[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       inet-access
Subject:    Re: ORBS Relay Test - 205.232.34.1
From:       JC Dill <inet-list () vo ! cnchost ! com>
Date:       1999-05-28 21:25:01
[Download RAW message or body]

On 05:00 PM 5/28/99 -0400, up@3.am sent forth across the ether('net):
>On Fri, 28 May 1999, Alex Kamantauskas wrote:
>
>> >> But if the admin *is* and ass, and *is* playing games, that doesn't
>> >> undermine the fact that the *relay is closed* to spamming.  It is up to
>> >> ORBS, not to the ass-like administrator, to prove that the relay is
open.
>> > 
>> > No, ORBS doesn't have to prove shit.  Of course you don't have to use
>> > them, either.  I don't.
>> 
>> I meant from a "principles" angle.  I don't use them either, cause I don't
>> agree with all of their principles.
>
>I suppose that's a matter of opinion, but I feel it's perfectly ethical as
>long as there's full disclosure to those that use ORBS.

The principle is "don't put a server on the Internet unless you have
properly secured it against relaying".  

A typical server is either open to relaying or closed to relaying.  ORBS
proves (by actually relaying a message through said server) that it is
open, at least in some circumstances, to relaying.  This is proof enough
that the server belongs on the ORBS list.  If the admin is an ass and is
playing games to get put on the ORBS list intentionally, what's the loss?
Admin wants to play game and get listed, that's their business.

If, on the other hand, the server is really an open relay (and will relay
for anyone, not just for ORBS) then being put on the ORBS list should be a
nice incentive to said server admin(s) to proactively fix the open relay
*before* it gets used to send spam. That is how it works in 99.99% of the
cases when a server gets listed on ORBS.  This is a Good Thing (tm).

ORBS functions as a way to proactively prompt people to close open relays
before they are used to send spam.  While I don't (personally) use ORBS, I
believe that the principle of creating negative results if you have an open
relay (you get blocked from sending email to those who do subscribe to
ORBS) is currently the best and most valuable tool we have to get those
open relays closed.  Would you rather see legislation enacted to accomplish
this goal?

WRT to the post that started this thread:

At 01:15 PM 5/28/99 -0400, Homer Wilson Smith wrote:
>
>      I do owe everyone an apology, our system is in fact relaying
>homer%rahul.net@lightlink.com, in fact it is used in one of our mail2mail
>anonymizers. 

Homer,

This took guts, and shows you to be a first rate guy.  Kudos for being man
enough to make an apology when it's due.  You just got put on my list of
"people to pay attention to" because I know that you are conscientious
about what you post to this list.

jc


-
Send 'unsubscribe' in the body to 'list-request@inet-access.net' to leave.
Eat sushi frequently.   inet@inet-access.net is the human contact address.

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]