[AusNOG] [Oz-ISP] [sorbs-announce] Public Servers needed.

Noel Butler noel.butler at ausics.net
Sun Nov 4 09:35:36 EST 2007

Hi Scott,

On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 09:32, Scott Howard wrote:

> > guess the turd that runs that site, has been caught out doing norties
> > therefor deserves to be where he is and his lil dummy spit more or less
> > proves it :)
> "Turd"?  Bit of a hard call, especially given that you don't need to
> look very hard to find any number of people who dislike SORBS, including
> a large percentage of the anti-spam industry.

Yes, but I would expect most people have taken exception to an anti-spam
organisation at some time or another for many various reasons.

> Personally I'd strongly suggest avoiding SORBS on principle alone (not
> to mention false positives), but if you don't want to take my word for
> it then google is a good place to start, or just try the following...
> http://www.dnsbl.com/2007/07/sorbs-on-accuracy-rates-and-false.html
> http://dnsblresourcedata.googlepages.com/criticismfromsorbs

You are not seriously going to quote Iverson are you :) He will assault
an organisation just for getting up on the wrong side of the bed!  He
has constantly attacked Spamcop as well as others.

Either way, whether you like or dislike Iverson, I would like to think
people here on this list at least do not protect their networks based on
personalities or what "some other guy" says. No RBL or S.A etc, is
immune to false positives either and defining FP's is an individual

As admins responsible for managing anti-spam I would think that we use
what works best for us, in *our own* environments,  SORBS works
extremely well for me, as does Spamcop and couple of others, it also
seems good enough for Optus to use (or at last used circa 2006).


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20071104/be0bbc95/attachment.html>

More information about the AusNOG mailing list