Paul Graham Describes Dangers of Spam Blacklists
CRoby writes "Paul Graham posted an essay describing the danger and corruption of the main spammer blacklists today. It discusses MAPS and the SBL, the blacklist created to try to alleviate the abuses of MAPS, and suggests (maybe) another blacklist's creation."
Oh, ok. Nothing like over reacting a bit.
www.HearMySoulSpeak.com
I have found an interesting offer: pay 50 bucks and you are removed immediately from the spam list. Have a look here.
Interesting: The company won't say who they are. They say this was approved by local authorities, but this is bullshit. Local authorities can not brake federal law in Germany.
I use blacklists all the time. Rather than simply rejecting the mail, if the server is on a blacklist, the initial OK is delayed by five seconds.
If you're sending a ton of mail, i.e., spam, little of it gets through. If you're only sending one or two messages, ie, likely legit mail, it goes through just fine.
Combined with more specific stuff further back (bayes, et. al), it's been quite effective at reducing the amount of spam sent, and the amount of mail that gets scanned.
The problem isn't blacklists, its how people use them.
Interestingly enough, the owner of the acme.com domain who was recently featured in a story due to his getting more than a million spam mails (well, attempts to send spam) a day, agrees:
(from http://www.acme.com/mail_filtering/shame_frameset. html)
quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.