[Dshield] SCV fundamentally flawed (was: .. appealing for ISPcommonsense)
doug at clickdoug.com
Sun Jan 25 02:35:50 GMT 2004
This topic has been beat to death on several forums, and frankly I am
disappointed that it has appeared here.
The only comment I can make at this point is that if the solution works for you,
then by all means implement it.
There has been no convincing argument based on experience with a variety of
methods being used by spammers that it is THE solution, and in fact as has been
explained in painful detail by many of my peers, many of whom are far more
experienced than I, that any benefits of such a solution would be extremely
transient in nature, consequently not really worth all the effort to implement
to only have to discard it as the spammer modifies his methods to circumvent the
Your mileage may vary
Stop spam on your domain, Anti-spam solutions
For hosting solutions http://www.clickdoug.com
Aspire to Inspire before you Retire or Expire!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Erik van Straten" <emvs.dsh.3FB4CC72 at cpo.tn.tudelft.nl>
To: <list at dshield.org>
Cc: "Wietse Venema" <wietse at porcupine.org>
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2004 9:58 AM
Subject: [Dshield] SCV fundamentally flawed (was: .. appealing for
: Hi Tony, Wietse, List,
: Tony, your response is much appreciated! However, we seem to disagree.
: Wietse, this is FYI, it is not my intention to drag you into this.
: The reason for me to trashcannize SCV is that some people may believe
: it is an alternative to blocking egress 25/tcp, as I propose here:
: Which, IMO is an ON-topic discussion on DShield, independent of any
: MTA. My SCV rant is here (click Next message for Tony's post):
: I'll respect the DShield moderator if _this_ message is not posted.
: On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 09:05:16 +0100 Tony Earnshaw, regarding SCV:
: > Patent number, please! Both Postfix 2.0 snapshot (limited IBM open
: > source license) and Exim 4 (GPL) would seem to be infringing it.
: I did my homework. I have read US_PATENT_6321267 from the 20031231
: Postfix snapshot, where Wietse Venema points out why he believes he
: is not infringing it.
: I do deeply respect Wietse, and I'm proud to be a country-man. I'm even
: using Postfix, and I love it (Exim is a comparable, highly valued MTA).
: However, IMHO, this is one of the very few cases where Wietse is wrong
: (and a lot of other good people who support the SCV idea). Note that I
: *do* see good reasons for using Recipient Address Verification [OT].
: (Wietse will understand when he sees the spambounce below).
: > > ==> SCV is FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED when intended to combat spam.
: > >
: > > All spammers who are currently not yet spoofing existing email
: > > addresses, will immediately start doing so.
: > This is an awfully sweeping assertion. "Everything is either white or
: > black".
: Which, likewise, can be said about your "argument". Again, please
: read the page where I explain the site-Joe-job I'm confronted with:
: I'll provide you with one black world example. Some spammers are using
: random 3-7 char names. They do hit accounts on my MTA; not just mine.
: My users do complain. I'm looking for feasable solutions. As Johannes
: pointed out, there will not be a solution that doesn't break anything:
: Erik van Straten
: CPO Sysadmin, Physics dept.
: Delft University of Technology
: I humbly apologize for forwarding spam (actually a bounce)
: Return-Path: <>
: X-Original-To: ERiC at cpo.tn.tudelft.nl
: Delivered-To: evs at cpo.tn.tudelft.nl
: Received: from mailhost3.tudelft.nl (mailhost3.tudelft.nl [220.127.116.11])
: by cpo.tn.tudelft.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9318497B44
: for <ERiC at cpo.tn.tudelft.nl>; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 03:00:03 +0100 (CET)
: Received: from 127.0.0.1 (localhost [127.0.0.1])
: by rav.antivirus (Postfix) with SMTP id 74E635ECF
: for <ERiC at cpo.tn.tudelft.nl>; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 02:59:34 +0100 (MET)
: Received: from mail2.myexcel.com (mail2.myexcel.com [18.104.22.168])
: by mailhost3.tudelft.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADA3CB958
: for <ERiC at cpo.tn.tudelft.nl>; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 02:59:08 +0100 (MET)
: Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 18:58:29
: Message-Id: <10401121858.AA81265133 at mail2.myexcel.com>
: Mime-Version: 1.0
: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
: From: "Postmaster" <postmaster at mail2.myexcel.com>
: Sender: <postmaster at mail2.myexcel.com>
: To: <ERiC at cpo.tn.tudelft.nl>
: Subject: Undeliverable Mail
: X-Mailer: <SMTP32 v8.05>
: Invalid final delivery userid: peanut73 at mail2.myexcel.com
: Original message follows.
: Received: from meridian.mailrover.net [22.214.171.124] by mail2.myexcel.com
: (SMTPD32-8.05) id A0C555D900DC; Mon, 12 Jan 2004 18:58:29 -0700
: Received: from dutndo7.tn.tudelft.nl (h24-83-73-161.vs.shawcable.net
: by meridian.mailrover.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id i0D14D224084
: for <peanut73 at myexcel.com>; Mon, 12 Jan 2004 18:04:13 -0700
: Message-ID: <9def01c3d97c$2a646e57$1d6fc6bf at H1ABAO>
: From: "Dr Biggums" <ERiC at cpo.tn.tudelft.nl>
: To: peanut73 at myexcel.com
: Subject: Discount Prescriptions Cheap Viagr a
: Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 21:22:23 -0500
: Mime-Version: 1.0
: Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
: X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
: X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
: X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
: This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
: Content-Type: text/plain;
: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
: To the internet store: http://www.onlinerxhq.com
: [message truncated]
: list mailing list
: list at dshield.org
: To change your subscription options (or unsubscribe), see:
More information about the list