Re: VIRUS HELP????

From: Chuck (none_at_example.net)
Date: 06/05/04 

Date: 5 Jun 2004 10:26:04 -0500

On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 20:44:28 -0700, Purl Gurl <purlgurl@purlgurl.net> wrote:

>Chuck wrote:
>
>> Purl Gurl wrote:
>
>(snipped)
>
>> You're right, nanae is a very devious and rabid bunch. But there are some very
>> serious folks there too.
>
>nanae: news.admin.net-abuse.email
>
>Haven't thought of them since they spammed our family email server
>with idiocy, threats and hatred. They are good for a laugh being
>easily manipulated.
>
>"Devious and rabid" would be a high compliment, for them.
>
>
>> Spammers are very tricky.
>
>They do not trick me.
>
<SNIP>

>> Black lists (aka blocklists) are a very nasty and bad publicity way of fighting
>> the spam problem. They cause much "collateral" damage. Many folks are hurt by
>> the atomic bomb approach.
>
>Black lists are a reflection of stupidity, laziness and a lack of talent.
>Money is made from black list services just as money is made from
>spam email. There is no difference; both are a disservice. Those
>"nanae" people are relieving people of their money, just like spammers.
>
>Recently, we received email with a friend's return address forged. He
>was alerted and appreciated this. After this, we changed our static
>ip address to a differenet block. Now we cannot email him about ongoing
>forgery of his address; we are black listed.
>
>Last year, I needed to conduct some commercial business with a client.
>Our client could email us, we could not email him; black listed. I had
>to establish a email account, off our server, to work around this idiocy
>known as "black lists" from which many profit, in an unethical manner.

<SNIP>

>Took me about an hour, with periodic adjustments, to configure
>our email server to reject ninety-nine point nine percent of spam.
>Over the past three months, I can count on one hand how many spam
>emails slipped through. We do not use black lists and my total
>hand written filter count is nine with all short and sweet.

PG,

You have two problems.

First, you are getting internet services from an ISP that is also doing business
with a known spammer. Most ISPs have responsible policies, and will not do
business with known spammers. Your ISP, or an ISP providing connectivity to
your ISP, is apparently ignoring warnings from the many folks who are fucking
fed up with obnoxious spammers, and their thievery.

The ISP providing service to the spammer needs to discontinue that service, or
you need to discontinue service with your ISP.

Second, the client which you cannot email, or his ISP (whoever provides incoming
email services) is fed up with fucking spammers who abuse his email system. The
owner of the email system being abused has simply chosen to reject email from
abusive and non-responsive ISPs, who will not do anything about their illegal
activity.

Your client (or his ISP) needs to use a finer ip filter on his email system. Or
not filter by ip address, but filter by content.

So don't blame the blocklists, or the folks who assemble the blocklists.

Blame the spammers, and the irresponsible ISPs who provide them connectivity.

And blame the folks who use the blocklists.

All the folks in nanae are not your enemy. Some agree with you - there are
discussions there frequently about the benefits of, and necessity for,
blocklists. Join the discussions. Argue patiently, and not rabidly. Maybe you
can make a difference there.

Cheers,
Chuck
Paranoia comes from experience - and is not necessarily a bad thing.

Quantcast