proposal: greylisting and multiple-IP clients

Vernon Schryver vjs@calcite.rhyolite.com
Thu Mar 11 18:50:18 UTC 2004


> From: John Sutton 

>                                             ...In any case, I've realised 
> today that I am going to have top provide users with access to the logs 

To get them to accept spam filtering, it is vital to give users
access to their logs.  Otherwise they will assume the worst.  It
is even better if you can give them a button to push and so feel
in control.  It's still better if the button actually does something.
(I'm quite serious about all of that.)


> ...
> It all comes down to where does this bloody spam come from!  Is it just a 
> bunch of tosspots in Boca Raton (or whatever that place is called) who have 
> cable connections?  If so, how come their whole IP address range is not 
> listed in the RBL, problem solved?

Do you have any customers using so called "dynamic" IP addreses?
If so, it might be hard to blacklist them.  If not, there are
DNS blacklists that specialize in them.

People say things of the CBL blacklist.  It's not about dynamic
addresses, but reportedly includes many open proxies.  See
http://cbl.abuseat.org/


> ...
> That you have got involved in implementation questions makes me think that 
> the proposal is not wholly unconvincing ;-)

Well, maybe so.
However, in my better moments, I remember that the customer is
always right, even when asking for the utterly stupid, silly, and
useless, provide only that it's optional, it does no harm to those
who don't make the mistake of turning it on, and I include appropriate
comments in the source and documentation.


Vernon Schryver    vjs@rhyolite.com



More information about the DCC mailing list

Contact vjs@rhyolite.com by mail or use the form.