[Greylist-users] Looking for updated list of bad (but good) senders

[Scott Nelson]

At 07:39 PM 9/13/04 -0400, you wrote:
>Evan Harris <eharris at puremagic.com> writes:
>> A few people have sent me updates, and I have added them into the list when
>> it seemed appropriate and safe.  But taking submissions/corrections for the
>> list is a little problematic due to the fact that I usually can't personally
>> confirm that the sites/ip's submitted have a problem, but I also want to be
>> careful to not include false/incorrect information.
>
>True.  To some degree I think it's a reputation issue.  You could note
>who's sent in what and who the purported sender site is and why it
>should be whitelisted, and if others complain about spam from some
>whitelisted blocks, well, we trust that submitter and everything else
>they sent in that much less.  (I'd like to see reasons anyways; not
>all of the current entries have them listed.)
>
>Of course, spammers could just invent new addresses to use when
>submitting their new entries, so previously unknown submitters perhaps
>shouldn't be trusted much, maybe just big-ISP reps and people active
>on this list, or something....
>

Well, they /could/ but is this really a big concern?

Any spammer smart enough to put bogus entries into the list could 
probably defeat greylisting more easily by just using a real mailer.
Besides, a few dozen bogus IPs isn't that big a deal, 
and more than a few dozen is going to look awfully suspicious.


Scott Nelson <scott at spamwolf.com>