IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Asrg] draft-irtf-asrg-bcp-blacklists-07 [re-send]

Michelle Sullivan <matthew@sorbs.net> Tue, 01 March 2011 16:56 UTC

Return-Path: <matthew@sorbs.net>
X-Original-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C6C63A69A6 for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:56:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI=-4.3, RCVD_IN_BSP_OTHER=-0.1, RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED=-4.3, SARE_SUB_RAND_LETTRS4=0.799]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lrA7jdXdnhaI for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:56:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from anaconda.sorbs.net (anaconda.sorbs.net [113.52.8.152]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80DFB3A6989 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:56:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.sorbs.net (mail.sorbs.net [113.52.8.200]) by anaconda.sorbs.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F2A11C548 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 2 Mar 2011 03:57:42 +1100 (EST)
Received: from nemesis.local (c190-214.i02-8.onvol.net [213.165.190.214]) by nemesis.sorbs.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.05 (built Mar 3 2005)) with ESMTPSA id <0LHE00I051S0B1@nemesis.sorbs.net> for asrg@irtf.org; Wed, 02 Mar 2011 02:57:40 +1000 (EST)
Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 17:57:35 +0100
From: Michelle Sullivan <matthew@sorbs.net>
In-reply-to: <EE315DEA-7486-4673-9875-DEC91352BC55@cauce.org>
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
Message-id: <4D6D257F.4060902@sorbs.net>
Organization: Spam and Open Relay Blocking System
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090823 SeaMonkey/1.1.18
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0
References: <4D6C265E.1060101@averillpark.net> <EE315DEA-7486-4673-9875-DEC91352BC55@cauce.org>
Subject: Re: [Asrg] draft-irtf-asrg-bcp-blacklists-07 [re-send]
X-BeenThere: asrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/asrg>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 16:56:43 -0000

Neil Schwartzman wrote:
>
> Allow me to take a brief moment to draw a significant line between the Spamhaus business model, and one based upon delisting. For those too drunk, blind, or somehow mentally deficient to spot it for themselves, it is simple. One charges the beneficiaries of a given DNSBL (Spamhaus) and thus motivates a blacklist operator to run the very best product possible. The other, such as previously done by SORBS, or now UCE Protect, motivates the DNSBL operator to list as many IPs as possible (1) for financial profit.
>   

SORBS had no financial gain due to charging.


Michelle

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email