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

[Brian Michalk]

A while ago, Evan and I discussed how to effectively implement a whitelist
system that could be automatic, trusted, and not abused.

Rather than a centralized database, perhaps it should be decentralized, thus
rendering useless a denial of service attack.
Have a centralized signup, that the user could register and receive some
sort of public key(or maybe use their IP address) to give him the ability to
submit domains for whitelisting.  Allow that registered user to submit, say
1 whitelist per month to the system.  As time goes on, that user becomes
more and more trusted.  If the user abuses the system, the account is
yanked.
I think that removing illegitimate whitelisted domains could be automated.
It's quite simple to examine the log file for originating IP's that hit
multiple accounts on my domain.  Since it's not a blacklist, it's not as bad
if the occasional mistake occurs.

Of course this has little to do with the actual workings of greylisting.

As far as implementation for replication of the whitelist, what about a
bitTorrent?  Perhaps DNS updates?

 Brian Michalk  <http://www.michalk.com>
Life is what you make of it ... never wish you had done something.
Aviator, experimental aircraft builder, motorcyclist, SCUBA diver
musician, home-brewer, entrepreneur and barely single


> -----Original Message-----
> From: greylist-users-bounces at lists.puremagic.com
> [mailto:greylist-users-bounces at lists.puremagic.com]On Behalf Of Ken
> Raeburn
> Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 7:52 PM
> To: Greylisting Users and Developers Discussion
> Subject: Re: [Greylist-users] Looking for updated list of bad (but
> good)senders
>
>
> Scott Nelson <scott at spamwolf.com> writes:
> >>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?
>
> No, you're probably right.
>
> Though I would still like to see reasons for the various whitelist
> entries, i.e., what do they do wrong.
>
> Ken
>