Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 182
  1. #76
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    12,136
    Originally posted by trif
    I have a perfect understanding of how spammers send spam.
    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.
    HostHideout.com - Where professionals discuss web hosting.

    • Chicken
      0 Not allowed!

  2. #77
    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 doesn't work Bob, that's the point. It doesn't work.

    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.
    Fine, that didn't work, I'm not arguing that. But this doesn't either.

    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...
    According to who? A bunch of people who distrbute but do not maintain their listing and tell others what to do, how to do it, and when to do it. Thanks, baaaaaahhhh, but I choose not to follow the herd of sheep. If you do, that's your choice.

    [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.
    What else would you call people who block innocent web sites' email? I can't think of other words...

    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.
    Excellent, I was hoping someone would ask about the methods we use here. We do block individuals, words, and IPs that we feel don't belong here. We maintain this list, however we do not distribute this list, claiming it to be a block list that other forums should or can use. We maintain it carefully and allow ourselves to be contacted to discuss any blocks or concerns. We don't hide like gutless SPEWS cowards and block ranges just because we can. Just because one person spammed the forum from an IP range. Doing this and distributing the list would be irresponsible on our part. See any differences?

    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.
    HostHideout.com - Where professionals discuss web hosting.

    • Chicken
      0 Not allowed!

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    1,210
    Originally posted by masood
    You are one good detective.
    Well, you see, I got this email one day that said "FIND OUT ANYTHING ABOUT ANYONE!!!!!"

    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
    First off, I'm not spews, just someone who happens to support what spews is doing. My occasional "spews retarder" sig comes from something that another contributer to this thread called me, and which I found to be pretty humorous.

    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.

    -Bob
      0 Not allowed!

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    1,210
    Originally posted by Chicken
    Bob, we've discussed this before...
    As a matter off fact, we did. Unfortunately, you closed the thread before I got a chance to post my response publically. Since it pretty much addresses all the points you've once again raised, I'll repost it here if you don't mind.

    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.
    Why is that? It's not just some lame argument, it's the truth. They publish it, I use it. If someone from a listed IP tries to contact me and their mail bounces, spews hasn't blocked them, I have.

    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
    Spews' responsibility, which is to it's subscribers, is to ensure that their list does what it says it will do. It does that. Spews has no responsibility to the spammer or the spammer's provider whatsoever, nor should it. Which, btw, I believe is what's pissing so many people off. Well, that and the erroneous and ever-popular perception still carried by some that others are obligated to accept their email traffic in the first place.

    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?
    You could apply that same argument to ORDB, relays.osirusoft.com, SBL, etc...None of these other lists, not even the ones championed by the anti-spews crowd, are directly shutting down spammer sites. The only people who can directly shut down the spammers are the ISPs. Spews is providing these ISPs with the necessary incentive.

    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.
    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'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.
    I'm afraid it's going to take more than spews to get rid of spammers. Even after all the scammers pushing viagra are run off to China, we'll still have the mainstream spam coming from the likes of etracks and topica. Unfortunately, nothing short of legislation is going to stop them.

    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.
    Well, how about this then:

    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.
    Funny, I said exactly the same thing about an hour ago.

    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.


    -Bob
      0 Not allowed!

  5. #80
    Originally posted by masood


    Because they black listed my ISPs IP netblock (cogent).
    Well then refer to an early reply about:

    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?
    What does it matter to you who I am? Your problem is with your provider who seems to think that YOU're not important enough or better than their spamming customers. YOur beef is with your ISP who chooses to keep spammers and use you as a shield. Have you talked with your COGENT rep to find out why they rather keep a spammer and take your money to help their spammers?

    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?
    I definitely know more about networks than you do it seems, since YOU'RE IN here bitching about SPEWS when its all COGENT'S fault for getting you blacklisted. Doesn't take and IQ of 20 to know that.


    Apparently they are, who block entire netblocks instead of individual server IPs.
    Shows your ignorance on this subject, so no wonder you're pissy.
    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.
    COGENT lied to you. They will remain blocked as long as they choose to host spammers and keep them on their network, or move them to other ip's within their network.

    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.
    So you're saying you're an idiot?




    Guess what? that does not stop the spam. Sorry to disappoint you.
    IT stops spam that enters privately owned networks. I get 60 million less emails a year because I use blocklists. BLOcklists never claimed to stop spam 100% and if you believe that, you are more than just and idiot. IT helps to curb the amt of crap that fills MY servers, my harddrive spaces and storage capacity and make sure that my users dont have to come to check their mail and find hte server down because of crap email.




    So what? Does it make any difference that the way they block entire netblocks and "nearby" blocks make it a good practice?
    You still dotn understand do you? Idiot.




    Oh yes, I'm at fault here. Thank you!
    Yeah you are as guilty as your provider. YOU CHOOSE to stay with a provider who knowingly hosts spammers, keep them on their network and feeding you lines of bull**** that they can't get rid of their spammers for four weeks?





    The crap is coming from you. Are you an ISP? Have you even ever run a small LAN? What are you BITCHING about?
    The crap is true. Suggest you step back, because your IGNORANCE is just dripping from everything you say.


    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
    Do you know how a mail server works? Obviously not.
    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:
    Sorry, Im 17. But hey, I've been able to set up my own webhosting service without so much a problem from my users, and my users love that I keep spam out of their inboxes. Unfortunately, I only offer webhosting to locals, since I know that where I am, there aren't any full time spammers. Hosted none so far, and I double check who they are, their purpose of their websites would be and have a sTRONG AUp/TOS against spamming. Haven't had a bad customer yet.







    OK. Thank you for your kind information I will spam from your network, using your domain and your IPs.
    Well until you give up Cogento's ip's and find a better host, it would be funny that you try to spam, since Cogento is already blocked on my servers.


    So I have wasted my time on a crybaby whiner like you Annie-Mei.
    The only crybaby here is you since you dont want to do anything about your situation.



    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.
    Since youdidn't give an IP address or the SPEWS evidence file number, I didn't comment on your ips.


    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 out
    Why dont you go and check out hte newsgroups for more information.
      0 Not allowed!

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    122
    Originally posted by lightnin
    Define 'spam friendly' please?
    Please define promptly as well.
    Either knowingly or willfully unknowingly (by not having or reading the abuse mailbox) providing internet services to spammers or spamware vendors. Bandwidth, email, web site, DNS, name registration, the works. Spammers defined as those who send commercial or bulk messages that are not solicited by the owner of the email address over the Internet (not only email spam but also instant messaging spam, winpopup spam, and SMS spam transmitted over the Internet). Exceptions made for email for which the sole purpose is to verify the ownership of a submitted email address, such as confirmations for mailing lists, or for situations like order confirmations from online businesses, for which the need to actually buy something forms an effective barrier against someone submitting someone else's mailing address in order to harrass them. Spamware defined as software containing features which are of very little use to anyone other than spammers, such as bulk email lists, email harvesting, header forging, finding and using open relays, proxies, and insecure formmails.

    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.
    It is up to the people in that chain to ensure that their whois and DNS is set up so that spam reports will naturally go to the place that will produce the fastest response. It is also up to the people in that chain to ensure that complaints that go downstream go down as quickly as possible. If someone emails the host, and that host takes 24 hours to pass down to the reseller, it doesn't matter much if the reseller yanks immediately, there's still been a 24 hour delay with spammers gleefully cackling about how they found a "good host". You really need to be able to respond to the abuse box 24/7. Spammers take advantage of those who don't. I know of one provider who took huge steps to have the abuse box covered 24/7. I asked how many abuse complaints they get, and the answer was they hadn't had any in over six months. Why such tight monitoring of the abuse box then? The answer? "We would start to get tons of abuse complaints. If we don't monitor constantly the spammers will eventually find out, they'll sign up and arrange to spam during our down time. It costs a lot less to have 24/7 monitoring than to have to be constantly cleaning stuff up after the fact." If you can't cover 24/7, then you need to outsource the abuse box to someone capable, and either be willing to get paged or empower them to shut down sites on your network. If you can't do this, then just acknowledge that you're doing the equivalent of going without fire alarms and sprinklers and you may arrive at work to find your entire "building" burnt to the ground.
      0 Not allowed!

  7. #82
    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.
    Exactly how does it make it easier to block Bob? Because you can just throw the whole range of IPs into the list? Nice.

    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.
    HostHideout.com - Where professionals discuss web hosting.

    • Chicken
      0 Not allowed!

  8. #83
    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.
    HostHideout.com - Where professionals discuss web hosting.

    • Chicken
      0 Not allowed!

  9. #84
    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.
    Okay, why don't you detail for me Ralsky's spamming methods? Or Empire Towers? Explain to these fine folks here what asymmetrical routing is and how spammers use it. Explain why when a spammer's website goes down, the spam stops until the web site is back up. You view spam as someone downstream looking at a polluted river. All the pollution looks the same. You see all these pipes sticking out spewing pollution and figure the way to get rid of the pollution is to stop up those pipes when they show up as if they're something that just happens to grow there without any way to stop them from popping up. Those of us who support SPEWS see those who are putting those pipes in in the first place. We are going after them and those who rent them space on the riverbank to put the polluting pipes in. 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. The spammers are being herded into smaller and smaller space, their costs are going up, their business is going down, and they are often finding themselves not having backup hosting when their site goes down when before it was just a matter of waiting until the DNS updates to their "waiting in the wings" site. Spammers are going out of business and spamming no more. That's the most effective form of blocking there is.

    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 Not allowed!

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Servers
    Posts
    806
    Originally posted by trif

    Spammers are going out of business and spamming no more.
    I wish it was true, but it is not.
      0 Not allowed!

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Servers
    Posts
    806
    Originally posted by Chicken
    Tell me all about the network you run Annie-Mei.
    I would be interested in that too. At least it is not Cogent
      0 Not allowed!

  12. #87
    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.
    And how long will that take? About 2 minutes I'm guessing, on average. They've just moved, they haven't been stopped.

    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.
    One down, 3,000 pop up. Brilliant. They get the next host blacklisted, and then move on, and the cycle repeats.

    Where did you ever get the idea that listings in SPEWS were permanent? When the spammer is gone, the listing goes away.
    Really? It's that easy, eh? I didn't know that.

    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.
    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.
    HostHideout.com - Where professionals discuss web hosting.

    • Chicken
      0 Not allowed!

  13. #88
    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]
    Like I said before, I've never had a legit mail tagged by SPEWS. From comparing notes to others, the amount of legitimate mail blocked by using SPEWS is extremely small compared to the spam it stops.

    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 Not allowed!

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Servers
    Posts
    806
    spam friendly provider.... spam friendly provider... spam friendly provider...

      0 Not allowed!

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Servers
    Posts
    806
    I just received spam originating from Sprint. Is Sprint spam friendly provider?
      0 Not allowed!

  16. #91
    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 Not allowed!

  17. #92
    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 Not allowed!

  18. #93
    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 Not allowed!

  19. #94
    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 Not allowed!

  20. #95
    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 Not allowed!

  21. #96
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Servers
    Posts
    806
    Originally posted by SoftWareRevue
    spam friendly
    LOL
      0 Not allowed!

  22. #97
    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 otherwise
      0 Not allowed!

  23. #98
    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 otherwise
    Hey, I bet if we ban all computers we could stop spam entirely!
      0 Not allowed!

  24. #99
    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 spam
      0 Not allowed!

  25. #100
    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 Not allowed!

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •