This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[anti-abuse-wg] The well-behaved ISP's role in spamfight
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] The well-behaved ISP's role in spamfight
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] The well-behaved ISP's role in spamfight
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Suresh Ramasubramanian
ops.lists at gmail.com
Mon Feb 13 17:56:16 CET 2017
I wish it were that clear cut. You also have a role to protect your customers against threats, and to ensure that their mailbox is at least usable rather than deluged with spam. Being proactive about postmaster complaints and being sensitive to false positives in filtering is a useful middle path and a widely defined best practice. Never mind that quite a few large players don’t follow it. --srs On 13/02/17, 8:43 AM, "anti-abuse-wg on behalf of peter h" <anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net on behalf of peter at hk.ipsec.se> wrote: As my wife urged me to clarify things :-) The role for an ISP in fighting abuse is to detect and prevent it's customer from sending malware & spam out of it's network. Not filter incoming stuff, that would be censoring.
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] The well-behaved ISP's role in spamfight
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] The well-behaved ISP's role in spamfight
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]