[linux-dvb] OT: Re: linuxtv.org fell in the blacklists trap

[hermann pitton]

Am Mittwoch, den 31.10.2007, 02:44 +0100 schrieb thomas schorpp:
> Luca Olivetti wrote:
> > En/na Jim Barber ha escrit:
> >> Sorbs will remove you from their list once you contact them and prove 
> >> you have a static IP address though.
> > 
> > Yes, they did, *twice*, since they wrongly listed my address *twice* 
> > (though I thought I already stated that) but I shouldn't go through all 
> > of this.
> > Besides, one shouldn't have more or less rights to have an own mail 
> > server depending on the fact that the address is static or dynamic.
> > And others blacklists don't even listen to you (and, again, even if they 
> > would, it's tiresome and shouldn't be necessary).
> > The net result is that spammers simply hop from network to network and 
> > can send their shit with no problem, while non-spam is blocked. Good job.
> > 
> > Bye
> 
> I'm with Luca.
> 
> in general blacklisting is an unprofessional, trivial security concept and completely sucks, 
> especially sorbs:
> 
> Netblock:	91.89.4.0/24 (91.89.4.0-91.89.4.255)
> Last Seen:	Thu Feb 15 15:15:12 2007 GMT
> Additional Information:	ad-online.biz. A 91.89.4.92 [TTL=1800] Job Scam Spammers
> 
> they still block my mail server on .246 cause some spamfucks were once in my assigned netblock??? great.
> and blocking Luca against their own(!) whitelist policy is really scandalous.
> 
> I and many people can't simply afford the horrific costs of static and NIC registered IPs.
> this is social discrimination of internet users and glorifying the few big mailprovider's monopoly 
> all in the name of a "protection system" that has been long proven of complete failure by spamgangs.
> 
> Jim, so how to prove ownership of a IP? thats actually a crap requirement, cause only the ISP 
> can certify. NIC registry can't, too. I can register every fake data in there. spamgangs do so.
> CA signed server certificates can't prove ownership of an IP, too, cause I could use any proxy 
> and fake certify ownership of its IP that way. so practically you never get delisted from sorbs, 
> once listed. they don't do blacklisting, actually they do whitelisting in their big sponsors preferences(?) in fact.
> 
> besides this is a violation of accepted civilized international law principles. pre-convicted for having done 
> nothing. BTW law: in most countries courts take denied mails *as delivered*(!) to evidence whatever the reason for denial!
> so companies be very careful using blocklists...
> 
> sorbs: "Fighting spam by finding and listing Exploitable Servers.". real great policy. Which administrator 
> can assure that his systems are 100% unexploitable all the time? this is pure SCI-FI and not a 
> accepted all day practioneer's requirement.
> 
> as Luca said, spam-gangs avoid it easily. Johannes, PLS use a bayesian filter / greylisting combination.
> or use spamhaus at least. they have a much kinder not "ordinary dynamic IP internet 
> mail user discriminating" delisting policy :) 
> 
> with private house community wlan-routers, wifi-hotspots, inetcafes, anonymizers further upcoming, 
> blacklisting has become complete idiocracy. sorbs go on, blacklist them all!
> spamgangs laugh at You.
> 
> y
> tom
> 

I also fully agree.

Cheers,
Hermann