Quote:
|
Originally Posted by abailey152
This is a catch-22 situation. You either encourage people to report spam, and then audit their responses, or you make it more difficult to report, and get less people involved.
It's difficult to find a way around this, except throw resources at it. I agree that many users just cannot be trusted to audit their own reports correctly, so I think organisations like Spamcop need to do a little checking of their own before adding IP addresses to their blacklist.
|
There are different sorts of blacklist. It's acknowledged that the public, open lists, such as Spamcop, that anybody can submit an offending server to, are more prone to false positives and malicious reporting. Other lists, such as those that maintain honey traps and blacklist any server that sends emails to the traps, are generally more accurate. What's really needed is better legislation and a stronger system for monitoring spam and blacklisting those servers that send spam, allow it to be sent or are misconfigured in a way that assists spammers. I'm thinking agencies whose purpose it is to maintain [a] "definitive" list[s]. Currently Spampal has something like sixteen different lists and the list of lists is constantly changing - the smaller lists often "disappear" because of the overheads involved.