![]() |
![]() |
|
October 11, 2004Power of Blogging: Word of Mouth FINALLY gets my SORBS issue fixedWell, there is proof yet again of the power of blogging. If you recall at the beginning of the month I complained that SORBS was erroneously blocking my company's IP address block, and constant attempts to communicate with SORBS from both myself and my ISP went unanswered. I was blacklisted from most of my colleagues, which makes it EXTREMELY difficult to communicate with anyone, including people I am working with at a few security and antivirus companies, and of course Microsoft. I was starting to lose business opportunities due to lack of communication, and I was thinking about moving to a different ISP before I lost any real business. Well apparently my blog entry made its way around the "inner-circle" of those that matter at SORBS, getting posted to an internal mailing list of SORBS gods and someone had the bright idea that it might make sense to go and fix it. I appreciate that. So it looks like life is back to normal on the mail server front. I SHOULD be able to communicate again with everyone. If you emailed me and you think I didn't respond, you might want to resend your email. Good lesson to be learned here though. It is amazing how a volunteer organization ran by one man can negatively affect business around the globe. I wonder who watches the watchers? If Matt and the crew at SORBS doesn't like someone, and decides to take their time in removing an IP address that 'accidentally' got blacklisted... there is NOTHING you can do about it. No relief. No recourse. No one to turn to. And this is for our CRITICAL communication infrastructure. Now to be fair, for all I know this could have been an honest mistake and a rare occurance. The fact that it took OVER A MONTH though should show that it doesn't matter. In the face of failure there should be quick, clear and concise remedies for recovery. Someone made a mistake with my IP block. Fine. But waiting a month before fixing it was unacceptable. Imagine if I was Ebay, Amazon or some other heavy hitting online business. I'd probably go sue your ass for the lost profits. And then a great service would be in litigation and end up folding. That doesn't help anyone. Posted by SilverStr at October 11, 2004 08:30 AM | TrackBackComments
I know EXACTLY where you're coming from. Our company is an insurance brokerage who basically shops around for the best insurance deals for individuals or entire companies. One of the companies we deal with Blue Cross Blue Shield, I believe, uses a blacklist program that is very obscure. Somehow this blacklist added our ISP IP Address block to their list. I made requests to take us off, but nothing was done about it I believe. They tend to only accept information from ISPs only, so if your ISP doesn't "see" it as a problem then they tend to not do anything about it. I don't know if it's an issue any more and hopefully it isn't. The blacklist is a cool idea but it just doesn't really make sense because there is no "police for the police" as you said. I'd rather take the time to blacklist known spam sites or use a baysian filter on the server level than to rely on some 3rd party to tell me what they believe is right and wrong. The sad part is, we use our own hosting company so it shouldn't matter what IP sends the message. They were blocking OUR IP which shows up in the email header, not the IP address of the server in question. I know it's due to Outlook being run behind a NAT box, but I can't fix this problem without giving everyone a public IP address. I'm not spending money to fix a problem I didn't create. I sure hope things like this go away though. One company or group of individuals can't police the entire internet. There's just too many implications. I know something should be done now about spam but going about it the wrong way isn't going to help anyone. Posted by: Jeremy Brayton at October 11, 2004 09:42 AMLucky you. It was resolved for you. But not for me. I've recieved an email like this one: ------- [a few URLs to add value to words] As for the listing: * You are an innocent party that has been included in a wider listing policy because your provider is happy to host spammer(s) that have spammed a SORBS spamtrap or admin.¹ ¹ If you are part of a wider netblock that is blocked you are not required to pay the SORBS 'fine' as the entry was not generated because of your actions, however your netblock will not be removed until your upstream removes the spammers. I've to use additional ISP for outgoing email and this ISP for incomming-only. I manage my entire server. It's on dedicated IP. I take full responsibility for software installed on it - but SORBS does not allow me to unblock select IPs from /19 (8192 IPs wide) block. Blocking innocent parties is totaly wrong. Next time cops instead of searching for person who steal somebody watch - will arrest entire house - you will understand difference. :-((
Here is a email I've recieved in return for my request: "From: RT_CorrespondAddressNotSet@goliath.sorbs.net RT could not load a valid user, and RT's configuration does not allow for the creation of a new user for your email." > "From: RT_CorrespondAddressNotSet@goliath.sorbs.net This means you either replied with a different email address than the ticket was created with or the ticket has been moved to a queue where you cannot update messages to (like the DUHL removals queue) Yours Mat @ SORBS Posted by: Matthew Sullivan at November 2, 2004 09:51 PMMatt, Thanks for clearing that up for AT. I appreciate you being open and letting us know. Oh, and welcome to my blog. Where were you a month ago??? :) Posted by: SilverStr at November 5, 2004 09:21 AM |
![]() ![]()
My 5 Favorite Books
Writing Secure Code
Secure Programming Cookbook Security Engineering Secure Coding Principles & Practice Inside the Security Mind ![]()
My 5 Favorite Papers
Smashing the Stack
Penetration Studies Covert Channel Analysis of Trusted Systems DoD Trusted Computer System Evaluation Criteria NSA Security Recommendation Guides ![]()
Archives
December 2005
November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 November 2002 October 2002 September 2002 August 2002 July 2002 ![]() |
|