nanog mailing list archives
RE: Lazy network operators
From: "Michel Py" <michel () arneill-py sacramento ca us>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 20:56:10 -0700
Steven M. Bellovin wrote: The spammers are already creating throw-away domains;
Indeed, a little stockpile has never hurt anybody; by registering them now they'll even have some that have been registered for 11 months when they use them in March 2005. There already are RHSBLs lookup shops that attempt to block these as well.
they'd do the same with mail sender authorizations.
True; although they will not suppress spam mail sender authorization schemes do have two advantages: a) they will curb some (from the dumber spammers that still send their crud on behalf of joe12345@bigeye_isp.com) and b) they will seriously reduce phishing schemes on behalf of ebay.com or mybank.com. Michel.
Current thread:
- Re: Lazy network operators, (continued)
- Re: Lazy network operators Niels Bakker (Apr 16)
- Re: Lazy network operators Iljitsch van Beijnum (Apr 16)
- Re: Lazy network operators Paul Vixie (Apr 16)
- Re: Lazy network operators Petri Helenius (Apr 16)
- Re: Lazy network operators Iljitsch van Beijnum (Apr 16)
- Re: Lazy network operators Petri Helenius (Apr 16)
- Re: Lazy network operators Paul Jakma (Apr 17)
- Re: Lazy network operators Paul Vixie (Apr 17)
- Re: Lazy network operators Kurt Erik Lindqvist (Apr 20)
- RE: Lazy network operators Stephen J. Wilcox (Apr 14)
- Re: Lazy network operators Petri Helenius (Apr 14)
- Re: Lazy network operators Alex Bligh (Apr 14)
- Re: Lazy network operators John Curran (Apr 14)
- Re: Lazy network operators Todd Vierling (Apr 14)
- Re: Lazy network operators Joe Abley (Apr 14)
- Re: Lazy network operators Joe Abley (Apr 14)