[130517] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: do you use SPF TXT RRs? (RFC4408)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Tue Oct 5 03:49:06 2010
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <27834.1286225948@localhost>
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2010 00:45:46 -0700
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org list" <nanog@nanog.org>,
Greg Whynott <Greg.Whynott@oicr.on.ca>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Oct 4, 2010, at 1:59 PM, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Oct 2010 13:30:55 PDT, Owen DeLong said:
>=20
>> Removing a few points probably isn't a bad idea so long as you have a =
list of
>> domains for which points should be added.
>=20
> 140 million .coms. Throw-away domains. I do believe that Marcus Ranum =
had
> "trying to enumerate badness" on his list of "Six stupidest security =
ideas".
> This won't scale as long as you have more spammers adding new domains =
faster
> than your NOC staff can add them to the blacklist.
>=20
Yes, getting rid of domain tasting and taking some other steps to bring =
sanity
to the domain name process would really help, IMHO.
> (And even centralized blacklists run by dedicated organizations =
haven't solved
> the problem yet, so I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to work =
out...)
Fair enough. It's not a panacea, but, it can be a component of a =
solution.
Owen
