Re: Anti-spam Working Group
- Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1998 09:27:33 +0200 (MET DST)
In fact there is a difference between being small and not yet knowing
all the details (no Drivers License) and Being BIG And Don't Care. My
suggestion is to at least try to handle the former, it's a good start.
Now, I've stopped counting my mail to spam-complaint@localhost but my
guess is that requests from RIPE, backed by all European ISPs, should
have better/more effect on Being BIG UU.NET than from us individuals.
So, please use the Grapevine and suggest to your friends, customers,
competitors et.al. that they stop Unauthorized Mail Relaying - or at
least that they fix their mailer to provide useful "Received:" lines.
Gunnar Lindberg
>Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1998 07:08:48 +0000
>From: Corneliu Tanasa cornel@localhost
>Message-ID: <35ECEF00.E96C3A2B@localhost>
>Gunnar Lindberg wrote:
>I agree. Also, you could add to your spam relay list .kr and .mx and
>also UU.NET. Do you suggest to cut UUNET (however I will agree :-) ) ?
>I've sent lots of messages to UUnet, asking them to stop the spammers,
>but it was like shooting in the dark: no answer and no action !!!
>Regards,
>Corneliu Tanasa
>>
>> It seems like an increasing number of spam Mail Relay now uses hosts
>> in Spain (.es), most often Sun with native/naive sendmail. Using RIPE
>> whois-info doesn't seem to get through, at least there is no response.
>>
>> If this list happens to contain .es ISPs it would be highly appreciated
>> if you spread the Do Not Relay info to customers (and competitors) by
>> whatever means have the best effect.
>>
>> http://www.sendmail.org/
>> http://www.sendmail.org/antispam.html
>>
>> Gunnar Lindberg, Chalmers University of Technology
>>
>> PS
>> On at least one occasion I've seen spam with a forged but existing
>> From first being Relayed through a .es site, after which the Sys-
>> admin at the Relay complained about the innocent From sending spam.
>> In fact that's as near to "enough" that you can ever get.
>>
>> I guess none of you ISPs will like the idea, but maybe there
>> should be like a Sysadmin's Internet Drivers License required
>> before a site is actually allowed to connect - some Netiquette,
>> something about security, something about logs/alerts.
>> DS
