[Standards-JIG] anti-SPIM advantages

[Hal Rottenberg]

On 9/22/06, Tony Finch <dot at dotat.at> wrote:
> DNS blacklists are a counter-example.

They can be abused certainly, but I disagree that they are a
"counter-example".  The best use of RBLs that I've seen are the ones
that analyze the body not the headers.  Look at the proposed
*destination* that the spammers wish you to click on and block
messages containing those, as opposed to blocking the source which has
a limited and detrimental effect in these days of botnets.

RBLs have a bad name because of those (overzealous) systems which
block entire subnets, even including hosts that are known not to be
spammers in order to compel them to move to a "better" host.

> > Yes. We've already got three Experimental protocols: JEP-0161 "SPIM Reporting"
> > (a foundation for the reputaion system you mentioned), JEP-0159 "SPIM-Blocking
> > Control" and JEP-0158 "Robot Challenges".
>
> Why is 159 not based on RFC 3921 privacy lists?

I think the consensus was that everyone hates it.  :)

-- 
Psi webmaster (http://psi-im.org)
im:hal at jabber.rocks.cc
http://halr9000.com