4 replies to this topic

[engineergreg]

mailserver 67.22.134.4 (mail7) was blacklisted at backscatter.org late in june. Now, while I dislike the operating methods of backscatter.org (I would go so far as to suggest that their fees for expedited removal are blackmail and possibly actionable), I also dislike the problem of SMTP backscatter. If you can do anything to prevent it in your server configuration, please look into it.

[CH-Jonathan]

Hello engineergreg,

Can you please submit a ticket on this so we can forward it on to the appropriate parties and discuss this in further detail with you? However, in the meantime, thank you for the suggestion.

Best Regards,
Jonathan

engineergreg, on 07 July 2010 - 08:16 AM, said:

mailserver 67.22.134.4 (mail7) was blacklisted at backscatter.org late in june. Now, while I dislike the operating methods of backscatter.org (I would go so far as to suggest that their fees for expedited removal are blackmail and possibly actionable), I also dislike the problem of SMTP backscatter. If you can do anything to prevent it in your server configuration, please look into it.

[CH-Andrew]

engineergreg, on 07 July 2010 - 08:16 AM, said:

mailserver 67.22.134.4 (mail7) was blacklisted at backscatter.org late in june. Now, while I dislike the operating methods of backscatter.org (I would go so far as to suggest that their fees for expedited removal are blackmail and possibly actionable), I also dislike the problem of SMTP backscatter. If you can do anything to prevent it in your server configuration, please look into it.

Hello,

unfortunately, we do not recognize backscatter as a legitimate RBL provider. There is simply nothing we can do about their listings. This RBL provider will blacklist entire data centers and then try to extort the data center into paying them obscene amounts of money to remove their IPs. Their method of operation is exactly illustrated here. They create upstream pressure from downstream customers in an attempt to generate revenue for getting IPs removed from their RBL list.

As you can see, the mail server you are mentioning (mail7) is not listed on ANY legitimate RBL - as such, there is nothing really for us to "fix" here. The only resolution is to pay them the money they are demanding so as to remove our IP from their RBL. Frankly, this is not going to happen. Instead, we have been using their own tactics against them (and not only us, but, major datacenters and providers as well). The method of dealing with these people is to provide upstream pressure. If you are having a problem sending to a specific mail server because they are using backscatter - that systems administrator needs to be brought up to speed with how this RBL operates and shown that they are denying legitimate mail to their users based on false and invalid RBL practices. We used to hear a lot of complaints about backscatter listings - this is the first Ive heard of it in almost a year - meaning, the strategy has been pretty successful and this particular RBL list carries little to no value anymore in the market.

I was going to show you the verbage on their website about why they charge fees (ie extort) and why the list entire blocks of IPs rather then just offending IPs - but, backscatter.org doesnt seem to be up anymore - just a default godaddy landing page now (unless Im visiting the wrong place)

I apologize if this is not the answer you are looking for, but, it is as honest and straight forward answer as I can provide

[engineergreg]

CH-Andrew, on 07 July 2010 - 10:12 AM, said:

...we do not recognize backscatter as a legitimate RBL provider. There is simply nothing we can do about their listings.
...the mail server you are mentioning (mail7) is not listed on ANY legitimate RBL - as such, there is nothing really for us to "fix" here. The only resolution is to pay them the money...
...I apologize if this is not the answer you are looking for, but, it is as honest and straight forward answer as I can provide.

Whoa, big fella, I did not intend to suggest that you were doing anything wrong, that you needed to fix anything or that you should undertake to negotiate with backscatter.org. I certainly would NEVER want to suggest that you give them any money. What I did do was ask you, nicely, to look in to it by which I meant, to see if there is some setting or practice you might be able to adjust to help with the problem of backscatter.

For example, When the server rejects email to a non-existent address does it reject it without receiving it [no backscatter] or receive it then later send a rejection to the listed sender [potential backscatter]?

When the server detects and removes a virus does it silently remove it [no backscatter] or send a notice to the listed sender [almost certainly backscatter]?

Do you run auto-responders that will respond to the listed sender? If if the listed sender is faked this creates a form of backscatter.

There are lots of choices where neither choice is right or wrong but one contributes and the other doesn't.

I think it was Charles Taze Russell, founder of Zion's Watch Tower Tract Society who in early writings suggested that a truth is a truth even if spoken by Satan. While I think that backscatter.org's business practices are, to be kind, less than sterling, I don't think that they are making up the triggers that cause a server to be listed out of whole cloth either. If there is a criteria that makes it look like a server is behaving in a way that causes or promotes backscatter then I feel it is in the best interest of the Internet Community at large to point out to the server's owners that their server has met that criteria. This I've done. I have no expectations about what you will do with that information but if you have a moment to check the server to see if there is anything that it is doing, allowable by the rfc specs or not, that might be changed to help with the backscatter problem that would be great.

It appears that you have had some experiences with this problem in the past so you may have already done such a review. If so, thumbs up and thank you for your time.

We resell hosting through Cartika and have had nothing but good comments on our service since we switched to you. We use an in-house SMTP server but none of our clients who use their domain's server are experiencing any problems with mail delivery at this time so I certainly have no complaints and am sorry if I led you to believe otherwise.

Cheers,
EG

[CH-Andrew]

engineergreg, on 07 July 2010 - 03:38 PM, said:

Whoa, big fella, I did not intend to suggest that you were doing anything wrong, that you needed to fix anything or that you should undertake to negotiate with backscatter.org.

no need for that - I am perfectly calm - I apologize if you misconstrued my answer or if I worded it incorrectly

Quote

I certainly would NEVER want to suggest that you give them any money. What I did do was ask you, nicely, to look in to it by which I meant, to see if there is some setting or practice you might be able to adjust to help with the problem of backscatter.

For example, When the server rejects email to a non-existent address does it reject it without receiving it [no backscatter] or receive it then later send a rejection to the listed sender [potential backscatter]?

When the server detects and removes a virus does it silently remove it [no backscatter] or send a notice to the listed sender [almost certainly backscatter]?

Do you run auto-responders that will respond to the listed sender? If if the listed sender is faked this creates a form of backscatter.

There are lots of choices where neither choice is right or wrong but one contributes and the other doesn't.

Trust me when I tell you, we worked exhaustively on this around 3 years ago.

Quote

I think it was Charles Taze Russell, founder of Zion's Watch Tower Tract Society who in early writings suggested that a truth is a truth even if spoken by Satan. While I think that backscatter.org's business practices are, to be kind, less than sterling, I don't think that they are making up the triggers that cause a server to be listed out of whole cloth either. If there is a criteria that makes it look like a server is behaving in a way that causes or promotes backscatter then I feel it is in the best interest of the Internet Community at large to point out to the server's owners that their server has met that criteria.

End of the day, an RBL provider that blacklists entire blocks of IPs and then asks for money for removal for all IPs on the block, even when maybe only 1 IP is guilty of anything - well, its not a practice we will participate in or frankly, even entertain

Quote

This I've done. I have no expectations about what you will do with that information but if you have a moment to check the server to see if there is anything that it is doing, allowable by the rfc specs or not, that might be changed to help with the backscatter problem that would be great.

backscatter should be ignored - that is the only thing that can be done about this....

Quote

We resell hosting through Cartika and have had nothing but good comments on our service since we switched to you. We use an in-house SMTP server but none of our clients who use their domain's server are experiencing any problems with mail delivery at this time so I certainly have no complaints and am sorry if I led you to believe otherwise.

Cheers,
EG

excellent news and thank you very much...

Please understand our position here - do not confuse bluntness with anything but bluntness.. it was 3 years ago that backscatter blacklisted ANY and EVERY IP at colo4dallas (and the planet between) because one of their customers had improperly configured mail servers - and then sent us all an email demanding that we insist colo4dallas remove this customer "or else" none of our email would be delivered. I have no other way to say this - there is nothing this organization produces that holds any value to anyone - even if they are right sometimes - is it worth looking at it the rest of the time where they are simply extorting IP block owners?