list of netblocks which bounceback spam about web forms?

[Jo Rhett <jr...@netconsonance.com>]

I am wondering if someone has already created a list of netblocks which shift the cost of their customer's abuse to us by sending bounceback spam informing us to use their web forms.

If not, I'm going to create one so that I can add scores for their netblocks. In a recent review I've found that we persistently get more spam from their netblocks, because they are actively avoiding dealing with it.

-- 
Jo Rhett
Net Consonance : net philanthropy to improve open source and internet projects.

Re: list of netblocks which bounceback spam about web forms?

[Greg Troxel <gd...@ir.bbn.com>]

Jo Rhett <jr...@netconsonance.com> writes:

> I am wondering if someone has already created a list of netblocks
> which shift the cost of their customer's abuse to us by sending
> bounceback spam informing us to use their web forms.
>
> If not, I'm going to create one so that I can add scores for their
> netblocks. In a recent review I've found that we persistently get more
> spam from their netblocks, because they are actively avoiding dealing
> with it.

I agree that this is a good idea (even if SA by default doesn't give it
a score).  But I suspect that the score assignment process will at least
put it to 0.5.

On the theory that things should be measured as finely as practical, and
scores separated, I suggest considering separately prefixes (or
domains?) for which:

    1) mail to postmaster bounces (for any bogus reason, including "you
    didn't DKIM sign your complaint to postmaster)
    2) mail to postmaster results in an exhortation to fill out a web
       form
    3) mail to postmaster is acknowledged by only a bot, with no
       evidence of action
 

Re: list of netblocks which bounceback spam about web forms?

["David F. Skoll" <df...@roaringpenguin.com>]

On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 13:03:55 -0800
Jo Rhett <jr...@netconsonance.com> wrote:

> I am wondering if someone has already created a list of netblocks
> which shift the cost of their customer's abuse to us by sending
> bounceback spam informing us to use their web forms.

I believe the now-defunct rfc-ignorant.org kept a list of domains
that didn't handle mail to abuse@... properly, but not netblocks.

> If not, I'm going to create one so that I can add scores for their
> netblocks. In a recent review I've found that we persistently get
> more spam from their netblocks, because they are actively avoiding
> dealing with it.

Sounds like a good idea for a DNSBL...

Regards,

David.