At 05:10 PM 2003-05-31 -0700, Bob Bish wrote:
It appears that my hosting IP may have been recently de-listed. I'll
give it some time for various ISPs to update their databases and see if
those bounces cease.
Many thanks to all who have helped with this.
Is your IP address yours, personally, or is it shared? I found this when I
googled for the address, and then I checked it.
Received: from quake.3dhosting.com (unknown [188.8.131.52])
by mycroft.greatcircle.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E20A51959D8
for <majordomo-users @
com>; Wed, 1 Jan 2003 13:30:36
I won't take mail from this address because it has no reverse
resolution. Just as a point. Many hosting companies that intend the host
to mostly be used for web are not providing reverse resolution as a
"signal". Are you sending mail directly from this host, or are you sending
it from this host through the mail server that your ISP maintains? If it
is your address, and you use it for e-mail, the hosting company should
provide reverse resolution that matches the forward resolution.
In the future, just as a suggestion, the right people to handle this issue
is the abuse desk at YOUR ISP. It is a fact of life that many ISPs simply
do not care that they are sources of spam. They do absolutely nothing
about outside complaints. The only time they will take action against a
spammer is when they are listed in a blacklist and their own customers
start complaining to them.
This came up on the postfix mailing list, and a lot of people posted a lot
of strong opinions. Then someone who actually worked at an abuse desk
posted his story. They had a spamming customer and were ignoring all
outside complaints at the direction of management. They asked to be able
to terminate the customer, and were told that they could not since the
customer was paying their bills.
So then they were "escalated" (which is the term for what happens when the
listing on a blacklist is broadened from a specific address used by a
spammer to a containing network).
And the customers of the ISP started to complain. And they threatened to walk.
And the next day the paying spamming customer who could not be terminated
because they were paying their bills was terminated.
Now, when they have a situation where they have a pattern of complaints
about a customer, they no longer wait for an escalation: They immediately
terminate the customer. And their other customers are not listed in
escalations, and they are happy, and they do not threaten to walk.
Simple economics. The people you should be complaining to is your
ISP. They almost certainly had complaints before you were listed in what I
presume was an escalation. And they almost certainly did nothing until the
I would start asking hard questions, like how long they knew about the
spammer before they terminated him, and if they are going to change their
policies so that expansion does not have to happen in the future.
Personally, I approve of escalations. My ISPs have made me agree to a
strong anti-abuse policy. I like traditional mailing lists. I believe that
spam is the single thing that is likely to render mailing lists irrelevant,
as e-mail as we know it becomes useless and unused because of the spam
problem. I believe that, in general, if all the customers at my ISP are
living up to this policy, that I am not likely to be listed in an
escalation. And if my ISP is getting service from someone that they should
be acting as my agent if their range is listed because their ISP is not
enforcing their rules on all of their customers.
The Rules of Spam:
Rule #0: Spam is theft.
Rule #1: Spammers lie.
(Proposed) Sharp's Corollary: Spammers attempt to re-define "spamming" as
that which they do not do.
Rule #2: If a spammer seems to be telling the truth, see Rule #1.
Chrissman's Corollary: A spammer, when caught, blames his victims.
Rule #3: Spammers are stupid.
Krueger's Corollary: Spammer lies are really stupid.
Pickett's Commentary: Spammer lies are boring.
Russell's Corollary: Never underestimate the stupidity of spammers.
Nick Simicich - njs @