Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Spanish Internet Provider's SMTP traffic Blocked

Posted by timothy on Mon Apr 26, 2004 01:10 AM
from the appropriate-measures dept.
Andrew D Kirch writes "After being barraged by spam and 419 scams from Rima-TDE and telefonica.es [translated], the AHBL has announced that all of Spain's national ISP's e-mail will be blocked by their blacklisting service. One has to ask though, is blocking an entire country like this the future of spamfighting, or has something gone horribly wrong?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1) | 2
  • about time by tannhaus (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @01:12AM
    • Re:about time (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Narkov (576249) on Monday April 26 2004, @01:15AM (#8970032)
      (http://www.overclockers.com.au/)
      Bad luck to those ligitimate ISP's out there that get brought down by a few big National ISP's.

      Blanket measures like this are wrong. Target the individual ISP's that are known bad.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:about time (Score:5, Informative)

        by trelanexiph (605826) on Monday April 26 2004, @02:07AM (#8970261)
        (http://www.sosdg.org/)
        Telefonica.es is the ISP, as RIMA-TDE (another hat it wears) it has been responsible for the continuing incredible 419 spams out of Spain, though they're a BIG ISP, and they are, this does not excuse them from policing their network and ensuring that such things are kept to a minimum, and terminations occur when appropriate. The issue here was they refused to identify corrective actions, refused to terminate abusive customers, and refused to return contact after they initiated contact.
        [ Parent ]
        • by @madeus (24818) <slashdot_24818@mac.com> on Monday April 26 2004, @05:37AM (#8970922)
          I quite agree Telefonica.es are an insuferable source of spam (much of the 419 spam I get is relayed through there, as you say). Telefonica is in fact the single largest source of all the spam in my mailbox and I have tried to get them to take notice for years. I welcome this action with open arms.

          Telefonica.es administrators are simply utterly incompetant and have been for years - they don't care one hoot, maybe now their own sence of self preservation will take over (though it's sad that it has to go this far before there is any hope of them taking action).

          There was a large degree of debate when they first joined the European Union that less wealthly nations such Spain and Portugal joining would upset the balance, so they were 'eased in' thanks to legislation allowing for a transition period. Now, they are economicaly fully integrated, but cultural issues still remain. I think their behavior in this reguard is glaring example of the level of sophistication and competance in a highly technical field not being up to par.

          Spain, South America, Africa and the less developed parts of Asia are main sources of spam (at least, the spam I receive). While South America, Africa and Asia all have understandable economic reasons for being sources of such abuse, the Spanish ought to be able to keep order and it's a damning indictment of their abilites that they have been unable to for so many years. What's even more depressing is I predict that we see a new influx of spam from the Eastern European nations now joining the EU in the not-too-distant future.

          [ Parent ]
          • Re:incompetence outside of the US? (Score:5, Insightful)

            by sofar (317980) on Monday April 26 2004, @07:03AM (#8971161)
            (http://foo-projects.org/)

            I'm a european and the occasional relayed-by-spain spam message doesn't even make the 95% that is relayed by US based machines.

            Don't assume, measure, balance, and do something about your own country's companies. It could be your neighbour.

            And that guy 3 postings up has a valid point: 80% of all spam topics are US centric. I should blacklist all US IP numbers for that. The US is capitally guilty of keeping spam in place, either by the largest DEMAND (companies and customers), or by non-conclusive legislation.
            [ Parent ]
            • Re:incompetence outside of the US? by ChuyMatt (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @07:37AM
            • Re:incompetence outside of the US? by twbecker (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @07:40AM
            • Re:incompetence outside of the US? by schon (Score:3) Monday April 26 2004, @08:01AM
            • Re:incompetence outside of the US? by budgenator (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @09:19AM
            • Re:incompetence outside of the US? (Score:5, Interesting)

              by @madeus (24818) <slashdot_24818@mac.com> on Monday April 26 2004, @10:49AM (#8973028)
              I'm a european and the occasional relayed-by-spain spam message doesn't even make the 95% that is relayed by US based machines.

              I'm a European too, and I've been getting Spam from Telephonica for 6+ years. Just because you don't understand the reasons behind why this course of action has taken place, doesn't mean it's not warrented, and it certainly doesn't mean you should defend their behavior.

              I receive virtually zero spam from US based source IP's and many from telephonica.es - given that the US has *VASTLY* more internet users than the smaller, less well connected Spain is quite damning on Telephonica's part.

              Dispite your assertions the US does more than any other nation to prevent and clamp down on spam. Impefect as it is, no comparible level of anti-spam ligitation has been passed in any other nation (though a few sops have been thrown here and there).

              Don't assume, measure, balance, and do something about your own country's companies. It could be your neighbour.

              I'm from the UK, we do comparibly quite a good job here (dispite poor legislation, largely thanks to the watchful behavior of ISP's), and yes it is one of our neighbours that's reponsible for a very high volume of Spam, that 'neighbour' is Spain.

              Telephonica is such a problem child that this is long over due. Many of us (who keep track of the source IP's of our spam) are frankly sick and tired of their **** and it's about time this happened.

              You can automatically bash the US all you like (for all the good it will do you), but the problem here is a company in an EU member country pisses of thousands of people all over the world though it's lax and unprofessional business standards, because they are too incompotent to sort out a problem I can recall them having for at least the last 6 years (thanks largely to it's proximity to North Africa and the large number of Cyber Cafe's no doubt).

              Go on and black list US IP's if you like, I'd find that amusing. That's actually likley to INCREASE your spam to genuine mail ratio.
              [ Parent ]
              • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
            • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
          • Re:about time - Telefonica incompetance by luisdom (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @11:12AM
          • Re:about time - Telefonica incompetance by BillKaos (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @11:25AM
          • by BobTheLawyer (692026) on Monday April 26 2004, @07:42AM (#8971354)
            Bad troll. The EC was formed in 1957 and Spain joined in 1986, at the same time as Portugal.
            [ Parent ]
            • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
          • Re:about time - Telefonica incompetance by @madeus (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @10:17AM
          • 4 replies beneath your current threshold.
        • Re:about time by mdinowitz (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @10:39AM
        • Re:you mean BIG? (Score:4, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 26 2004, @02:53AM (#8970430)
          A 419 e-mail refers to a particular kind of Nigerian fraud e-mail, not the number of e-mails sent.
          [ Parent ]
        • Re:you mean BIG? by Stonent1 (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @03:04AM
        • Re:you mean BIG? by An Ominous Cow Erred (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @03:04AM
        • Re:about time by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @06:45AM
        • Re:about time by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @07:58AM
        • Re:about time by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @08:21AM
        • Re:you mean BIG? by AndroidCat (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @11:53AM
        • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:about time by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @02:49AM
      • Re:about time by c (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @06:45AM
      • Spock loves blackhole lists by fleener (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @08:24AM
      • Re:about time by sjdude (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @09:47AM
      • Re:about time by JuggleGeek (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @09:37PM
      • Re:about time (Score:4, Interesting)

        by trelanexiph (605826) on Monday April 26 2004, @02:44AM (#8970397)
        (http://www.sosdg.org/)
        hrm.. nothing is definately not enough, they terminated no customers, sent no warnings, they demanded to see our previous complaints because they'd never recieved any complaints from ahbl.org. news flash we have quite a few domains, we're not going to complain from the blacklist. Frankly we shouldn't have to wave around a blacklist to get attention, and to get abusive customers removed. A customer who has abused is already abusive before the first complaint is sent. TERMINATE THEM THEN!
        [ Parent ]
      • Re:about time by N3WBI3 (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @06:36AM
      • 7 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:about time by Anonymous Coward (Score:3) Monday April 26 2004, @01:19AM
      • Re:about time (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 26 2004, @01:39AM (#8970150)
        I believe Poor Richard's Almanac (written by Benjamin Franklin) which went something like this:
        When solving a problem it is common to take a method and try it. When it fails, try another. But above all, do something."
        [ Parent ]
        • Re:about time by EpsCylonB (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @06:58AM
          • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
        • Re:about time by HD Webdev (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @08:48AM
        • Re:about time by JuggleGeek (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @09:50PM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • But If We Block Their IPs... by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @02:42AM
      • Re:about time by Lshmael (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @01:45AM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:about time by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @01:46AM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:about time by operagost (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @06:42AM
      • Re:about time by another_mr_lizard (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @06:59AM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:FWIW... by Paradise Pete (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @06:59AM
      • But, we were hypocritical on this by zogger (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @09:25AM
      • Re:about time by Guido von Guido (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @03:22PM
      • Re:about time by JuggleGeek (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @09:53PM
      • Re:about time by JuggleGeek (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @10:12PM
      • 5 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:about time by eddeye (Score:3) Monday April 26 2004, @02:44AM
      • Re:about time (Score:4, Insightful)

        by trelanexiph (605826) on Monday April 26 2004, @03:33AM (#8970562)
        (http://www.sosdg.org/)
        your paper also doesn't really provide any emphasis or responsibility on ISP's to police their traffic, therefore it's more or less functionally useless at stopping spam. The best way to stop spam is to deny access to our mail servers from ISP's harboring spammers.
        [ Parent ]
        • Re:about time by eddeye (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @01:05PM
          • Re:about time by trelanexiph (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @01:52PM
    • Re:about time by The Arbit Council (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @02:50AM
    • Re:about time by halowolf (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @03:09AM
      • Re:about time by thogard (Score:3) Monday April 26 2004, @03:22AM
        • Re:about time by halowolf (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @05:42AM
          • Re:about time by thogard (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @08:38PM
    • Re:about time by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @07:33AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • by joeszilagyi (635484) on Monday April 26 2004, @01:12AM (#8970015)
    (http://www.joeszilagyi.com/)
    The message is clear: police your people's usage and abuse of the Internet, or prepare to enjoy your new Intranet.

    A few other countries that can use this are found here [blackholes.us].

  • perhaps? by tuxette (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @01:12AM
    • Re:perhaps? by Anonymous Coward (Score:3) Monday April 26 2004, @01:27AM
      • Re:perhaps? by Ded Mike (Score:3) Monday April 26 2004, @01:50AM
      • Re:perhaps? by Ironica (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @02:01AM
        • Re:perhaps? by AlfredoLambda (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @05:13AM
        • Re:perhaps? by holt (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @12:32PM
    • Re:perhaps? by SEWilco (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @01:40AM
    • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Is there such a thing as a reputable blacklist? by LostCluster (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @01:13AM
  • by inflex (123318) on Monday April 26 2004, @01:14AM (#8970025)
    This is crazy, blocking an entire country because of spam - while I can appreciate the 'irritation' of receiving spam, the dis-service imposed by this massive block will greatly outweigh the 'service' it's supposed to perform.

    It's like back in school, when the entire class would be put into detention because of the actions of one person, it was a pathetic method then and it's a pathetic method now. Ultimately, it comes down to the teacher/blocker being lazy and hoping that such drastic measures will induce the 'masses' to seek out and obliterate the offending party. I never saw such 'action' succeed at school, I doubt we'll see much happen from this either (apart from iritate a lot of people).

    *disclaimer: school was more than half a lifetime ago - so perhaps my brain is rusty by now.
    • by NSash (711724) on Monday April 26 2004, @01:22AM (#8970074)
      (Last Journal: Monday April 26 2004, @01:10AM)
      "Blocking off an entire country" is meaningless in this context. You make it sound as if no one in Spain can send e-mail now; that's completely untrue. What has been blacklisted is e-mail originating from Spain's national ISP: that won't affect the Yahoo Mail, or hotmail, or GMail, or any other mail service accounts of people in Spain. Only the accounts provided by Telefonica De Espana, or companies that rely on them for hosting, will be blocked.

      This is far less extreme than say, a spam filter that automatically flags email originating from hotmail and aol addresses as spam.
      [ Parent ]
      • by inflex (123318) on Monday April 26 2004, @01:29AM (#8970117)
        You make it sound like no one ever uses their own corporate mail servers?

        Not everyone uses yahoo, hotmail, gmail etc. A lot of local businesses will have localised mail servers, these people will now feel the crunch... I can imagine export type companies would really be wailing.

        It's not like they all have time on their hands to start phoning up and complaning, let alone even KNOWING who to complain to (imagine if they're a few tiers down from the top ISP). How many of those business would know why their email all of a sudden wasn't being responded to.

        Clients love getting email from joe@hotmail.com, very professional looking :-\

        While this may actually induce something to happen, I still feel the cost on the innocents is just too high.

        PLD.
        [ Parent ]
        • by _Sprocket_ (42527) on Monday April 26 2004, @01:58AM (#8970226)


          You make it sound like no one ever uses their own corporate mail servers? ...
          While this may actually induce something to happen, I still feel the cost on the innocents is just too high.


          If I were a company who rented IP space from Telefonica De Espana, I'd be upset. They should be able to police their own network. I would have to consider taking my business elsewhere. Or, failing that, seek compensation for the increase in expense of hosting my company email server elsewhere.

          The key here is generating a cost to ISPs who harbor spammers. After all, a spammer's fee is certainly incentive to sign them on. Without a counter incentive, we will quickly find ourselves in a classic tragedy of the commons situation.

          A final point - email and the Internet in general is a powerfull, valuable resource that exists because various entities work together. When one (or more) entities threaten the workings of that resource, it should be of no suprise that others will decide to no longer work with them.
          [ Parent ]
        • Re:It's not something that'll ever go away by dodobh (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @01:59AM
        • Re:It's not something that'll ever go away by darnok (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @02:09AM
        • Re:It's not something that'll ever go away by harlows_monkeys (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @03:20AM
        • Re:It's not something that'll ever go away by drinkypoo (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @11:44AM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • All DSL accounts will be blocked by kornerson (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @02:27AM
      • Re:It's not something that'll ever go away by pyrotic (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @04:13AM
      • Re:It's not something that'll ever go away by Eggplant62 (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @10:31AM
      • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:It's not something that'll ever go away by Jhon (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @01:53AM
    • Re:It's not something that'll ever go away by CdBee (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @02:05AM
    • Re:It's not something that'll ever go away by sadangel (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @02:17AM
    • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • It might be unfair... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by dawg ball (773621) on Monday April 26 2004, @01:14AM (#8970029)
    (http://www.theerogenouszone.net/)
    ... but it's about time that something serious was done to combat spam. It's a pity that some innocent ISPs have had to suffer because of this but maybe they, in turn, will also put pressure on ISPs that host spammers?
  • This is a good idea. by saden1 (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @01:15AM
  • The future of blocking? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Animats (122034) on Monday April 26 2004, @01:15AM (#8970033)
    (http://www.animats.com)
    The near future of blocklists may include all of these highly spam-tolerant areas:
    • China
    • Romania
    • Sub-Saharan Africa
    • Florida
  • Shoot on sight... (Score:4, Funny)

    by silentbozo (542534) on Monday April 26 2004, @01:15AM (#8970034)
    (Last Journal: Sunday April 17 2005, @07:20PM)
    You may or may not like blacklists, but you gotta admit, they take their work seriously (from their list of return classifications when querying their blacklist DNS lookup):
    Shoot On Sight (Response: 127.0.0.10)

    This IP address is listed for one of several reasons. The provider, individual, or company did one of the following:

    * Cart00ney threats made towards the AHBL, SOSDG, other blacklists, and spam fighters.
    * Attempted and unsuccessful legal attacks against the AHBL, SOSDG, other blacklists, and spam fighters.
    * Promotes, supports, or incites attacks against the AHBL, SOSDG, other blacklists, spam fighters, and others on the Internet.
  • No significa nada by NSash (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @01:16AM
  • Been suggested before, but it's not the answer... by Mindcry (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @01:16AM
    • They did try by Sycraft-fu (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @03:20AM
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 26 2004, @01:16AM (#8970037)
    ...that since most spam originates in the US, the entire country should be blocked.

    I, for one, would welcome it, living in the US. Get rid of my spam AND my e-mail. Productivity would go through the roof.

  • Next stop.. by Dragonshed (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @01:18AM
  • The answer is yes by Rosco P. Coltrane (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @01:20AM
  • Wonderful (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Neo-Rio-101 (700494) on Monday April 26 2004, @01:20AM (#8970064)
    This is amazing really.

    All the democratizing functions, promises of free education, free dispersion of information, increased international communication and understanding..... all these things that the internet promised is being brought to it's knees because of penis enlargements, nigerian fraudsters, and greedy marketers all wanting to make a buck!

    Don't mod this funny! It's NOT!

    (Actually, now that I think of it, TV suffered the same fate. Originally touted as an educational resource, it turned into the junk box it is today. It's just history repeating.)
  • not extreme in the least by sensei_brandon (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @01:21AM
  • National ISP by GSPride (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @01:21AM
  • Dumb by KalvinB (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @01:22AM
    • Re:Dumb by Digital Avatar (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @01:29AM
    • Recourse? by joeszilagyi (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @01:35AM
    • Re:Dumb by corbettw (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @02:02AM
      • Re:Dumb by 12357bd (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @03:28AM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Dumb by kevinadi (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @02:15AM
    • Re:Dumb by SpecBear (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @02:19AM
    • Re:Dumb by Analysis Paralysis (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @03:21AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Blocklists don't block email (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jhunsake (81920) on Monday April 26 2004, @01:22AM (#8970076)
    (Last Journal: Friday September 03 2004, @06:47PM)
    e-mail will be blocked by their blacklisting service

    Nope, only *you* can block email to *your* server.
  • Blacklist 'em all. by Digital Avatar (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @01:22AM
  • its fine by P0lyh34) (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @01:23AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Seems like a good idea, doesn't it? by crowley_dk (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @01:23AM
  • Internet passports by October_30th (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @01:23AM
    • Re:Internet passports by jettoblack (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @01:52AM
      • Re:Internet passports by October_30th (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @02:17AM
        • Re:Internet passports by thogard (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @03:29AM
        • Re:Internet passports (Score:4, Interesting)

          by geminidomino (614729) on Monday April 26 2004, @04:03AM (#8970667)
          (http://www.mangaschool.com/ | Last Journal: Tuesday January 03 2006, @07:51AM)
          They will when the alternatives are 1) having to change one's e-mail address every week because your ISP just got on SPEWS blacklist and 2) drown in spam.

          3) Change once to an ISP that doesn't tolerate spamming on its network. They DO exist.

          Have worms on your Windows box: your ID is revoked.

          Which means a huge subset of users would lose the ability to send mail anyway. Same supposed problem with blacklists, except in your solution, they lose it completely.

          x) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical

          No-one has even tried because the ideas got shot down by professional hand-wringers


          It has been tried, repeatedly. It has failed, just as repeatedly. This idea of yours is not new, not practicle, and all but unimplimentable.

          (x) Sending email should be free

          I disagree. E-mail "stamps" would be a good idea.


          Email stamps would be a very BAD idea. Spammers already steal accounts, bandwidth, server space... what makes you think they wouldn't steal "stamps?"

          All in all, a very naive suggestion.
          [ Parent ]
          • Monopoly by tepples (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @09:44PM
            • Re:Monopoly by geminidomino (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @11:49PM
              • Smart what? by tepples (Score:1) Tuesday April 27 2004, @12:03AM
              • Re:Smart what? by geminidomino (Score:2) Tuesday April 27 2004, @05:11AM
              • Re:Smart what? by October_30th (Score:1) Tuesday April 27 2004, @02:01PM
              • Re:Smart what? by geminidomino (Score:2) Wednesday April 28 2004, @01:43AM
          • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
        • Re:Internet passports by jettoblack (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @04:07AM
    • Re:Internet passports (Score:5, Informative)

      by maxpublic (450413) on Monday April 26 2004, @02:02AM (#8970246)
      (http://slashdot.org/)
      We have real life IDs that are difficult to forge and even if you can forge them, you'd get hit by hefty penalties for doing it.

      This is a silly argument. Criminals will forge i.d.'s regardless of the law *because - duh! - they're criminals. It's what they do*.

      And if you think it's difficult to forge a driver's license or a passport, from *any* country, you've been swallowing too much government bullshit. For $500-$1000 you can get a completely new, legal identity that'll check out if the government investigates it, because it was purchased directly from the folks who control the system that issues i.d.'s in the first place. I could, in 48 hours, get a perfectly valid (and new) SSN, drivers license, and birth record entry which will hold up under government scrutiny *because the folks who control the system will sell them to me, and they aren't forged*. I can get decent forgeries for just a few hundred bucks, if I don't need to pass a serious security check.

      Internet i.d.'s will be no different, and no harder to forge. Or to buy, from the right people.

      Max
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Internet passports by icebike (Score:3) Monday April 26 2004, @02:11AM
    • Re:Internet passports by October_30th (Score:1) Tuesday April 27 2004, @01:58PM
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • It's really quite simple... by jollis (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @01:25AM
  • A sucker is born every minute... by utahraptor (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @01:27AM
  • spamfighting? by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @01:27AM
  • Update SMTP ... by psilonaut (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @01:28AM
  • Gandi.net (Score:3, Interesting)

    by azav (469988) on Monday April 26 2004, @01:29AM (#8970114)
    (http://web.mac.com/zav | Last Journal: Wednesday May 28 2003, @04:24PM)
    I have noticed that the vast majority of spam that I get reference domains registered at http://gandi.net

    I'd LOVE to be able to block by registrar.

    Does anyone know how to get a registrar shut down??
    • Re:Gandi.net by supalexie (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @01:51AM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Gandi.net by LostCluster (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @01:54AM
    • Re:Gandi.net by Professeur Shadoko (Score:3) Monday April 26 2004, @02:56AM
      • Re:Gandi.net by azav (Score:3) Monday April 26 2004, @04:00AM
        • Re:Gandi.net by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @04:27AM
          • Re:Gandi.net by EvilStein (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @05:58AM
            • Re:Gandi.net by djmurdoch (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @06:24AM
    • Re:Gandi.net by drinkypoo (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @11:46AM
    • Re:Gandi.net by Cpyder (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @04:17AM
      • Re:Gandi.net by azav (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @04:19AM
        • Re:Gandi.net by Cpyder (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @04:56AM
        • Re:Gandi.net by wagemonkey (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @06:00AM
          • Re:Gandi.net by azav (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @10:40AM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:Gandi.net by azav (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @04:28AM
    • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • by dtfinch (661405) * on Monday April 26 2004, @01:34AM (#8970134)
    (Last Journal: Monday September 25 2006, @01:19PM)
    The United States produces more spam than any other country.

  • This doesn't happen overnight. (Score:3, Informative)


    Rima-tde's long time treatment of abuse complaints has lead to them being labeled by many in the community as a rogue provider.

    This has continued for quite some time, as evidenced by archived usenet posts (http://groups.google.com/groups?q=rima-tde&ie=UTF -8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&btnG=Google+Search)

    Getting up there along with the likes of HINET and Chinese state-run providers takes some serious work, and in goes to show Telefonica De Espana's commitment to its spammers!

    Congratulations to them on this well deserved moment of (in)fame.
  • :-O by macgyvr64 (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @01:39AM
  • On time! by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @01:55AM
  • /. just does the same by agi (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @01:58AM
  • Bah, typical slashfoo (Score:3, Interesting)

    by crucini (98210) on Monday April 26 2004, @02:01AM (#8970238)
    This is a typical demagogic attempt to get slashdotters riled up against an otherwise unnown blocklist operator. Simply put, most slashdotters do not run ISP's and therefore see only the downside of blocklists.
    Most slashdotters are benefiting from some kind of mail filtering and don't even realize it. They are like peaceniks bitching about the very defense establishment that keeps them free to bitch.

    I never heard of the AHBL before this article. There are tons of lists. A list that would block a major ISP is probably a niche list aimed at small domains who are not going to have 10,000 angry customers. If SPEWS blocked this ISP, it might be news. If some unknown list does it, so what?

    If you find it shocking that a list would shoot from the hip, don't ever query xbl.selwerd.cx. Fast, broad and unforgiving!

    Before the inevitable whining chorus of broad-listing-is-bad-what-about-the-innocent-victi ms, let me remind you that SPEWS has gotten the attention of some extremely inattentive spam havens. Companies that unrepentantly spammed like mad in the face of every kind of complaint, peer pressure, and narrowly targetted listing have suddenly come to the table when facing a broad SPEWS block. Broad listing works where diplomacy has failed.

    And remember, also, that you are almost certainly benefiting from a lot of filtering implemented by your postmasters or even network admins (at border routers). They spend a huge amount of time compiling lists of bad domains and netblocks - why shouldn't they share that knowledge with other admins? Such sharing is most efficiently done by publishing a DNS-based list like SPEWS. The high profile lists are more professionally maintained than most ISP's in-house lists. Would you rather they share in secret, so small operators can't benefit from their knowledge?
    • Re:Bah, typical slashfoo (Score:5, Informative)

      by bruns (75399) <bruns.2mbit@com> on Monday April 26 2004, @02:16AM (#8970288)
      (http://www.sosdg.org/)
      The AHBL is the redesign of the older blackholes.2mbit.com DNSbl from years ago. We've just changed its main focus on abuse in general - which includes e-mail, DoS attacks, etc.

      We are apparently in wide enough use that we deal with TDE customers on a daily basis that are complaining that they are blocked.

      Its not our primary focus to be the biggest.

      Our primary focus is to protect our systems, and the systems we manage, from spam and abuse. We make our data available to anyone and everyone, because we know that our data will improve on the feedback of our users.

      So far, we have had zero complaints from our users as to our blocking methods, even if they are extreme at times.

      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Bah, typical slashfoo by jollis (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @02:21AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Telefonica is not the *onyl* ISP in Spain by borjam (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @02:02AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • This is a good idea, but... (Score:5, Funny)

    by SiliconEntity (448450) on Monday April 26 2004, @02:06AM (#8970258)
    This is a good idea, but it doesn't go far enough.

    I didn't just block Spain. I set my system to blackhole the whole damn world!

    Just think of it! All over the world, anybody tries to send me email, and it disappears into a black hole. Eat dirt, spammers!

    And of course all the legitimate email disappears as well. But that's the point! When I talk to someone and they complain that I didn't respond to their email, I explain that it's not me - it's their world's policies about spam! Once you get your act together and get spam off the net, then I'll unblock you, I say. Until then, don't come crying to me - talk to your ISP, to your elected representatives, to the UN. That's where the problem is, and until you can solve it with them... you're blocked.

    Yup. I figure this spam business is going to get cleaned up PDQ once people realize what it's costing them. We're going to get a nice, spam-free net, and it's all because of me. You're welcome.
  • Totally legit by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @02:13AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • I say block it. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Mustang Matt (133426) on Monday April 26 2004, @02:13AM (#8970279)
    Block every country that's sending tons of spam. Yes, I know the US is responsible for most of it, but that's exactly my point. Keep blocking countries until the US spammers have to send from US servers and then let us all attack them with a multitude of lawsuits.

    China is the worst for me because some jerk spammer is sending junk with my domain on the reply-to. His stuff is hosted in China and there's not a thing I can do.
  • AHBL policies (Score:5, Informative)

    by bruns (75399) <bruns.2mbit@com> on Monday April 26 2004, @02:22AM (#8970314)
    (http://www.sosdg.org/)
    The AHBL is very open to working with providers to solve their problems. On a daily basis, I can be working with several ISPs to figure out how to better tune our listings, or help them track down a spamming customer.

    We only resort to this wide range listings when we're run out of options. In the case of TDE, we just do not have any more patience.

    We gave them time. We sent them abuse reports. We even asked them to provide us with accurate information on their netblocks so we can tune our listings down to only their dynamic customers.

    However, they ignored our requests.

    The AHBL has very strict policies on what we will and will not do.

    We are taking a strong stance on 419 and phishers right now - just take a look at our ongoing fight with megamailservers.com - we caught them in a lie with their phishing customers, and we are holding them responsible.

    If we are having an effect or not, it doesn't really matter to me. All I do know is that we are taking a stance and asking others to support us.

    The hope being that with enough people working with us, we will be able to force providers to do something about their problems.

    Feel free to flame me all you want.
  • tackling spam from ground up by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @02:25AM
  • Blocking Entire Countries (Score:5, Insightful)

    by RWarrior(fobw) (448405) * on Monday April 26 2004, @02:27AM (#8970330)
    It would be nice if these kinds of things would get administrators' attention. I don't have high hopes.

    Personally, I get anywhere between one thousand and one hundred thousand spams a week directed at my domain from some asshat in Brazil. They come addressed to user1@mydomain.com, user2@mydomain.com, etc., in alphabetical order. Tens of thousands of them. And that's just the Brazilian stuff. That doesn't include the mortgage ads, 419 scams, porn ads, and advertisements that will help me make my wife's penis larger.

    Since I'm the only person who uses my domain, and I don't read Portuguese anyway, these are nothing but a drain on my bandwidth and resources, even if I were inclined to buy penis enlargement cream for my wife.

    And since I use a hosting service I can't implement a connection-level block because I don't have root on the box. Implementing SpamAssassin on the hosting server brings their box to its knees (I know because I've done it and they shut down my account); instead, I have to dedicate one of my own boxes to scanning all this shit -after- downloading it. My box does virtually nothing else.

    And since my domain is my last name, I can't exactly change it easily.

    SMTP is broken. It has outlived its usefulness, and it is past time for it to die. Born in an era when the internet was a far safer place, patches and scanning placed on top of it to stop spam do nothing to put the burden of sending mail where it belongs: on the sender. While tools like SpamAssassin, SpamBouncer and RBLs help us to avoid seeing the crap in our inboxes, they remain kludges that still eat up our processor time, bandwidth, infrastructure and money.

    But all my work in call centers has taught me that stupid people will always exist, and that some of them can never be taught to behave properly. This means that any schmuck with enough money and enough time and some basic Google literacy can set up a broken copy of $YOUR_FAVORITE_SMTPD on $YOUR_FAVORITE_OS and become the latest spew.

    Proposals exist (Dr. Dan Bernstein's Internet Mail 2000 [cr.yp.to] is one of several) to shift the burden of storage and processing from the receiver to the sender. All well and good, but nobody's bothered writing a bunch of cross-platform implementations that everybody will actually switch to, and that Microsoft won't be able to embrace and extend.

    So where does that leave us mere mortals, except to use the hypersonic planet-smashing axe to kill the maggot-laying fly?

    • Re:Blocking Entire Countries by PhotoGuy (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @05:21AM
    • Proposals exist (Dr. Dan Bernstein's Internet Mail 2000 is one of several) to shift the burden of storage and processing from the receiver to the sender.
      IM2000 is interesting on the surface, but the proposal is incomplete and it misses one essential point. Putting the storage burden on the sender is meaningless when the sender is sending millions of identical copies. There's also the point that under IM2000, the receiver must know to seek out and download notifications of waiting mail. This does well against unsolicited spam, at the expense of unsolicited non-spam. I suppose you could develop a network of trusted introducers to provide the thousands of maildrops you would now be required to periodically check, but then there would be the issue of how to extend trust. And if spammers are willing to forge every last bit of identifying data save for the essential sucker's URL in an email now, nothing suggests that they would be any more responsible about creating introducers.

      The essential problem is that email is a push technology by necessity. A successful antispam technology protects the entry point to the system, but protecting the entry point is a Hard Problem.

      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Blocking Entire Countries by adrianbaugh (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @06:23AM
    • Re:Blocking Entire Countries by drinkypoo (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @11:27AM
    • Re:Blocking Entire Countries by JuggleGeek (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @04:29PM
    • 5 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • UPDATE: 4/26/2004 by Ded Mike (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @02:28AM
  • Both sides now. by 12357bd (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @02:32AM
  • Next thing by fernand0 (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @02:35AM
  • As a Spaniard... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by JCAB (714346) on Monday April 26 2004, @02:47AM (#8970407)
    (http://www.jcabs-rumblings.com/)
    As a Spaniard living abroad, I care deeply about this. I do exchange plenty of legit email with Spain, you see, so this will affect me personally.

    Contrary to what many people seem to think here, the announcement doesn't say thay'll block the whole country. That measure would be draconian, along the line of nuking a city to quench a major disturbance.

    Instead, they say (correctly) that they are blocking the offending IDE, which "is the govt run ISP of Spain" so it can be expected that this ISP provider is a major provider, and many people will be affected. I believe that. Telefonica was, until a few years ago, _the one and only_ telephone communications provider of Spain. It is BIG.

    This is unfortunate, but _if_ this provider really is such a non-cooperative major source of spam and hack attacks, then I can't blame them for blocking it, much as it pains me.

    • Re:As a Spaniard... (Score:4, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 26 2004, @04:26AM (#8970730)
      As Spaniard...

      It's true that the announcement does'nt say that they'll block the whole country, but telefonica rents his lines to other companies, so they will be blocking a lot of people, a lot more than the 50%.

      Its incorrect that telefonica is the gov's isp, it was few years ago, but the previus government privatized it so the new government (we have elections a month ago) doesn't have any control over the company.
      The process of privatizacion was very obscure, a lot of directives getting a large amount of money, the new president that was designed was a friend from school of the old government president, etc etc.

      We've got only a pair of alternatives and isn't as easy as it seems to change provider, for example you can't change company in the first year whithout paying a large amount of money.

      We're paying what the previous government do, they do their worst in exterior relationships, they had a very bad plan about new technologies, education, etc. For example Spain got the worst number of internet connections, internet services and the most expensive connections of Europe.

      Telefonica got the worst client hot line you can imagine and they don't pay any attention to what the users says, but you've got no alternatives in the most of the cases.

      So as a Spaniard and as a Telefonica user i thought that it isn't fair to ban the whole company ips but it's fair to make telefonica pay a large amount of money or punish it other way.

      PD: sorry for my english
      [ Parent ]
  • by Animaether (411575) on Monday April 26 2004, @02:50AM (#8970415)
    (Last Journal: Wednesday December 20 2006, @07:31PM)
    Ideally, people would complain to their ISP. But, society is hardly an ideal...

    -----

    Somebody robs a bank and flees.
    The cops don't know where he is, but know that he can't have fled beyond 5 blocks.
    The cops cordon off those 5 blocks.
    Everybody within can't leave, everybody outside can't get in.
    Does society, in general, get pissed wtih :
    A. The bankrobber, for robbing the bank, making this a likely necessity
    B. The police, for preventing people from going where they want

    Answer : B

    -----

    A local TV transmitter gets notice from a commercial network that the commercial network will no longer pay the transmitter to be aired. They'll have to put them on the air for free.
    The local TV transmitter gives them the finger and pulls them off the air.
    Delicate issue : the commercial network carries soap operas that are hugely popular within the local region.
    Does society typically blame :
    A. The commercial network for using their show's/shows' popularity to try and strong-arm the local transmitter for a better deal
    B. The local transmitter for making it impossible to watch their favorite show

    Answer : B. Real story where I'm from, and people ended up getting TV dishes en-masse.

    --

    Same thing with this...

    Do you really think all those Spanish people are going to blame their ISP for hosting (known) spammers once they get word/realize that their mails out to the world are bouncing/getting eaten ?
    Of course not. They're going to say "wtf. stupid blacklists - that e-mail has to be there today, and that blacklisting of my ISP is the reason it can't. I guess I'll have to hotmail it. *expletive*"

    That's how cause and effect is going...
    effect : ISP is blacklisted
    cause : ISP hosts spammers
    NOT the legitimate people's problem!

    at least, until...
    effect : people can't send e-mail
    cause : blacklists
    Therefore - blame the blacklists!

    you see, there is no :
    effect : people can't send e-mail
    cause : ISP hosts spammers
    relationship to most of society, so they're not about to blame the spammers.

    And as much as I disagree with that stance, and would poke at my ISP to see if they can get off the blacklists a.s.a.p., I can't say that I blame users who point at the blacklists instead.

    Maybe if blacklists could warn ISPs' users 3 days in advance. Maybe... mass e-mail them :x That's spam I wouldn't mind receiving it means I could ring up the ISP and warn them that if 3 days later the ISP still finds itself listed, I'd take my business elsewhere - and find a decent alternative in the mean time, rather than being caught off-guard.
  • Minimal impact by Avlimator (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @02:54AM
  • WHAT ABOUT OUTBLAZE!!!! by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @02:55AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • China... by Seven001 (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @02:57AM
  • just fix the damn problem for good by dangil (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @03:03AM
  • Telefonica has it all by McKlain (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @03:03AM
  • The key problem by NiklasD (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @03:08AM
  • So... by inode_buddha (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @03:12AM
  • blacklisting a whole country? by beware1000 (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @03:19AM
  • I'm from Spain by NaiL2001 (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @03:25AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • honestly by mattboston (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @03:26AM
    • Re:honestly by TiggsPanther (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @01:24PM
  • SPF by noselasd (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @03:28AM
  • Why exactly is this a problem? by jez9999 (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @03:33AM
  • Not the first time (Score:3, Interesting)

    In the past, the whole of Costa Rica has already been blocked once because their national ISP (racsa.co.cr, which was (is?) the only one available) did nothing against Ralsky's bestiality and incest porn spamming via their networks and hosting his sites on their network.

    And since this is in the "Your Rights Online" category: I think everyone has the right to refuse mail from anyone else. If an ISP uses this blocking list without properly informing his customers and without offering a way for his customers to opt-out of this kind, then this ISP is obviously at fault, not the people who publish the blacklist. The latter are simply like a consumer magazine that advises against buying a particular product because it performed very bad compared to other tested products.
  • Telefónica IS NOT the govt/national ISP of Sp by jecouto (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @03:53AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • One way of getting rid of Spam? by Antti Luode (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @03:54AM
  • A blessing in disguise (Score:3, Insightful)

    by D4C5CE (578304) on Monday April 26 2004, @03:55AM (#8970639)
    They cannot claim that it wasn't a scenario waiting to happen.
    Back in 2000 already, Tom Geller made this statement in a discussion [tgeller.com] with the EFF:
    The saddest part of the spam problem is this: The "technical solutions" you name above already cause
    entire nations to be blackholed in thousands of servers around the world. Many postmasters have received only spam from .cn and .kr, so they dump all mail from those TLDs in the trash.
    Mind you, it is the Spanish government's explicit duty under EU legislation to stop precisely this situation from happening to all of Europe - this is the very reason why Directive 2002/58/EC [eu.int] was adopted in the first place, and its wording is crystal clear - anything that is not opt-in (with the onus on the sender to prove it) is strictly illegal:
    Article 13
    Unsolicited communications

    1. The use of [...] electronic mail for the purposes of direct marketing may only be allowed in respect of subscribers who have given their prior consent.
    It was a long hard fight [slashdot.org] getting this on the statute books almost all across an entire continent - but now, finally, the law is definitely not on the spammers' side.

    Blacklists are a bad idea in the first place, but if legitimate eMail gets blocked because a provider fails to fight spam, it is that ISP (rather than the blacklist operators) who deserves all the wrath of its customers.

    Sad as the current situation is, combined with the onslaught of Trojan eMail [slashdot.org] it will hopefully make Spanish businesses and citizens pressure their authorities to enforce a draconian crackdown on the perpetrators - finally treating spammers as the cyber-terrorists they are.

  • Huh? No reference to Monty Python yet? by Fizzl (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @04:09AM
  • The question is what? by localman (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @04:28AM
  • Telefonica just can't cancel the spammers accounts by cfsmp3 (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @04:29AM
  • Just a typo (Score:3, Funny)

    by ocie (6659) on Monday April 26 2004, @04:43AM (#8970771)
    (http://slashdot.org/)
    They accidentally typed the following in a config file:

    .es TLD for spamish servers

    See, just that one letter messed up the whole country when it was caught by a filter run on the config file. Look for similar things to happen to:

    .vi TLD for U.S. virgin islands
    .ng TLD for Nigeria
    .ph TLD for the Philipenis

    Seriously, haven't these folks ever heard of a spell checker?
  • FInally someone wiat a brain.... by diegocgteleline.es (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @04:45AM
  • If you are interested in some facts by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @04:49AM
  • AHBL to be trusted? by scoof (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @04:52AM
  • The internet is NOT a human right! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by erroneus (253617) on Monday April 26 2004, @05:30AM (#8970902)
    (http://slashdot.org/)
    Working and playing on the internet is a priviledge. It's that simple. And allow me to draw a parallel to my own experience.

    I had a roommate. This roommate has a child. This roommate's babysitter would enter my home and during that time, things would disappear. And after changing the locks twice, I arrived at the conclusion that the items were disappearing either through my roommate or the roommate's babysitter. I decided to notify the police and before my roommate would give me the babysitter's contact info, the roommate called the babysitter to inform about the situation.

    They both deny any wrong-doing and no property was recovered however, once I booted the roommate, my theft problem disappeared with the roommate.

    Living in my home was a priviledge and when that priviledge was abused I needed to take action since all other outlets were met with opposition, denial or attempts to evade. Ultimately, just like the blocking of SMTP traffic from Spain, I had to cut off the problem from the source.

    Obviously no one expects the situation with Spain to be permanant. I expect when the lesson is learned and enough cries are heard, they will be restored without the scam-spam problem they once had.

    The Public Internet is a priviledge, not a right.
  • by DocSnyder (10755) on Monday April 26 2004, @05:53AM (#8970961)
    (http://docsnyder.de/)
    rima-tde.net is a major European spam source. So is wanadoo.fr [wanadoo.fr] whose official email relays (193.252.22.21-30) are sending me about 50 spam emails per day. Almost everyone in Europe is blocking their entire netblocks, but that can't be a solution as not everyone is able to block them.

    So I unblocked their relays a week ago to see the input IPs and LART each spam originating from worm-infected Wanaspew customer PCs [google.com]. Surprisingly, the whole mess hasn't been coming from thousands of wormed Weendoze boxes, but merely from *four* (later six) different input IPs. A responsible ISP wouldn't have any problem in preventing a handful of customers from emitting spam.

    Wanapoo did nothing. In spite of 44 (!) complaints to Spamadoo and some further communication with the French ISP association AFA France, the same customer IPs I've been LARTing up to 10 times since Sunday last week were still spamming on Friday [google.com].

    So there are only two solutions left - either eat your spam or dig a deep hole, put Wanadoo's netblocks including their email relays in and let them rot there. Writing spam complaints to Wanadoo is futile.

  • SMTP extensions by GnuDiff (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @06:05AM
  • Not all Spain is blocked and TDE never respond. by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @06:05AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • TDE has no excuse by erik_norgaard (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @06:08AM
  • Black listings reversed: whitelists by erik_norgaard (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @06:31AM
  • Not too helpful really. by adelayde (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @06:48AM
  • Blacklisting at this level can help (Score:3, Informative)

    by DeanFox (729620) <{moc.liamg} {ta} {naed.xof}> on Monday April 26 2004, @06:50AM (#8971117)


    So many posts complaining that this won't solve the problem...

    Blacklisting the entire ISP does not solve the problem in a technical sense. It's designed to achieve one thing. It gets the attention of top management who can fix the problem.

    As in human nature, the problem isn't important until it affects you. This is especially true in large organizations, and becomes more and more true the further up in management one gets. It's a given in political jobs at any level.

    Polite emails are not an affect; I doubt top management even knew about them. The decision makers at TDE haven't cared because they haven't had to care.

    If AHBL is large enough to have an effect, now the top management has something to care about. Since their positions at the top are governed by politics, this notoriety is exactly what's needed to get their attention.

    Blacklisting like this solves the problem by affecting the top management in a way that motivates them to act. Now policies will be enacted, procedures will be followed, closing down forwarding on port 25 will happen, so on and so forth... And those changes do help fix the SPAM problem.

  • Solution To Spam: by Tei (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @07:17AM
  • Collateral Damage by DynaSoar (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @07:54AM
  • by JackAsh (80274) on Monday April 26 2004, @07:55AM (#8971424)
    Hi all,

    My family actually lives in Spain, and uses Telefonica as their ISP. During my last visit, I discovered a wonderful surprise: Slashdot already blacklists the entire Telefonica data block. Whenever you select a link to read a story's comments, etc., it comes up with some message about not allowing that operation due to abuse from the netblock. It was pretty cool, really.

    In any event, Telefonica is a big, monolithic telephone operator. They used to be the official, national telephone monopoly company before the market was opened up to other operators. Telefonica is still huge, nonetheless. They have voice, data, and cell phones in Spain; I think they also own a good chuck of media there. They run a pretty sizeable percentage of the telco business in South America (possibly the largest telco in the region). They bought our Terra back in the 90's, which bought out the Lycos networks for those that actually care.

    Telefonica could probably have worse service, but they would need to train their personnel for it. As with most old monopolies there's this pervasive company culture that they are the center of the universe and if you don't like it you can go jump off a cliff or something. So I'd suggest not holding your breath for this situtation to be resolved. Although, as with every bureaucracy, every once in a while messages accidentally make it to the desk of the one guy who has a clue... :)

    -Jack Ash
  • The spammers win . . . (Score:3, Interesting)

    by dheltzel (558802) on Monday April 26 2004, @07:57AM (#8971428)
    . . when the collateral damage becomes so great that people start losing the benefits of the internet.

    It looks to me like we are segregating the internet into 2 nets:
    1) Free of Spam
    2) Free from regulation

    I suppose some people think this is a great idea, but I find it disturbing because innocent people are punished without any recourse (don't give me the "switch ISP" baloney, it's not always possible, and you know it).

    Of course, the first one will still have Spam, just less of it, the second will still have regulations, just less of that. Personally, I like option #2 and deal with Spam at my server with SpamAssasin and at my clients with Thunderbird. No blacklists required.

  • Future of spamfighting or something wrong? by Anita Coney (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @08:03AM
  • THAT is a solution, obvious! by gmuslera (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @08:17AM
  • Telefonica are the most incompetent Ive ever seen by cremat (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @08:30AM
  • The problem is, you make an erroneous assumption. by csoto (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @08:46AM
  • Using blacklists is OPTIONAL (Score:5, Insightful)

    by WoodstockJeff (568111) on Monday April 26 2004, @09:02AM (#8971948)
    (http://abusedemailaddress.com/)
    The use of ANY blacklist is OPTIONAL on the part of an ISP. And, in the case of the article in question, the lists mentioned are (and have been) more agressive than most people would like.

    We only block based on a few external lists (ORDB, SpamCop, Blitzed Proxy), and then, not unconditionally. 90% of our blocks are done by internally generated lists, because we do have to receive mail from compromised sources at times... our business customers have clients in countries that are notorious for spamming, and even on ISPs that are bad.

    That said, we do not accept any mail on the first pass from a large number of subnets, varying in size from /24 up to /8's, and a growing number of European subnets are on that list - not just Spanish ones. Mail from these subnets is "soft-bounced" (given a 451 error code) until it can be reviewed for legitimacy. And anything that doesn't have at least 1 retry is judged to be a proxy-based spam attempt.

    Now, I will check bounces against some of the more agressive lists in deciding whether to make exceptions for these "soft bounces", but the final authority is a check with the customer on anything questionable. A million-customer ISP can't do that; that's one of our advantages...

  • Slashdot also blocks Telefonica Spanish users by [rvr] (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @09:21AM
  • Yes, something *has* gone horribly wrong... by PinkFreud (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @09:42AM
  • It's a good start, but..... by Ride-My-Rocket (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @09:44AM
  • Internet Terrorism... by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @10:21AM
  • geopolitics and blackholes by whirlycott (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @12:00PM
  • Good for them! by mabu (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @12:57PM
  • Iraq war link? by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @04:08PM
  • Blocking SMTP traffic by Nonillion (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @04:13PM
  • Just do what I did... by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @06:04PM
  • Remember how the Internet actually works... by KC7GR (Score:2) Tuesday April 27 2004, @01:23AM
  • Not Blocking... by suwain_2 (Score:2) Tuesday April 27 2004, @11:04AM
  • Re:I am not AC, I am shanen--login is borken again by Anne Thwacks (Score:2) Monday April 26 2004, @02:20AM
  • Re:Spain? Not getting no spam from spain... by Skapare (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @10:06AM
  • Re:Does it even have anything to do with SPAM? by Skapare (Score:1) Monday April 26 2004, @10:13AM
  • 42 replies beneath your current threshold.
(1) | 2