On Mon, 6 Jul 1998, Dean Pemberton wrote:
I agree with a number of the other people who have replied to this message. While Paul Vixie's approach to adding people to the RBL is the safest, it does however not address the narrow timewindow that you have to stop SPAM from being a problem.
Surely the point is that as time goes by you get closer and closer to the utopia where you accept no mail (ever) from a promiscuous relay machine? The RBL is only intended to cut down untraceable mail posted through promiscuous relays, I thought. There will always be a danger from people posting spam from a real address. I don't really see where the narrow time window comes into it; spam will flood out from a relay until it is blocked. Then no more spam will flow. Although I think that flowing spam is pushing the metaphor to extremes.
Afterall this is what happens with our current justice system. If there are resonable grounds to suspect that I have commited a crime then I can be arrested on the spot. It is then up to me to convince the authorities that I am innocent. This allows us to get the truly guilty people off the streets in the minimum ammount of time, by sacrificing a small amount of convienience for those people who are falsly accused.
Well, that might be how it works in Wellington :) I thought it was up to the prosecutor to prove guilt...
Is this how we want to run the Internet SPAM Problem????
Who knows? I dont make the rules! =)
That's more or less the key issue, isn't it? Nobody does.
3) Has anyone any opinion on whether a group acting in this way forms a cartel which restrains trade? I feel it might well do.
# grep -i lawyer deancv #
# which grep
/tmp/.ho-ho-ho/joes-trojan
#
That'll teach you to run untrustworthy, obscure software as root :)
Joe
--
Joe Abley