[SURBL-Discuss] SURBL and listing abuse address

Jeff Chan jeffc at surbl.org
Tue Dec 21 02:31:00 CET 2004


On Monday, December 20, 2004, 12:26:25 PM, Nick Askew wrote:
> if people here
> think for good reason that complaints to the ISP's of spam URL's would
> backfire then there is not point proceeding so I thought a discussion at
> this level would be a good start.

It could definitely backfire.  There are ISPs (like in China,
Russia, Brazil, the U.S., etc.) that apparently don't kick
off spammers who host web sites on their servers.  For all
we know those same ISPs could be forwarding spam complaints
to the spammers, and the spammer could be using the complaints
simply to confirm the addresses (and successful delivery) they
are sending to.  This has been a likely problem for a long
time with responding in any way to spam.

Once a spammer gets such a delivery, the address the spam
was sent to becomes much more valuable to try to send more
spam to, and to sell to other spammers since it's known to
be a valid address.  Spammers may not take a close look at
the type of blocking and try to force the mail through in
various ways.

Any kind of response that can get back to spammers can be
regarded as a poor practice for some of these reasons.

Jeff C.
--
"If it appears in hams, then don't list it."



More information about the Discuss mailing list