[37763] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Stealth Blocking
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (J.D. Falk)
Wed May 23 22:01:39 2001
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 16:19:12 -0700
From: "J.D. Falk" <jdfalk@cybernothing.org>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Message-ID: <20010523161912.J92776@cybernothing.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <9DC8BBAD4FF100408FC7D18D1F0922860E4667@condor.mhsc.com>; from rmeyer@mhsc.com on Wed, May 23, 2001 at 02:35:07PM -0700
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On 05/23/01, Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com> wrote:
> I'm getting seriously confused here. I thought that the open-relay issue was
> irelevent to MAPS. That MAPS only black-holed confirmed SPAM sites (a little
> tougher, but more granular, charter). Further, that it was ORBS that listed
> open-relay sites specifically, whether they were involved in a spam or not
> (unacceptable due to punishing potential anti-spammers for proliferating
> spam that never saw their systems). To me, these are two entirely different
> charters. If MAPS starts to look like ORBS then I will stop using MAPS.
>
> Can someone please clarify?
MAPS is a company. They have three basic lists. One of them,
the RSS, contains open relays which have been abused by spammers.
http://mail-abuse.org/rss/ has more information.
Sometimes people use "MAPS" to refer to the MAPS RBL, which is
described at http://mail-abuse.org/rbl/ .
The most commonly overlooked (but individually most effective)
MAPS list is the DUL, at http://mail-abuse.org/dul/ .
Each has its own criteria and set of rules, and each has (as
might be expected) attracted assorted kooks and naysayers.
--
J.D. Falk SILENCE IS FOO!
<jdfalk@cybernothing.org>
