is a problem so complex and totally out of control that there are no easy answers. I don't particularly care for the idea of collateral damage, but utilizing the spews list is the only thing that has made a measurable dent in my spam load.
As I said above, if you have a better way, I'm all ears.
-Bob0
-
10-19-2002, 04:50 PM #80Disabled
- Join Date
- Jun 2002
- Posts
- 74
Originally posted by masood
Because they black listed my ISPs IP netblock (cogent).
If someone doesn't research their upstreams and their upstreams' upstreams spam problem, they deserve EVERYTHING they get.
COGENT IS A spamhaus. THEY HOST spammers. People complain to them about hosting spammers, THEY Do nothing about their spam problem. So people get tired of playing by COGENT rules, so they decide that COGENT doesn't want to play fairly on the playground. WELL we dont want to put up with COGENTS half-assed **** so we block COGENT. Cogent can live in their own world with their pet spammers and take their money, we just dont want any part of it
COGENT is your problem. YOu live in a slum. Your landlord like the money they get from criminals. Your money is not good for them, so they dont care about you:
1,300 hits on COGENT alone about their non-responsiveness
Who do you think you are?
Just know that I block all of COGENT because they dont want to play fair.
Do you know that YOU have no right to send email to ANYONE.
Email is privlege. YOu dont need it. And it has neve been deemed as a valid form of communication. MY network my rules. SPEWS just helps define the rules I set up.
People who use SPEWS can use their entire list as a whitelist if they wanted to.
And do you know anything about networks?? Who you are trying to lecture here? What do you think you know about networks?? Go and learn it yourself and then start bitching around. And what IQ do you have? 20?
Apparently they are, who block entire netblocks instead of individual server IPs.
BEEN THERE DONE THAT, and just like with COGENT who has been shown to do it, when people block just hte spammer's ip, the ISP moves the spamemr into a new ip address, to get around those blocks. So if spamemr was inhabitting xxx.xxx.xxx.25 and we block that, ISP will move him/her to xxx.xxx.xxx.34.
Tell me genius, how does that protect us from spam?
So Spews decided that enough is enough, and that we aren't going to play by their rules. We'll play by our own.
So if spammer spews his **** from xxx.xxx.xxx.25 we block that first. We send a complaint. ISP ignores it or moves the spammer to xxx.xxx.xxx.34 and more spam originates, WE decide to block the entire /24. Harsh? Hell no. ISP doesn't want to lose their spammer so we aren't going to play their game.
They are not protecting their networks, that's for sure. How much spam have they stopped after the spam has already hit?
From my own statistics, this month alone I've stopped 3,680,900+ pieces of Spam email from networks who harbor spammers. This year alone I've logged over 60 million pieces of spam. That's 60 million less messages I have to deal with deluging my mail server. Care to share your experiences?
How does blocking a netblock help? My server will remain blocked for 4 weeks, that's what Cogent told me.
Yup, COGENT is one to be trusted. Why 4 weeks? Why not 24 hours? Why one month? Seems like they are pulling the wool over your eyes, and YOU Are believing every crap that spew from their mouths.
ISP"S have been shown to shut-down spammers withing 24 huors after the first slew of complaints come in. Why can't COGENT do that?
Now if another spammer spams after 4 weeks, how does it help? Only idiots don't understand it.
Guess what? that does not stop the spam. Sorry to disappoint you.
So what? Does it make any difference that the way they block entire netblocks and "nearby" blocks make it a good practice?
Oh yes, I'm at fault here. Thank you!
The crap is coming from you. Are you an ISP? Have you even ever run a small LAN? What are you BITCHING about?
Let me know if you are webhost/ISP or even run a small server. Then I'll show you how spews.org works! Do you even know how a mail server works? :p
Spews.org explains how it works on their website. WHY not try and reading their website?
Oh no sorry, I forgot, you are a stupid 16 year old:
OK. Thank you for your kind information I will spam from your network, using your domain and your IPs.
So I have wasted my time on a crybaby whiner like you Annie-Mei.
Thank you for your reply. I really appreciate it. The IP you are referring to is not effected. I don't know where you got that IP from? You are one good detective.
The IP which is currently blocked is a Cogent one and they have already contacted you, and the block you guys have put will go away in 2 weeks. Now my ranting has at least helped me to get your attention
Now here are a few question:
1. What have you achieved by blocking a netblock after the spam has already hit?
2. What is my fault that my server is hosted in a netblock where the spam was generated?
3. What do you expect an ISP to do if one of their 400+ servers generate spam?
4. Is it possible for you to unlist some IPs?
5. What should I do? Can you provide me name of the ISP/Webhost which guarantees that no spam will be generated from their unmanaged servers?
I look forward for your replies.
Masood - the future spammer if things don't work out0
-
10-19-2002, 04:54 PM #81WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Oct 2002
- Posts
- 122
Originally posted by lightnin
Define 'spam friendly' please?
Please define promptly as well.
Promptly would mean within a few hours of receiving the first complaint. It is a situation that needs to be dealt with as seriously as something like a fiber cut or a downed router, because not responding will have the same effect of degraded connectivity to the rest of the Internet. If an IP is an actual spam source, you can expect that IP to have been blocked immediately by one or more DNSBL's, but if you leave any spam support in place for more than a few hours past being notified, you're starting to run risks. Understand that it isn't SPEWS you're really afraid of here, because they will remove the block after the spam support is demonstrably gone. It's the overworked admin who drops your IP's in the deny table because he's pissed about a spam flood that's been going on for hours, and never checks back to see if it's gone away. Perhaps you are familiar with AGIS. They were a backbone provider back in the days when spam first hit the big time. They decided to host Cyberpromo because they figured they were too big for anybody to do anything about it. There were no DNSBL's in those days, and admins responded by null routing Cyberpromo's IP's. AGIS signed up more spammers and started moving the spammers around to get around the blocks. More blocks went in, but in most cases the old blocks were not removed. Many eventually got fed up and null routed all of AGIS. AGIS' legitimate customers deserted them in droves because they had severely compromised connectivity. AGIS went bankrupt and the company was dismantled and sold. Telia bought some of their assets including the IP space. After waiting awhile and doing some testing, it became apparent to Telia that there were enough of those old blocks out there still functioning that the IP space was effectively "poisoned" for the forseeable future, and could not ethically be given out to customers. This is one reason why centralized blocklists came into being, so that blocks of space would not be forever poisoned. Any blocklist that has substantial usage is doing you a big favor, because there is a much simpler way out of those than dealing with the "death of a thousand paper cuts" that would exist if all those admins were managing their own blocklists. There *are* other blocklists out there, it is not SPEWS or nothing. People are choosing SPEWS blocking because it does what they want it to do.
When you're dealing with tiers of service like this:
bandwidth provider ->datacenter->host->reseller->spamming client
There simply has to be a REASONABLE (not, pull the HOST'S server immediately, but expect the host to act SWIFTLY) and CLEARLY DEFINED PROTOCOL to handle such situations.
From what I see, the problem with SPEWS, is that not all spam situations are quite as cut and dried as the NANAE people seem to like to think they are.
I should think the people that run SPEWS would be interested in such a thing, as it would make their list much more precise, thus making it possible for more people to use it.0
-
10-19-2002, 05:00 PM #82Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2000
- Location
- Southern California
- Posts
- 12,136
Bob, obviously I'm not going to convince you to stop using that worthless list, nor am I trying to. My only hope is that more people won't start using it.
Blocking the **** of tons of IPs and IP blocks has got to be the most asinine way of dealing with the problem that I've ever heard of. Failing to have a method to correct and or contact the maintainer (maintainer said toungue and cheek), just makes the whole thing not only problematic, it makes the list a new problem
They're not just moving around a bit, they are slowly (painfully so, I'm afraid) getting corralled and localized. A tremendous amount have given up trying to find stateside hosting and have moved offshore, particularly to China and Russia - making them a whole lot easier to block.
I don't understand how people don't understand that what they are doing is poisoning the whole crop in order to kill off the pests in the field, but as I said, I'm not going to try to convince you. As the list grows, and more and more innocent IPs are blocked, it will soon become apparent that the list and those who use it are the problem. You can't attempt to solve a problem by creating another one and call that progress.0
-
10-19-2002, 05:31 PM #83Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2000
- Location
- Southern California
- Posts
- 12,136
Tell me all about the network you run Annie-Mei.
http://groups.google.com/groups?num=...in.net-abuse.*
Who cares, insert any host name, any network. They all get spammers.0
-
10-19-2002, 05:33 PM #84WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Oct 2002
- Posts
- 122
Originally posted by Chicken
You have shown you don't know a damn thing, sorry. If you're going to tell me that spammers spam via IPs and via IP blocks, and via only one host, then just let me know so I can file you under completely misguided. This theory of blocking works so little of the time that it is rather sad that people think this is the way to control the problem.
There is only a limited amount of IP addresses, and with more and more spammers sending out spam, hopping from host to host, more and more of these IP blocks are going to be blocked until the list is completely useless (as if it isn't already). Sure you can block all IP ranges and that will stop spam, but that is the solution? You can't be serious?
As I said, anyone who uses SPEWS does not have an understanding of how spammers send spam, and does not have an understanding of how to block spam.
Where did you ever get the idea that listings in SPEWS were permanent? When the spammer is gone, the listing goes away. There are some people who aren't happy with the fact that SPEWS will delist someone right away even if they kept their spammer for months, but I think it is the right thing to do because there is otherwise no reason for delisting. I've said it before and I'll say it again, you get entire blocks listed only when you don't respond to compaints and boot the spammer. Trying to list individual sources of spam as they pop up is fruitless. It's been tried. In the long run, the only thing that will work is to attack the spammers' ability to do business by making sure that they can't host web sites, etc. And unfortunately, with so many providers having the mindset of, "I want to make money, I don't care if it's at your expense," that means using our right to deny that provider access to our networks as a means of leverage to ensure that their cost/benefit formulas account for the fact that they must take our costs into account in order to get the benefit of connectivity to us.0
-
10-19-2002, 05:42 PM #85Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Mar 2002
- Location
- Servers
- Posts
- 806
Originally posted by trif
Spammers are going out of business and spamming no more.0
-
10-19-2002, 05:43 PM #86Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Mar 2002
- Location
- Servers
- Posts
- 806
Originally posted by Chicken
Tell me all about the network you run Annie-Mei.
0
-
10-19-2002, 05:55 PM #87Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2000
- Location
- Southern California
- Posts
- 12,136
Originally posted by trif
Explain why when a spammer's website goes down, the spam stops until the web site is back up.
SPEWS has driven spammers out of business. I was researching one of the listings that someone here cited, and noticed that cardwish is no more. Gone, kaput. They eventually ran out of people who would host them. Spammers are going out of business and spamming no more.
Where did you ever get the idea that listings in SPEWS were permanent? When the spammer is gone, the listing goes away.
And unfortunately, with so many providers having the mindset of, "I want to make money, I don't care if it's at your expense," that means using our right to deny that provider access to our networks as a means of leverage to ensure that their cost/benefit formulas account for the fact that they must take our costs into account in order to get the benefit of connectivity to us.
If done right and carefully and with more effort than it's worth, SPEWS and other lists might actually be useful. Any monkey can throw a sloppy range of IPs in a list and block them.0
-
10-19-2002, 06:32 PM #88WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Oct 2002
- Posts
- 122
Originally posted by Chicken
And unfortunately, with so many providers having the mindset of, "I don't care if it's at your expense..." in regards to blocking legit mail, the whole system doesn't really work and will only get worse unless it is properly maintained. If you'd like to argue that less and less legit mail will be blocked in the years to come, while at the same time SPEWS and other lists like it not changing the way they list and maintain their crappy block lists, well then you're simply got another opinion than I do.
If done right and carefully and with more effort than it's worth, SPEWS and other lists might actually be useful. Any monkey can throw a sloppy range of IPs in a list and block them. [/B]
And as for my not caring if you get blocked, I might point out that the vast majority of those who get blocked are there because they don't care about the expense that spam causes everybody else. If they cared, they wouldn't be renting space from a spam friendly provider. SPEWS saves people a lot of money on bandwidth that they would otherwise be providing for free to spammers. A lot of places are not willing to go with content filtering because it means they still have to pay for the bandwidth to get the spam delivered. They're sick and tired of providers making money off of spammers at their expense, and they're not willing to hear, "But I like my cheap spammer subsidized hosting, how dare you refuse my email?" from those providers' customers. If you're hosting at a spam friendly provider, you *are* getting subsidized by the resource their spammers steal.
You can have a different opinion than I do about SPEWS and that's okay. But I will point out once again that if you're going to stick your head in the sand and pretend it doesn't exist or will go away anytime soon, you're not living in the real world, and it's probably going to come back and bite you on the ass. Would you rather use a payment service that engages actively in fraud prevention or one that just runs everything through, and bummer if you get chargebacks later? Fraud isn't fair either, but you'd better account for it in your business planning or you'll end up finding yourself out of business.0
-
10-19-2002, 06:40 PM #89Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Mar 2002
- Location
- Servers
- Posts
- 806
spam friendly provider.... spam friendly provider... spam friendly provider...
0
-
10-19-2002, 06:48 PM #90Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Mar 2002
- Location
- Servers
- Posts
- 806
I just received spam originating from Sprint. Is Sprint spam friendly provider?
0
-
10-19-2002, 06:54 PM #91Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Mar 2002
- Location
- Servers
- Posts
- 806
OK, here's another one from Cable and Wireless, is C&W "spam friendly ISP"??
Subject: Free internet speed test.
0
-
10-19-2002, 07:02 PM #92Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Mar 2002
- Location
- Servers
- Posts
- 806
Now eat this: Rackspace.com
Subject: Claim a Free $25 Kmart(R) Gift Card!
And mind you, I have reported this to all the ISPs/WebHosts abuse department. Your spews.org philosophy will come out soon once I receive a reply/action from these "spam friendly ISPs".
Anyone need proof of these spams which I have received from these "spam friendly providers" during last few hours? PM me!0
-
10-19-2002, 07:04 PM #93Dennis Johnson
- Join Date
- Jun 2001
- Location
- Kalamazoo
- Posts
- 33,412
Spam is bad; okay?
Spews is bad; okay?
Taking the spews approach, if someone is selling crack over by the school and gets ran off the block and someone else takes his place who gets ran off the block and another takes his place who (oh you get the picture), we should burn the whole neighborhood?There is no best host. There is only the host that's best for you.0
-
10-19-2002, 07:21 PM #94Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Mar 2002
- Location
- Servers
- Posts
- 806
Guess what? Fresh spam from UUNET Technologies, Inc.
Subject: Free Money Making Secrets Revealed!
Go and block the entire IP range of UUNET!0
-
10-19-2002, 07:23 PM #95Dennis Johnson
- Join Date
- Jun 2001
- Location
- Kalamazoo
- Posts
- 33,412
spam friendly
There is no best host. There is only the host that's best for you.0
-
10-19-2002, 07:26 PM #96Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Mar 2002
- Location
- Servers
- Posts
- 806
Originally posted by SoftWareRevue
spam friendly0
-
10-19-2002, 07:30 PM #97Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- May 2001
- Location
- Dayton, Ohio
- Posts
- 4,977
Hey wait a minute... These spammers are using this protocol that just helps them keep spreading their crap.. I think its called IP... We need to ban it now and that should help keep down on spam
*plugs ears* you'll never conveince me otherwise0
-
10-19-2002, 07:47 PM #98Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jul 2002
- Posts
- 3,734
Originally posted by The Prohacker
Hey wait a minute... These spammers are using this protocol that just helps them keep spreading their crap.. I think its called IP... We need to ban it now and that should help keep down on spam
*plugs ears* you'll never conveince me otherwise0
-
10-19-2002, 07:49 PM #99Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- May 2001
- Location
- Dayton, Ohio
- Posts
- 4,977
Originally posted by lightnin
Hey, I bet if we ban all computers we could stop spam entirely!
Nah them some ass would prolly think of another way to do it
How about we all commit mass suicide, that should stop spam0
-
10-19-2002, 08:06 PM #100Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jul 2002
- Posts
- 3,734
Originally posted by The Prohacker
Nah them some ass would prolly think of another way to do it
How about we all commit mass suicide, that should stop spam
There we go! Finally the answer to what we've all been looking for: A SPAM FREE UTOPIA where our mail is not forced to mingle with undesirables...
...all it takes is drinking the Kool Aid
I'll drink mine if the zealots drink it first...
...you have my word on that...0