Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 28 Dec 2002 19:32:42 +0000
From:      Kevin Golding <kevin@caomhin.demon.co.uk>
To:        htabak@quadtelecom.com
Cc:        Chuck Rock <carock@epcusa.com>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Bystander shot by a spam filter.
Message-ID:  <AjFU7ICaxfD%2BEwKa@caomhin.demon.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <3E0DCE46.30803@quadtelecom.com>
References:  <3E0DC89D.3010203@quadtelecom.com> <3E0DCE46.30803@quadtelecom.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Someone, quite probably Harry Tabak, once wrote:
>> From: Chuck Rock <carock@epcusa.com>
>> There's not much you can do but what you already are doing. Complain.
>> 
>> You complain to the people using the software, and if they can't
>> configure it, they will probably stop using it if they care.
>
>I know only one user, that is how I discovered the problem.  I have no 
>way of identifying other users.  That frightens me.

What about this especially frightens you?  Many people have many filters
for various mail systems around the globe.  This is just one that
someone has bundled up.  I'd also be very surprised if it's the only set
of filters out there that block your IP address.  If your provider has
upset someone enough to get blocked then there has to be a fair chance
that they've upset others similarly.

Whilst getting spambouncer changed will solve this issue a long term
solution would be to make sure your ISP doesn't do the kind of things
that people blacklist over.

>> You can try to complain to FreeBSD Ports, but removing this goes against
>> the very nature of "Open Source" Good or bad, there's not much to convince
>> people not to distribute a piece of software that's free and
>> open. 
>
>There is a significant difference between this port and the others.  My 
>other ports at worst only harm the intended user when things go wrong. 
>This port harms random and anonymous individuals.  I don't believe that 
>FreeBSD redistributes spamming software or list managers that don't 
>provide the proper opt-in safeguards by default.

Well technically FreeBSD (ports) provides only helper software to make
other people's software easier to manage, and since Sendmail is part of
the base system and it can be (mis-)configured to act as an open relay
it could be used by spammers.

But I understand what you're trying to say and I'm just being a little
pedantic about the wording.

>> Everyone knows when they install these softwares that you do so at
>> your own risk. If your ISP is spending money to support problems caused by
>> it's use and they have control over it, they will probably stop using
>> it. Most ISP's care about expenses, so you can bet if it's not worth
>> using, they will eventually stop.
>> 
>> If you have any capacity, you can attempt to fix the program, and submit
>> it to the author for distribution. This is how Open Source works.
>
>I will be happy to fix it, the author may not like my philosophy. I 
>believe in Free Speech and a working internet mail system. 

Surely part of a working Internet mail system means that I have the
right to filter mail?  Free Speech should also allow me the freedom to
not listen after all.

>I would 
>attempt to minimize "false positives", and require testing. But as I 
>said earlier, the author doesn't respond.  Even if the software is 
>adjusted, it will be impossible to recall all the older versions.

Have you looked at the port itself?  Maybe if your fixes are simple
enough you could convince the maintainer to accept them in the port
until such time as the author is able to respond?

Kevin
-- 
kevin@caomhin.demon.co.uk

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AjFU7ICaxfD%2BEwKa>