Re: SORBS Identity theft alert

[Dean Anderson <dean () av8 com>]

On Mon, 11 Apr 2005, Andrew D Kirch wrote:
> Having read this diatribe I can only catagorize it as mis-informed and
> state unequivocably that Brian McWilliams has no clue whatsoever who
> runs SPEWS. (please see myriad interviews I have down with BMcW).

Brian McWilliams makes no claims about who runs SPEWS in the book.

> "See more about mailbombing. Mailbombers are spammers. They just aren't
> in it for the money. Or possibly they are. SORBS asks for donations to
> get delisted, and also seeks donations from Subscribers. It is very
> unusual for blacklists to extort money this way."
>
> This also is a blatant mischaracterization, the AHBL relies on donations
> and advertisements on the website to fund it's operational budget,
> spamhaus charges for commercial
> supporthttp://www.spamhaus.org/organization/funding.html . 

Not from the victims, I hope.

> MCI reaps 5 million dollars per year on spam related income
> http://www.emailbattles.com/archive/battles/spam_aajghgebej_c/, spam
> costs companies billions
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A17754-2003Mar12, why are we
> expected to fight it for free?  

Because Open Relay blacklists have in the past given their databases 
directly to spammers (or abusers, anyway).  This generates abuse, which 
the blacklist then happilly charges fees to block.  We ought not encourage 
that.

> Though we do our best to look out for the good of the internet we are
> not by any means communists, and we deserve to be compensated for our
> work.  Right now the AHBL barely covers the operational costs of the
> servers on a month-to-month basis let alone compensating it's volunteers
> for their time.

This is about SORBS, not AHBL. But speaking of for-profit anti-spam, most 
people aren't interested. The IETF recently rejected SPF technology due to 
its patent encumbrances. Anti-spam technology has to be free and 
pervasive. Your dreams of getting rich on anti-spam are unlikely to be 
realized.

> > SORBS seems to be collecting a lot of sensitive information to view
> > listings:
>
> My site, my rules, or in this case Matthew's site, Matthew's rules.  As
> a non-paying user you always have a choice as to whether or not you
> provide personal information to a website, should you choose not to,
> don't.  The same goes with useage of the DNSBL or RHSBL.  Note that this
> choice may result in your inability to access some content that that
> site has to offer.

And when you collect an alarming amount of sensitive information
unnecessarily, people will be alerted.

> > or used for other mass marketing purposes. 
>
> If Matthew Sullivan uses this to send spam, I'll personally eat my MTA.

ORBS and others were involved in mailbombing. (I conducted tests of this
back in the late 1990's.) Sullivan has threatened mailbombing. 3 MAPS
employees went to work for a well-known spammer. Doesn't seem like it 
would be very surprising. It wouldn't the first time.

I hope your MTA is bio-degradable. Otherwise, you may have difficulty
passing it.

                --Dean

-- 
Av8 Internet   Prepared to pay a premium for better service?
www.av8.net         faster, more reliable, better service
617 344 9000