SORBS crap

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Rob J, Feb 11, 2006.

  1. Rob J

    Rob J Guest

    We are gettings lots of blocks for Xtra, Paradise and Hotmail just
    because some of their servers appear in SORBs lists.

    SORBS is going the way of ORBS, causing a lot of trouble for everyday
    people who don't send spam and just happen to use shared servers with a
    few rogue users. Their credibility is going downhill fast.
     
    Rob J, Feb 11, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 13:42:43 +1300, Rob J wrote:

    > We are gettings lots of blocks for Xtra, Paradise and Hotmail just
    > because some of their servers appear in SORBs lists.
    >
    > SORBS is going the way of ORBS, causing a lot of trouble for everyday
    > people who don't send spam and just happen to use shared servers with a
    > few rogue users. Their credibility is going downhill fast.


    Sounds like it's working as intended. It is up to those ISPs to ensure
    their servers are not abused by their clients!


    A Nice Cup of Tea

    --
    Adam L. Penenberg: "The next time Bill G. promises to make software that is
    so fundamentally secure that customers never have to worry about it, ask him
    what decade he plans to release it."
     
    A Nice Cup of Tea, Feb 11, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Can you give some examples? If someone is on an RBL, there usually is
    a VERY good reason they are on it.

    Thanks
    Craig

    "Rob J" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > We are gettings lots of blocks for Xtra, Paradise and Hotmail just
    > because some of their servers appear in SORBs lists.
    >
    > SORBS is going the way of ORBS, causing a lot of trouble for everyday
    > people who don't send spam and just happen to use shared servers with a
    > few rogue users. Their credibility is going downhill fast.
     
    Craig Whitmore, Feb 11, 2006
    #3
  4. Rob J

    Rob J Guest

    In article <43ed41a4$>, says...
    > Can you give some examples? If someone is on an RBL, there usually is
    > a VERY good reason they are on it.
    >
    > Thanks
    > Craig
    >
    > "Rob J" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > We are gettings lots of blocks for Xtra, Paradise and Hotmail just
    > > because some of their servers appear in SORBs lists.
    > >
    > > SORBS is going the way of ORBS, causing a lot of trouble for everyday
    > > people who don't send spam and just happen to use shared servers with a
    > > few rogue users. Their credibility is going downhill fast.


    There is approximately one mail server from each of Xtra and Paradise
    included in SORBS' blacklist, and a number of Hotmail servers. I also
    found a listing for a Computer Associates mail server.

    A search of the net tells us that SORBs is run in part by the
    discredited ORBs operator Alan Brown.

    Log entries:

    Jan 31 23:23:10 postfix/smtpd[9955]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
    listserv.ca.com[141.202.248.221]: 554 Service unavailable; Client host
    [141.202.248.221] blocked using dnsbl.sorbs.net; Spam Received

    Feb 10 01:10:09 postfix/smtpd[7614]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from bay13-
    f24.bay13.hotmail.com[64.4.31.24]: 554 Service unavailable; Client host
    [64.4.31.24] blocked using dnsbl.sorbs.net; Spam Received

    Jan 23 11:53:16 postfix/smtpd[10094]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from bay18-
    f22.bay18.hotmail.com[65.54.187.72]: 554 Service unavailable; Client
    host [65.54.187.72] blocked using dnsbl.sorbs.net; Spam Received

    Jan 31 11:22:26 postfix/smtpd[2994]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from bay21-
    f20.bay21.hotmail.com[65.54.233.109]: 554 Service unavailable; Client
    host [65.54.233.109] blocked using dnsbl.sorbs.net;

    Feb 5 17:25:22 postfix/smtpd[10370]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from bay18-
    f14.bay18.hotmail.com[65.54.187.64]: 554 Service unavailable; Client
    host [65.54.187.64] blocked using dnsbl.sorbs.net; Spam Received

    Feb 6 02:13:21 postfix/smtpd[17978]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from bay18-
    f7.bay18.hotmail.com[65.54.187.57]: 554 Service unavailable; Client host
    [65.54.187.57] blocked using dnsbl.sorbs.net; Spam Received

    Feb 7 08:47:34 postfix/smtpd[9109]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from bay18-
    f16.bay18.hotmail.com[65.54.187.66]: 554 Service unavailable; Client
    host [65.54.187.66] blocked using dnsbl.sorbs.net; Spam Received

    Feb 7 15:52:44 postfix/smtpd[10411]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from bay24-
    f6.bay24.hotmail.com[64.4.18.56]: 554 Service unavailable; Client host
    [64.4.18.56] blocked using dnsbl.sorbs.net; Spam Received

    Feb 8 21:40:15 postfix/smtpd[23308]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from bm-
    1a.paradise.net.nz[203.96.152.180]: 554 Service unavailable; Client host
    [203.96.152.180] blocked using dnsbl.sorbs.net; Spam Received

    Jan 29 16:03:13 postfix/smtpd[19890]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from 203-96-
    148-146.apx1.paradise.net.nz[203.96.148.146]: 554 Service unavailable;
    Client host [203.96.148.146] blocked using dnsbl.sorbs.net; Exploitable
    Server

    an 24 11:12:24 postfix/smtpd[18631]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from mta207-
    rme.xtra.co.nz[210.86.15.118]: 554 Service unavailable; Client host
    [210.86.15.118] blocked using dnsbl.sorbs.net; Spam Received

    Jan 25 22:26:00 postfix/smtpd[13165]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from 203-96-
    101-32.dialup.xtra.co.nz[203.96.101.32]: 554 Service unavailable; Client
    host [203.96.101.32] blocked using dnsbl.sorbs.net; Dynamic IP Addresses
     
    Rob J, Feb 11, 2006
    #4
  5. Rob J

    Tony Guest

    Oh that's bolloks Craig and you know it. As you know SORBS is not run to
    any credible standard of common sense. As mentioned on the NZNOG list
    recently I personally had a "new" /21 from APNIC that was SORBS listed
    before it was even in use. It took over a month to get it removed and
    only after virtually having to beg. Any ISP using SORBS for blocking
    mail is being extremely foolhardy. That Matthew Sullivan guy is a real
    up himself jerk.


    Craig Whitmore wrote:
    > Can you give some examples? If someone is on an RBL, there usually is
    > a VERY good reason they are on it.
    >
    > Thanks
    > Craig
    >
    > "Rob J" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> We are gettings lots of blocks for Xtra, Paradise and Hotmail just
    >> because some of their servers appear in SORBs lists.
    >>
    >> SORBS is going the way of ORBS, causing a lot of trouble for everyday
    >> people who don't send spam and just happen to use shared servers with a
    >> few rogue users. Their credibility is going downhill fast.

    >
    >
     
    Tony, Feb 11, 2006
    #5

  6. >> "Rob J" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >> > We are gettings lots of blocks for Xtra, Paradise and Hotmail just
    >> > because some of their servers appear in SORBs lists.
    >> >


    I've used quite a number of RBL's in the past, and I've found SORBS
    (dnsbl.sorbs.net ) a little TOO
    strict in what it has listed. I would never use it myself. it just blocks
    TOO much . (from personally testing)

    If you check the listing.. most of those IP addresses are listed as they
    sent to spamtrap
    email addresses, so they get listed. The other one (xtra) is listed as its
    in a dyanmic
    range that sorbs thinks so it should send directly (maybe this one is spam
    in the past)

    Saying SORBS is too strict.. the ones I suggest people use are:

    blackholes.mail-abuse.org
    sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org (This is quite a good one)
    dsn.rfc-ignorant.org
    relays.ordb.org
    cbl.abuseat.org
    bl.spamcop.net

    But its up to whoever is running the mailserver to use whatever they feel
    comfortable running.

    Yes ORBS (NZ run RBL) got in the media a while back (see
    http://www.spam.co.nz/spamhistory.html
    (Work in Progress) for a few things, and he shut it down 5 years ago for
    unnamed reasons
    , but it did a good job (At the time) , until he started listing
    people/companies he had personal disputes with.

    Thanks
    Craig
    Talking for Myself





    >
     
    Craig Whitmore, Feb 11, 2006
    #6
  7. Rob J

    Steve Guest

    And lets not even start on Orcon and their spam hosting policies.

    How soon we all forget Cash Evolution.

    --
    Steve.

    Tony wrote:
    > Oh that's bolloks Craig and you know it. As you know SORBS is not run to
    > any credible standard of common sense. As mentioned on the NZNOG list
    > recently I personally had a "new" /21 from APNIC that was SORBS listed
    > before it was even in use. It took over a month to get it removed and
    > only after virtually having to beg. Any ISP using SORBS for blocking
    > mail is being extremely foolhardy. That Matthew Sullivan guy is a real
    > up himself jerk.
    >
    >
    > Craig Whitmore wrote:
    >> Can you give some examples? If someone is on an RBL, there usually is
    >> a VERY good reason they are on it.
    >>
    >> Thanks
    >> Craig
     
    Steve, Feb 11, 2006
    #7
  8. "Tony" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Oh that's bolloks Craig and you know it. As you know SORBS is not run to
    > any credible standard of common sense. As mentioned on the NZNOG list
    > recently I personally had a "new" /21 from APNIC that was SORBS listed
    > before it was even in use. It took over a month to get it removed and only
    > after virtually having to beg. Any ISP using SORBS for blocking mail is
    > being extremely foolhardy. That Matthew Sullivan guy is a real up himself
    > jerk.
    >


    I wasn't saying SORBS was a good RBL (See my other post), I was trying to
    say (and didn't make clear) that if it was listed on SORBS, there was a
    VERY good reason _they_ thought they should add it on (sending once
    to a spamtrap email address might be a very good reason they think that
    they add you on), but in everyone else's opinion its quite bad.

    Using SORBS (from testing), just gives too many false positives.

    Thanks
    Craig
    Talking for Myself
     
    Craig Whitmore, Feb 11, 2006
    #8
  9. Rob J

    Steve Guest

    Craig Whitmore wrote:
    > I wasn't saying SORBS was a good RBL (See my other post), I was trying to
    > say (and didn't make clear) that if it was listed on SORBS, there was a
    > VERY good reason _they_ thought they should add it on (sending once
    > to a spamtrap email address might be a very good reason they think that
    > they add you on), but in everyone else's opinion its quite bad.


    Let me help your memory.

    Craig Whitmore wrote:
    > Can you give some examples? If someone is on an RBL, there usually is
    > a VERY good reason they are on it.


    See, its great changing what you said AFTER the effect, but it doesn't
    make it true.

    It a pitty you are not quite so active about the spammers YOU host eh ?
    I guess the thing that marks a spammer from a customer is that spammers
    giving you money become customers not spammers.

    --
    Steve.
     
    Steve, Feb 11, 2006
    #9
  10. Rob J

    Rob J Guest

    In article <43ed5c97$>, says...
    >
    > >> "Rob J" <> wrote in message
    > >> news:...
    > >> > We are gettings lots of blocks for Xtra, Paradise and Hotmail just
    > >> > because some of their servers appear in SORBs lists.
    > >> >

    >
    > I've used quite a number of RBL's in the past, and I've found SORBS
    > (dnsbl.sorbs.net ) a little TOO
    > strict in what it has listed. I would never use it myself. it just blocks
    > TOO much . (from personally testing)
    >
    > If you check the listing.. most of those IP addresses are listed as they
    > sent to spamtrap
    > email addresses, so they get listed. The other one (xtra) is listed as its
    > in a dyanmic
    > range that sorbs thinks so it should send directly (maybe this one is spam
    > in the past)
    >
    > Saying SORBS is too strict.. the ones I suggest people use are:
    >
    > blackholes.mail-abuse.org
    > sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org (This is quite a good one)


    Probably, all the entries in our logs do look like spam addresses -
    except that I can't tell whether the reason Hotmail servers addresses
    don't appear is because Sorbs got them first.
     
    Rob J, Feb 11, 2006
    #10
  11. Rob J

    Alden Bates Guest

    Rob J <> wrote:

    >We are gettings lots of blocks for Xtra, Paradise and Hotmail just
    >because some of their servers appear in SORBs lists.
    >
    >SORBS is going the way of ORBS, causing a lot of trouble for everyday
    >people who don't send spam and just happen to use shared servers with a
    >few rogue users. Their credibility is going downhill fast.


    They still making email useless? I had trouble with them a couple of
    years ago. :p

    Alden
    --
    http://www.tetrap.com
     
    Alden Bates, Feb 11, 2006
    #11
  12. Rob J

    Iswhatid Guest

    On , , Sat, 11 Feb 2006 15:38:32 +1300, Re: SORBS crap, Rob J
    <> wrote:

    >In article <43ed41a4$>, says...
    >> Can you give some examples? If someone is on an RBL, there usually is
    >> a VERY good reason they are on it.
    >>
    >> Thanks
    >> Craig
    >>
    >> "Rob J" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >> > We are gettings lots of blocks for Xtra, Paradise and Hotmail just
    >> > because some of their servers appear in SORBs lists.
    >> >
    >> > SORBS is going the way of ORBS, causing a lot of trouble for everyday
    >> > people who don't send spam and just happen to use shared servers with a
    >> > few rogue users. Their credibility is going downhill fast.

    >
    >There is approximately one mail server from each of Xtra and Paradise
    >included in SORBS' blacklist, and a number of Hotmail servers. I also
    >found a listing for a Computer Associates mail server.
    >
    >A search of the net tells us that SORBs is run in part by the
    >discredited ORBs operator Alan Brown.


    He just can't keep his trotters out of the trough.

    ---

    "I prefer the pleasure of writing bits of nonsense to that of wearing
    an embroidered coat which costs 800 francs." (Stendhal)
     
    Iswhatid, Feb 11, 2006
    #12
  13. Rob J

    -=rjh=- Guest

    Tony wrote:
    > Oh that's bolloks Craig and you know it. As you know SORBS is not run to
    > any credible standard of common sense. As mentioned on the NZNOG list
    > recently I personally had a "new" /21 from APNIC that was SORBS listed
    > before it was even in use. It took over a month to get it removed and
    > only after virtually having to beg. Any ISP using SORBS for blocking
    > mail is being extremely foolhardy. That Matthew Sullivan guy is a real
    > up himself jerk.


    Maybe, but what has that Paul Vixie ever done, huh?

    "The Internet is not for sissies." (Vixie, 1994)
     
    -=rjh=-, Feb 11, 2006
    #13
  14. Rob J

    SchoolTech Guest

    On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 13:59:32 +1300, A Nice Cup of Tea <> wrote:

    >On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 13:42:43 +1300, Rob J wrote:
    >
    >> We are gettings lots of blocks for Xtra, Paradise and Hotmail just
    >> because some of their servers appear in SORBs lists.
    >>
    >> SORBS is going the way of ORBS, causing a lot of trouble for everyday
    >> people who don't send spam and just happen to use shared servers with a
    >> few rogue users. Their credibility is going downhill fast.

    >
    >Sounds like it's working as intended. It is up to those ISPs to ensure
    >their servers are not abused by their clients!
    >
    >
    >A Nice Cup of Tea


    And just how do you expect them to do that? This isn't Nazi Germany
    even if you wish it was.
     
    SchoolTech, Feb 11, 2006
    #14
  15. On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 22:25:53 +1300, SchoolTech wrote:

    > And just how do you expect them to do that? This isn't Nazi Germany
    > even if you wish it was.


    Hmmm...

    Godwins Law.


    A Nice Cup of Tea

    --
    A: because it messes up threading
    Q: why should I not reply by top-posting?
    A: No.
    Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?
     
    A Nice Cup of Tea, Feb 11, 2006
    #15
  16. Rob J

    thingy Guest

    Rob J wrote:
    > We are gettings lots of blocks for Xtra, Paradise and Hotmail just
    > because some of their servers appear in SORBs lists.
    >
    > SORBS is going the way of ORBS, causing a lot of trouble for everyday
    > people who don't send spam and just happen to use shared servers with a
    > few rogue users. Their credibility is going downhill fast.


    Some of the rbl lists are also blackmailing people.

    We got on a Norwegain one before xmas, because of some bounces, (you
    know those RFC compliant ones) and they wanted $50US to take us off, we
    said take a running jump......

    Generally though it is the responsibilty of the ISPs to look after their
    servers, if they get used as spam relays they should be fixing the issue.

    I notice Clear/Paradise is advertising for at least 2 unix engineers, I
    pity the poor sods who takes those...one in three on call....I can so
    see you getting sleep for that week....not.....

    regards

    Thing
     
    thingy, Feb 11, 2006
    #16
  17. Rob J

    whoisthis Guest

    In article <>,
    SchoolTech <> wrote:

    > On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 13:59:32 +1300, A Nice Cup of Tea <> wrote:
    >
    > >On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 13:42:43 +1300, Rob J wrote:
    > >
    > >> We are gettings lots of blocks for Xtra, Paradise and Hotmail just
    > >> because some of their servers appear in SORBs lists.
    > >>
    > >> SORBS is going the way of ORBS, causing a lot of trouble for everyday
    > >> people who don't send spam and just happen to use shared servers with a
    > >> few rogue users. Their credibility is going downhill fast.

    > >
    > >Sounds like it's working as intended. It is up to those ISPs to ensure
    > >their servers are not abused by their clients!
    > >
    > >
    > >A Nice Cup of Tea

    >
    > And just how do you expect them to do that? This isn't Nazi Germany
    > even if you wish it was.


    In New Zealand easy.
    Make sure everyone signs up using some positive ID including:
    Phone number
    Drivers licence
    Credit card

    NOW, create a bad customer database, so if you have a spammer in NZ ALL
    ISPs can blacklist them.

    Of course ISPs are going to have to block shit loads of ports to stop
    viruses and hacking as well as black list a whole heap of other ISPs who
    knowingly host viruses/trojans...

    Hmmm.... guess there is no easy solution, though I guess if you had to
    front up with a $1000 bond if you had been black listed by the ISPs for
    spamming you would make some efforts to kep your virus checker up to
    date, as well as having your own personal firewall and making sure you
    did not download malware.
     
    whoisthis, Feb 11, 2006
    #17
  18. Rob J

    Steve Guest

    On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 13:42:43 +1300, Rob J wrote:

    > We are gettings lots of blocks for Xtra, Paradise and Hotmail just
    > because some of their servers appear in SORBs lists.
    >
    > SORBS is going the way of ORBS, causing a lot of trouble for everyday
    > people who don't send spam and just happen to use shared servers with a
    > few rogue users. Their credibility is going downhill fast.


    Credibility long gone. We use spamhaus and ordb.

    Steve
     
    Steve, Feb 12, 2006
    #18
  19. Rob J

    Steve Guest

    -=rjh=- wrote:
    > Tony wrote:
    >> Oh that's bolloks Craig and you know it. As you know SORBS is not run
    >> to any credible standard of common sense. As mentioned on the NZNOG
    >> list recently I personally had a "new" /21 from APNIC that was SORBS
    >> listed before it was even in use. It took over a month to get it
    >> removed and only after virtually having to beg. Any ISP using SORBS
    >> for blocking mail is being extremely foolhardy. That Matthew Sullivan
    >> guy is a real up himself jerk.

    >
    > Maybe, but what has that Paul Vixie ever done, huh?
    >
    > "The Internet is not for sissies." (Vixie, 1994)


    Well, i recall him requesting people send him feedback at an nznog on
    his presentation once and it became apparent that he was blocking most
    of the NZ IP space :)

    needless to say he was hung drawn and quartered for this, no idea if he
    actually learned anything from the experience tho.

    --
    Steve.
     
    Steve, Feb 12, 2006
    #19
  20. Rob J

    Tony Guest


    > In New Zealand easy.
    > Make sure everyone signs up using some positive ID including:
    > Phone number
    > Drivers licence
    > Credit card
    >
    > NOW, create a bad customer database, so if you have a spammer in NZ ALL
    > ISPs can blacklist them.


    I think you would find NZ privacy laws would prevent this. It is done on
    an informal level and is best kept that way. In general we don't get
    people spamming here as a rule.
     
    Tony, Feb 12, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    5
    Views:
    4,723
    Tester
    Jan 13, 2007
  2. Guest
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    783
    Peter
    Jan 23, 2007
  3. Guest
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    639
    Guest
    Jan 23, 2007
  4. Guest
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    462
  5. Old Wolf

    What is this 'SORBS' email scam?

    Old Wolf, Mar 14, 2010, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    4,246
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    Mar 18, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page