Re: [SHAME] Spam Rats

[Chris Boyd <cboyd () gizmopartners com>]

On Jan 9, 2013, at 8:58 PM, Julian DeMarchi wrote:
> This is the first RBL I have seen list a /24 for lack of PTRs. Not for
> sending spam, but just PTRs alone. How do you explain this to your
> customer?

We're small shop, but our policy is not to accept email from addresses without PTRs.  And we have a long list of 
pool/dhcp/dyn/resnet PTRs we don't accept mail from as well.

I tried SpamRats a few years ago, but found them to have too many false positives.  Then, they were trying to be early 
detectors of spam orginiating from static IP cable/DSL customers.  Good idea, but poorly executed in operation.

--Chris