Slashdot Mirror


Overcoming MAPS Reverse-Lookup Oppression?

ArghBlarg asks: "Imagine the following scenario: you're the volunteer admin for a small, non-profit site for a few local artists and musicians. You run your web site and SMTP server out of your laundry room, via cable broadband. The broadband provider doesn't mind, as you only get a few hits a day; you keep your system secure and were only rooted once, over 4 years ago (hey, it happens). Your site has never, ever (to your knowledge) relayed spam. On the whole you've been an exemplary netizen. One day, some email you send bounces because your ISP's entire netblock has been placed on the MAPS DUL. True, your server's IP isn't technically static (though it hasn't changed in 12 months); because your domain is embedded within the broadband provider's larger IP block, reverse lookups don't give your domain name, rather that of the provider (with a huge number prefixed as the hostname). Hence you're considered a rogue SMTP node and blocked by MAPS. I've emailed MAPS but they won't agree to whitelist me. I have a proper MX record for my SMTP server, under my domain name. What can I do? Is there any way to make my legitimate domain take precedence in reverse-lookups, so I don't show up as being part of a spam-friendly network?" "Please don't bother suggesting that I ask my provider to give me a static IP outside the affected block -- they won't, not without upgrading to a MUCH more expensive package which gives me no benefit for a small-traffic server like this.

What have you done to get your domain, running on a pseudo-static IP, out from under the thumb of the spam block lists? While I wholeheartedly support the efforts of the MAPS people and others like them to stamp out the vermin that are spammers, our domain has become collateral damage in the war!"

6 of 97 comments (clear)

  1. Well by The-Bus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why not run email and webhosting separately? Email could always be run through a provider (Flames Burn seems to be focusing on helping independent musicians). Yes, you're small and non-profit but I'm sure your time could be better used than dealing with hassles like these. Pay for the hosting, then spend your time on other stuff for this organization. From the looks of it, and the needs you have, this may be a simpler solution. Of course, I'm not supremely technically versed, and it sort of goes against the hacker mentality leaving this problem unsolved...

    That's my EUR 0.016414 anyways.

    --

    Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.

  2. Well DUH... by stienman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Please don't bother suggesting that I ask my provider to give me a static IP outside the affected block -- they won't, not without upgrading to a MUCH more expensive package which gives me no benefit for a small-traffic server like this.

    Then you are stuck between a rock and a hard place. You are using a residential class line for business class use. MAPS is right to block residential lines because of all the zombie relay servers that virus writers are including in their payloads now.

    Either pay for a business class connection, or use the SMTP server your provider gives you.

    It's not the "open internet" that you'd like to see. Live within the limitations this simple, dumb network provides.

    Besides, do you honestly expect MAPS to whitelist a dynamic IP? MAPS is not the problem, PEBKAC.

    -Adam

    1. Re:Well DUH... by drsmithy · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The first is that this method of "spam prevention" provides pretty much no spam prevention whatsoever. Insofar as it provides any protection, it's from a small minority of unsecured open relays present in older operating systems, which happens to be an extremely specific bug and a very easy issue to deal with.

      It's not just open relays, it's also all those machines that have been taken over by trojans with built-in SMTP engines.

  3. These "services" suck by duffbeer703 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I had to waste alot of time with ORBS because my company's upstream provider had a larger netblock that we were a part of blacklisted. The people I emailed were quite obnoxious and rude, despite the fact that our servers were secure and never relayed a thing.

    And for what? I still see a ton of spam, despite the fact that my ISP uses MAPS.

    --
    Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
  4. Well, it looks like the consensus is... by rusty0101 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... that only large businesses should be allowed to run mail servers that can send e-mail.

    Glad to see so many people here who are interested in maintaining a free system.

    -Rusty

    --
    You never know...
  5. Re:Only corps should be free to run their own mail by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 3, Insightful
    but I just feel that responsible people should be allowed to run whatever servers they want to.

    Absolutely NOBODY is preventing this guy from running whatever server he wants to.

    Some people are, however, exercising their own rights to refuse to accept communications from him, for a reason that may or may not be reasonable, valid, or useful.

    --
    Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.