[anti-abuse-wg] AS41609, AS203974, and Alexandru ("Andrei") Stanciu / Suceava, Romania
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] AS41609, AS203974, and Alexandru ("Andrei") Stanciu / Suceava, Romania
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] New on RIPE Labs: SHA2017: Hackers' Camping, RIPE Topics
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
ox
andre at ox.co.za
Sat Aug 5 06:41:58 CEST 2017
On Fri, 04 Aug 2017 12:46:06 -0700 "Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg at tristatelogic.com> wrote: > ox <andre at ox.co.za> you wrote: > >For Abuse purposes... Email Administrators should as a rule not > >relay/accept emails from IP numbers with no reverse... > I do agree completely. However as is made clear by this exact case, > there are enough inbound mail servers still left on this planet that yes, sadly some of the providers on this list, it is conservatively less than 25% though (aggressive/optimistically 10%), so there is a small/smaller minority still to convert... /* Taking a small break for marketing / advertisement... ************************************************************** If you are reading this thread and you accept emails for relay with no rDNS check, please consider changing your policy :) */ > do not follow that rule so as to make it worthwhile for spammers to > continue to go to great lengths... even hijacking old & abandoned > legacy IPv4 blocks... to get "fresh" IP addresses, even if they can't > set up any reverse DNS for those. > > In a way, this case shows just how desperate spammers have become > in their search for "fresh" IP addres space. > Agree 100% :) Andre
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] AS41609, AS203974, and Alexandru ("Andrei") Stanciu / Suceava, Romania
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] New on RIPE Labs: SHA2017: Hackers' Camping, RIPE Topics
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]