Keyserver spam example

MFPA expires2010 at
Sat Jun 12 03:36:08 CEST 2010

Hash: SHA512


On Friday 11 June 2010 at 8:00:09 PM, in
<mid:20100611150009.2719ae9e at scorpio>, Jerry wrote:

> On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 11:18:05 -0500 John Clizbe
> <John at> articulated:

>> Mark H. Wood wrote: > On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at
>> 05:57:50PM +0200, Joke de Buhr wrote: >> You do not
>> sacrifice legitimate incoming mail because there is an
>> >> RFC that clearly states mailservers do not operate
>> from dynamic IP >> addresses. Therefore they can not
>> be considered valid.

>> > If there is such an RFC, it's rubbish; I run an MTA
>> at home on my > dynamic address, and it works just
>> fine, and is quite valid.

>> EXACTLY what Mark said, "RUBBISH"

>> MTA and keyserver here. My home ISP "blesses" me with
>> a new address about once every six months. Router
>> automagically updates my DNS provider and everything
>> is good to go.

>> Cite the RFC, please.

> The Spamhaus PBL might very well list you.

> is listed in the PBL

> Mailservers using this blocklist would probably block
> mail from you.

Of course, even Spamhaus's own website says the PBL is not a blacklist
and that you can remove your IP address from their list if you are
running a "legitimate" mail server, but only if it's a static Ip
address. They provide no definition (that I can find) of what
constitutes a "legitimate" mail server

> Obtaining a static IP is easily done so
> I don't know why someone would want to risk using a
> dynamic IP.

Most ISPs I have seen charge considerably more for a static IP
address; generally, commercial prices rather than home-user or
small-business prices. Unless you have relatively high bandwidth
requirements there is no point. It is *definitely* not worth the
expense just just to avoid an occasional over-zealous mailserver admin
spuriously binning one of your perfectly valid email messages. Even if
you are hosting a website or an incoming mail server, there are plenty
of dynamic DNS services available for many times less cost than having
a static IP address.

> In any case, a very large percentage of
> SPAM originates from dynamic IPs, which is why I
> routinely block them.

A large percentage of spam originates from the USA. It would be just
as rational to block mail from all IP addresses that are listed as
being there. (-;

- --
Best regards

MFPA                    mailto:expires2010 at

When you're caffeinated, all is right with the world


More information about the Gnupg-users mailing list