http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2001/06/08/orbs/print.html # # A spam cop goes AWOL # # The ORBS blacklist, a controversial tool for stopping unsolicited # e-mail, is suddenly inaccessible. # # - - - - - - - - - - - - # # By Damien Cave # # June 8, 2001 | Spam fighters all over the world have lost a # controversial weapon in the battle against unsolicited e-mail. # Since June 1, the Web site for ORBS -- the Open Relay Behavior # Modification System -- has been gutted. Visitors to the site # now find nothing more than a gray blank page and a simple message: # "Due to circumstances beyond our control, the ORBS website is # no longer available." # # ORBS's main service was a blacklist of Internet mail servers # -- computers capable of routing mail across the Net -- that the # ORBS administrator, Alan Brown, had identified as potentially # capable of forwarding spam. Now that blacklist is no longer # available to network administrators, and they want to know why. # One popular theory mooted on the Net is that Brown closed down # the site rather than comply with a New Zealand court order # demanding that he remove two specific ISPs from the blacklist. # But Brown, who lives in New Zealand, is keeping silent. "I am # unable to answer any of your questions," he writes in an e-mail. # "Sorry." # # Even without an explanation, the demise of ORBS is significant, # stirring up, once again, an ongoing worldwide debate over how # best to administer the Internet and mediate the Net's intersection # of humanity and technology. Questions about ORBS's behavior always # centered on the problem of how to handle e-mail abuse. But more # generally, ORBS symbolized the ongoing struggle between the Net's # tendency to encourage individual freedom and the necessity of # combating anarchy. # # Ever since the Net moved beyond its roots as a small, open, # academic community, users have attempted to balance opposing # forces. Most favor the right to speak out, along with the right # to privacy; they rail against censorship, but at the same time # desperately seek the ability to censor unsolicited e-mail by # limiting spammers' access to their networks. # # ORBS supporters say the blacklist was a fully justified form # of preventive medicine. Brown saw his mission as identifying # every mail server on the Net that allowed "open relays" -- in # essence, that permitted the forwarding of mail from one point # on the Net to another without any restriction. Spammers love # open relays; they employ them to hide their identities and funnel # out massive amounts of e-mail for free. But at the same time # the open relays bog down the system for other customers. # # Brown used simple software agents and diagnostic probes to comb # the Internet, looking for mail servers configured for open # relaying. Whenever he found one, Brown would post the Internet # protocol (IP) address on his list -- even if the address had # never been used by a spammer. ISPs, systems administrators and # everyday citizens who configured their computers to block # addresses listed on ORBS could then close off a spammer's favorite # distribution tool even before the spammer knew it existed. # # More controversial, Brown also placed on his list servers that # blocked his probes, whether or not he could ascertain if they # had open relays. ORBS supporters say such a policy was the only # way to keep a flood of open-relay-capable servers from pumping # spam across the Net. The end, they argue, justified the means. # # The immediate impact of the ORBS shutdown could mean more spam, # says Michael LeFevre, a London technology company executive. # "I've received four spams since ORBS went down last week," he # says. "I only received two or three previous to that this year." # # But not everyone is sorry to see the site go. ORBS has plenty # of critics. ORBS wasn't just a useful technology, they say; it # was also a tool used by a specific person, Alan Brown, an # overzealous spam fighter who went too far. ORBS's own ISP pulled # the plug on Brown in 1998 after receiving complaints about the # way that Brown used probes to test servers for open relays. # Although another ISP agreed to host ORBS soon afterward, Brown's # detractors say that he never learned his lesson: He repeatedly # insisted that he had the right to test servers as often as he # wanted. # # "Alan Brown created some nice technology -- nobody faults him # on that point," says Tom Geller, founder of Suespammers.org, # a nonprofit group that lobbies for strict spam legislation. "But # he used it in an irresponsible way, invading others' private # networks and using others' resources against their stated wishes." # He became a living contradiction -- a man who, says Geller, "used # others' network resources to prove that it's wrong to use others' # network resources." # # Before the scourge of spam, the Net was a less contentious place. # Until the early '90s, open relays were not uncommon. In fact, # they were the norm. # # "I remember when you'd get funny looks for running a mail server # that wasn't an open relay," says "Der Mouse," a Canadian # spam-fighting veteran who refused to give his off-line name. # "I remember when there was a machine on the Net that was # advertised as having no password on its administrative log-in. # Want a guest log-in? Log in and create yourself one. I remember # when the Net was a friendly and civilized place." # # "Today it is more of an armed camp, suspicious of everyone," # he continues in an e-mail. "The Net I knew and loved is dead, # killed by uncivilized greedy incompetents who came barging in, # without caring that when you barge into a foreign culture it # behooves you to learn how they do things. This would not have # been a problem, except that they arrived in sufficient numbers # to overload the mechanisms that normally would have either brought # newcomers up to speed on the culture or rejected them; as a result # they killed off the culture we had, the only culture I've ever # seen work based on mutual friendship and helpfulness on a large # scale." # # Spam signified the death of the original Net culture, Der Mouse # and others argue. By the mid-'90s, systems administrators started # fighting it by closing off open relays. Shutting the pipes made # it harder for, say, employees of a company to log on to their # corporate network from home, but by limiting who could use the # network, closed relays also kept spammers out. This, in turn, # saved companies and individuals money, since open relays # essentially let anyone borrow servers and bandwidth without having # to pay for them. # # But some network administrators moved slower than others. So # ORBS appeared, with a mission to move them along. At first, most # people on the Net welcomed the service. Open relays were sometimes # hard to find, and ORBS worked more quickly than other # spam-fighting lists. The Mail Abuse Prevention System's Realtime # Blackhole List, for example, acts like an after-the-fact plug. # Its main list contains domain names that spam has already been # sent from, and MAPS only adds servers to its list after the system # administrator of the offending mail server has been given a chance # to close the hole but hasn't done it. # # ORBS, on the other hand, "tested relays and listed them # immediately," says William James, a computer consultant in # Mississippi. "No negotiation, no notice. It was fast. Someone # running an open relay ran the risk of losing a substantial amount # of traffic without any notice." # # Over time, however, Brown's pace and intensity started alienating # the very people who sympathized with his cause. John Oliver, # a systems administrator in San Diego, remembers butting heads # with Brown in early 1999. ORBS probes invaded his servers and # tested them for 45 minutes, over and over again. The probes # returned and retested a few days or weeks later, "as often and # as frequently as they saw fit," Oliver says. # # Each day that the tests ran, Oliver's server logs lengthened. # He received pages and pages of server activity that directly # resulted from Brown's tests. "It was annoying because since I # wasn't running an open relay, it was wasting my time," he says. # "And, of course, I didn't appreciate the implicit accusation # that I was an irresponsible admin." # # Brown regularly tested servers without any evidence of wrongdoing, # says Der Mouse. "Let me be precise: He repeatedly 'tested' my # home mail server, and if he had any reason to think it had ever # relayed spam, he steadfastly refused to produce it," he says. # "He also repeatedly did so after I explicitly denied him # permission to do so." # # MAPS also had a run-in with ORBS. In 1999, MAPS listed ORBS on # its Realtime Blackhole List, in response to several complaints # about the way that ORBS was supposedly abusing networks. The # group removed ORBS and stopped blocking it from its own servers # three months later, but not before ORBS threw MAPS into its own # black hole. Even Suespammers.org found itself blocked over a # dispute with ORBS. Until the day the list died, spam fighters # who used Brown's list couldn't access the Suespammers site, a # major resource that might have helped them in their war on # unsolicited e-mail. # # "Alan's problem is that he was so convinced that testing was # necessary that he felt that anyone who didn't want him testing # their systems, as often as he wanted to, was somehow just as # bad as an actual open relay," says Peter Seebach, a systems # administrator who subscribes to several spam-fighting mailing # lists. "This is where I drew the line; without any spam coming # through a system, and with the admin's request that he not test # it, he had no business hitting systems over and over again. I # don't see a meaningful distinction between what he did and what # script kiddies do with root scripts" that attempt to break into # a system. # # Is what ORBS did really so bad? In essence, ORBS was nothing # more than a list of servers that Brown checked and decided to # block from connecting with his network -- which is one suggested # recipe for spam fighting. Doesn't Brown have the right to protect # his network by blocking whomever he wants to? Doesn't he have # the right to publish a list of whom he's blocking? # # People who rail against Brown are ignoring the implications of # their argument, says "Afterburner," manager of the e-mail abuse # department for a large ISP. ORBS may have been run "in a # particularly unethical way," he says, but that doesn't mean that # Brown should be silenced. # # Rather, everyone should have "the unfettered right to publish" # a blacklist, regardless of how it is organized, he says. Probes # don't damage a network, and "nobody is required to use your list # if they don't want to," he says. "The situation is somewhat # analogous to the idealized free market: If you put out a list # that's worth using, people will use it. If you put out a list # that is not worth using, people will not use it." # # But ORBS doesn't quite fit Afterburner's paraphrase of the # libertarian ideal. The list was worth using; blocking the servers # ORBS listed cut down on spam. Yet those who used the list as # a tool against unwanted e-mail didn't necessarily have to pay # the costs, which came in the form of ORBS's probes. In other # words, Brown's approach looks a lot like a spammer's: He invaded # others' networks without consent, offering benefits without costs. # # Even worse, critics argue, Brown went one step further, blocking # servers that didn't have open relays, and adding them to a list # that he knew would keep traffic from them. There is, for example, # the Xtra Mail lawsuit in New Zealand, which Brown's critics say # was a direct result of Brown's unethical practices. # # Essentially, Brown added Actrix and Xtra Mail's servers to his # blacklist after they blocked his probes. He reportedly had no # evidence that they used open relays. Actrix and Xtra Mail sued, # and on May 24 they won. The New Zealand High Court ordered Brown # to remove Xtra Mail's servers from the ORBS database. # # Brown then said that he would comply, but he remained unrepentant. # "ORBS policy is that if you threaten ORBS you'll be manually # listed," he said, according to a story in IDG New Zealand. # "Telecom [Actrix and Xtra Mail's parent company] threatened me # with legal action for two years." # # Those who have tangled with Brown aren't surprised at his stance. # And they don't have a problem with his philosophy, or with his # argument that he has a right to form a policy and block whomever # he wants. They argue, however, that the policy has to be carried # out with honesty. # # "The list wasn't what it was purported to be," says Oliver, of # San Diego. "If you employ a list called the Open Relay Behavior # Modification System to protect your server from spam, you expect # that list to block open relays and nothing else. But that isn't # what you got with ORBS. You got open relays blocked as well as # anyone who had attracted the personal enmity of Mr. Brown." # # Ultimately, Oliver says, the Net should be glad to see ORBS go # because it lacked the basic values of the old Internet -- truth, # respect and freedom. "It's extremely dangerous to support the # use of a tool when the cost for its use includes the loss of # a liberty," he says. # # Still, many of Brown's critics argue that ORBS's technology # shouldn't go to waste. The list is already mirrored on at least # one site, and some predict that another administrator -- someone # with a bit more restraint -- will clean it up and maintain it. # If he or she does, perhaps that individual, and other # technologists, will learn from Brown's mistakes, says Geller # at Suespammers.org. # # "Any technical endeavor that ignores social aspects is doomed # to failure," he says. "It's like making soup without liquid."
George@Orwellian.Org wrote:
# One popular theory mooted on the Net is that Brown closed down # the site rather than comply with a New Zealand court order # demanding that he remove two specific ISPs from the blacklist.
I know I sound naive asking this, but has something like this ever happened in the US? The way I read this, the NZ court ordered a private publisher of an enumeration of IP addresses to modify his publication despite the fact that the IP addresses in question met the criteria for inclusion on the list. (ORBS claimed to be a list of open relays, but it was well known that it included any network that blocked ORBS probes, which apparently included the two companies in question.) In addition, even if it did include networks that didn't fit the stated criteria for inclusion on the list, it seems to me that the circumstances under which a particular entry is added to the list are completely immaterial---for any particular entry on the list, its inclusion only indicates that the ORBS administrators are not adequately assured that spam will not originate from the IP address in quesiton. Doesn't seem like that could possibly be considered libel. One might be able to make the case that being listed in ORBS was damaging in that outgoing email from a listed system would be blocked by lots of people, but that doesn't seem compelling---people are _choosing_ to block traffic from your server based on the fact that they trust the recommendations of ORBS and, according to ORBS, it cannot be ascertained that spam will not originate from the system. Like I said, I'm probably just naive. -- Riad Wahby rsw@mit.edu MIT VI-2/A 2002 5105
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001 George@Orwellian.Org wrote:
Subject: CDR: ORBS sucked into a black hole!
http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2001/06/08/orbs/print.html
About Fucking Time! I'm just amazed that it lasted as long as it did afrter it was forced to flle Canada for New Zealand. These assholes should be on one of Jim Bells mythical auction lists... -- Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin@mfn.org If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place... --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001 George@Orwellian.Org wrote:
http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2001/06/08/orbs/print.html # # A spam cop goes AWOL # # The ORBS blacklist, a controversial tool for stopping unsolicited # e-mail, is suddenly inaccessible.
It does no such thing. What ORBS does do is go around telling MTA operators how to configure their servers, or else. I hope ORBS burns in hell. -- ____________________________________________________________________ "...where annual election ends, tyranny begins;" Thomas Jefferson & Samuel Adams The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobody's holding a gun to your head and telling you to configure your servers in a certain way. ORBS is a reputation-publishing tool. Extremely cypherpunkish. One wonders why Choate is even on this list instead of commie-privacy-lefty-punks instead. -Declan On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 04:27:17PM -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001 George@Orwellian.Org wrote:
http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2001/06/08/orbs/print.html # # A spam cop goes AWOL # # The ORBS blacklist, a controversial tool for stopping unsolicited # e-mail, is suddenly inaccessible.
It does no such thing. What ORBS does do is go around telling MTA operators how to configure their servers, or else.
I hope ORBS burns in hell.
-- ____________________________________________________________________
"...where annual election ends, tyranny begins;"
Thomas Jefferson & Samuel Adams
The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote:
ORBS is a reputation-publishing tool.
Total Bullshit. None of my domains have *ever* had a single spamming incident, yet we were on their list. I guess our reputation was that we were *potential* spammers? Fuck ORBS.
-Declan
-- Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin@mfn.org If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place... --------------------------------------------------------------------
I see I was unclear. I never said ORBS is an *accurate* reputation-publishing tool. I have never said it was entirely focused on spammers. I have never said I uncritically accept it or use it on the machines for which I am responsible.* But it is, nevertheless, beyond question that ORBS and its progeny allow their operators to broadcast their views about what they think about some certain network addresses or domains. If they go too far and are too zealous, the market will move toward a better solution. Like I said, very cypherpunkly. -Declan * In fact, I wrote earlier this year: Slashdot ran a thought-provoking piece not so long ago about how anti-spam measures (that I have long endorsed) like the RBL and its progeny are moving from blackholing spammers to blackholing sites with software that *could be used* to spam. While that's a private activity, it's treading the same path that Rep. Bob Goodlatteis with his plan to criminalize software that could be used to send bulk messages. At least the RBL is limited by market pressures: If it goes too far, ISPs will stop using it. But while free markets are the best way we've found yet to order society, they're hardly perfect, and RBL could overreact and restrict some folks who are undeserving in the interim. On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 09:28:56PM -0500, measl@mfn.org wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote:
ORBS is a reputation-publishing tool.
Total Bullshit.
None of my domains have *ever* had a single spamming incident, yet we were on their list. I guess our reputation was that we were *potential* spammers?
Fuck ORBS.
-Declan
-- Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin@mfn.org
If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place... --------------------------------------------------------------------
I think it's a typo. I think Declan meant reputation punishing tool. If he didn't, he should have. Good riddance to bad rubbish--though, as I suppose would Declan or even Choate, I'd defend the bastard's right to be a bastard, so long as he's willing to pay up when he causes real damage--or just gets caught in an arbitrary system not of his own arbitrary devise, such as the courts. If you're going to be a tyrant, you'd better be able to cope with it. Apparently Mr. ORBS wasn't. MacN On Mon, 11 Jun 2001 measl@mfn.org wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote:
ORBS is a reputation-publishing tool.
Total Bullshit.
None of my domains have *ever* had a single spamming incident, yet we were on their list. I guess our reputation was that we were *potential* spammers?
Fuck ORBS.
-Declan
-- Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin@mfn.org
If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place... --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Mac Norton wrote:
I think it's a typo. I think Declan meant reputation punishing tool.
If he didn't, he should have. Good riddance to bad rubbish--though, as I suppose would Declan or even Choate, I'd defend the bastard's right to be a bastard, so long as he's willing to pay up when he causes real damage
But's they won't. I've tried to open a discussion with them on several occassions and their attitude is 'do it our way'. The only(!) way I'd support their activity is if they had a 'opt out' to their database. I have no desire to participate in their 'project' in any way. Yet I don't have that choice. So, no, I don't support his activity when it involved me against my wishes. There is something particularly slimey about that. -- ____________________________________________________________________ "...where annual election ends, tyranny begins;" Thomas Jefferson & Samuel Adams The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
The only black hole in this conversation are the Choatian posts. ORBS/RBL/etc. in principle are making statements about what they believe about other people. This is similar to movie or book reviewing. People may read my review and stay away from a movie/book, just as they read an ORBS/RBL/MAPS "review" and stay away from certain addresses. -Declan On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 11:26:24PM -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Mac Norton wrote:
I think it's a typo. I think Declan meant reputation punishing tool.
If he didn't, he should have. Good riddance to bad rubbish--though, as I suppose would Declan or even Choate, I'd defend the bastard's right to be a bastard, so long as he's willing to pay up when he causes real damage
But's they won't. I've tried to open a discussion with them on several occassions and their attitude is 'do it our way'. The only(!) way I'd support their activity is if they had a 'opt out' to their database. I have no desire to participate in their 'project' in any way. Yet I don't have that choice. So, no, I don't support his activity when it involved me against my wishes.
There is something particularly slimey about that.
-- ____________________________________________________________________
"...where annual election ends, tyranny begins;"
Thomas Jefferson & Samuel Adams
The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote:
The only black hole in this conversation are the Choatian posts.
ORBS/RBL/etc. in principle are making statements about what they believe about other people. This is similar to movie or book reviewing. People may read my review and stay away from a movie/book, just as they read an ORBS/RBL/MAPS "review" and stay away from certain addresses.
Malarky, they actively(!) participate. What ORBS and their ilk do is collect scans of IP's across the Internet, some do it directly, some do it through independent 3rd parties, and direct complaints. The only way ORBS will remove you from the database is if you allow(!) them to re-scan your MTA and verify to their satisfaction you are not in any way running an Open Relay. They then make this database (usually for some sort of fee) available to other groups who then actively filter submissions to their sites. In other words if I have a friend who I want to exchange private mail with, ORBS's uses their trumped excuse for justification to inject their belief system into that. Truly heinous. Since when did I have any sort of obligation to help them in their particular crusade? My duties as a citizen and human being are not to interfere. I'm not saying 'Stop', I'm only saying 'Let me off'. There is no technical or legal standard to back their actions. There is no 'authority' for them to decide who may configure their software how (and the fact that they tell a private citizen is particularly irksome, more angels among men I guess). Just another fascist bastard. Freedom for me, but not for thee... -- ____________________________________________________________________ "...where annual election ends, tyranny begins;" Thomas Jefferson & Samuel Adams The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
ORBS/MAPS/etc. "participate" by connecting to and reviewing sites, much like I go out to and watch movies to review. As usual, Choate fails to grasp the point. I am not saying anyone has a duty to "help them." In fact, as I said in an earlier post, I'm not sure I even agree with what they're doing. But I do believe they have a right to publish their reviews of mail relays, just as I have the right to publish movie reviews -- even if you disagree with what I say in them. To tell them not to speak their mind about you is censorship no less than if you attempt to force me not to speak my mind about that rather awful Operation: Swordfish movie. -Declan On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 12:10:40AM -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote:
The only black hole in this conversation are the Choatian posts.
ORBS/RBL/etc. in principle are making statements about what they believe about other people. This is similar to movie or book reviewing. People may read my review and stay away from a movie/book, just as they read an ORBS/RBL/MAPS "review" and stay away from certain addresses.
Malarky, they actively(!) participate.
What ORBS and their ilk do is collect scans of IP's across the Internet, some do it directly, some do it through independent 3rd parties, and direct complaints. The only way ORBS will remove you from the database is if you allow(!) them to re-scan your MTA and verify to their satisfaction you are not in any way running an Open Relay. They then make this database (usually for some sort of fee) available to other groups who then actively filter submissions to their sites. In other words if I have a friend who I want to exchange private mail with, ORBS's uses their trumped excuse for justification to inject their belief system into that. Truly heinous.
Since when did I have any sort of obligation to help them in their particular crusade? My duties as a citizen and human being are not to interfere. I'm not saying 'Stop', I'm only saying 'Let me off'.
There is no technical or legal standard to back their actions. There is no 'authority' for them to decide who may configure their software how (and the fact that they tell a private citizen is particularly irksome, more angels among men I guess).
Just another fascist bastard.
Freedom for me, but not for thee...
-- ____________________________________________________________________
"...where annual election ends, tyranny begins;"
Thomas Jefferson & Samuel Adams
The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote:
ORBS/MAPS/etc. "participate" by connecting to and reviewing sites, much like I go out to and watch movies to review.
Not always. If you refused to have your site "reviewed", then they would literally make one up.
As usual, Choate fails to grasp the point. I am not saying anyone has a duty to "help them."
Yes, you are stating that implicitly.
In fact, as I said in an earlier post, I'm not sure I even agree with what they're doing. But I do believe they have a right to publish their reviews of mail relays, just as I have the right to publish movie reviews -- even if you disagree with what I say in them.
I agree with this ONLY as far as they have actually had an encounter to review. To "review" my site as a series of open relays, as retailiation for my refusing to let this asshole connect to my site, is bullshit. And it remains bullshit whether or not you try to muddy the waters with completely off topic references to Choate.
To tell them not to speak their mind about you is censorship no less than if you attempt to force me not to speak my mind about that rather awful Operation: Swordfish movie.
And to allow them to MAKE UP what they say is pure libel. Good riddance to bad trash. Now that ORBS is dead, when are you going to follow their fine example Declan?
-Declan
On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 12:10:40AM -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote:
The only black hole in this conversation are the Choatian posts.
ORBS/RBL/etc. in principle are making statements about what they believe about other people. This is similar to movie or book reviewing. People may read my review and stay away from a movie/book, just as they read an ORBS/RBL/MAPS "review" and stay away from certain addresses.
Malarky, they actively(!) participate.
What ORBS and their ilk do is collect scans of IP's across the Internet, some do it directly, some do it through independent 3rd parties, and direct complaints. The only way ORBS will remove you from the database is if you allow(!) them to re-scan your MTA and verify to their satisfaction you are not in any way running an Open Relay. They then make this database (usually for some sort of fee) available to other groups who then actively filter submissions to their sites. In other words if I have a friend who I want to exchange private mail with, ORBS's uses their trumped excuse for justification to inject their belief system into that. Truly heinous.
Since when did I have any sort of obligation to help them in their particular crusade? My duties as a citizen and human being are not to interfere. I'm not saying 'Stop', I'm only saying 'Let me off'.
There is no technical or legal standard to back their actions. There is no 'authority' for them to decide who may configure their software how (and the fact that they tell a private citizen is particularly irksome, more angels among men I guess).
Just another fascist bastard.
Freedom for me, but not for thee...
-- ____________________________________________________________________
"...where annual election ends, tyranny begins;"
Thomas Jefferson & Samuel Adams
The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
-- Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin@mfn.org If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place... --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 07:10:34AM -0500, measl@mfn.org wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote:
ORBS/MAPS/etc. "participate" by connecting to and reviewing sites, much like I go out to and watch movies to review.
Not always. If you refused to have your site "reviewed", then they would literally make one up.
Huh? If theyr'e checking to see if you're running an open relay or harboring spammers, both can be verified ("reviewed") without too much effort.
As usual, Choate fails to grasp the point. I am not saying anyone has a duty to "help them."
Yes, you are stating that implicitly.
No, I'm explicitly stating that you don't.
And to allow them to MAKE UP what they say is pure libel.
Libel laws are tricky things -- as a tool of the rich, they are often used to stifle speech. But if they're libeling you, try to sue them. But it seems to me this isn't the main complaint being circulated against them around here.
Good riddance to bad trash. Now that ORBS is dead, when are you going to follow their fine example Declan?
Amusing. Last time I got a veiled death threat was when I wrote about UFOs. -Declan
At 09:17 AM 06/12/2001 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote:
On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 07:10:34AM -0500, measl@mfn.org wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote:
ORBS/MAPS/etc. "participate" by connecting to and reviewing sites, much like I go out to and watch movies to review.
Not always. If you refused to have your site "reviewed", then they would literally make one up.
Huh? If they're checking to see if you're running an open relay or harboring spammers, both can be verified ("reviewed") without too much effort.
ORBS's relay hunter software was often extremely aggressive, pounding heavily on systems trying to see if it could send test spam. Some ISPs and systems disliked that kind of rudeness and blocked them, and that was enough to get you blacklisted. At one point, MAPS was blocking ORBS, so MAPS users all blocked ORBS (Mommy, mommy, he's on MY side of the room! Make him stop!) so you didn't even have to be trying to block them to get blacklisted. Also, harboring spammers can be much harder to verify - some places let them operate out in the open, while some expected their spammers to be stealthier, and it's hard to tell a stealthy tolerated customer from a stealthy not-caught-yet policy-violating customer, especially from an ISP who's mostly in the colocation business so the spammer may be a customer of a customer or a customer of a customer of a customer. Plus colocation or hosting customers may leave open relays out of ignorance, or by mistake, or because they don't have a good technical alternative, and their ISPs may get crap from ORBS. And that doesn't even count ISPs who have strong and enforced anti-spamming policies but have occasional sales people who are clueless about spam and willing to write contracts allowing violations - my employer got embarassed by that a year or so and the VP had to yell at everybody to make sure it doesn't happen again :-) MAPS wasn't always the most flexibly-responding system, but at least you could negotiate with them. Also, spamming is active misbehaviour, while open relays aren't - they're just something that's too easily abused, and closing them reduces the tools available to spammers. It's too bad - it was much easier for me to send email from my laptop when I could use the same mail relay regardless of whether I was connected to the LAN at work or dialed into my ISP, because "att.com" would forward my mail either way. (Then when that got closed, "research.att.com" would...) Now I have to switch mail servers depending on where I am.
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote:
ORBS/MAPS/etc. "participate" by connecting to and reviewing sites, much like I go out to and watch movies to review.
Not always. If you refused to have your site "reviewed", then they would literally make one up.
Huh? If theyr'e checking to see if you're running an open relay or harboring spammers, both can be verified ("reviewed") without too much effort.
No. Assuming that ORBS servers were blocked at the edge (as is the case here), they have absolutely no way to test for open relays (not that it would do any good here, as we don't have any). If ORBS probes are blocked, ORBS will literally _invent_ the review of "open relay", and apply it to the "movie" (domain) they never had access to "see". There is another dark side to ORBS which seems to be missed here: Most people's primary complaint about spammers is that they (the spammer) is making use of network services at someone elses expense, without permission of the spamee. ORBS is guilty of the EXACT same "crime" - but, the ORBS is Politically Correct, so nobody seems to mind... Hypocrisy in action, eh?
Good riddance to bad trash. Now that ORBS is dead, when are you going to follow their fine example Declan?
Amusing. Last time I got a veiled death threat was when I wrote about UFOs.
You flatter yourself *way* too much Declan - I know of nobody who would waste a cartridge on your useless ass.
-Declan
-- Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin@mfn.org If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place... --------------------------------------------------------------------
Typically, you misunderstand a vigorous defense of someone's right to publish certain information with endorsement of the information published. Also typically, in a Choatian sense, you erroneously conflate speech with action. The rest is blather and not worth responding to. -Declan At 07:37 AM 6/13/01 -0500, measl@mfn.org wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote:
ORBS/MAPS/etc. "participate" by connecting to and reviewing sites, much like I go out to and watch movies to review.
Not always. If you refused to have your site "reviewed", then they would literally make one up.
Huh? If theyr'e checking to see if you're running an open relay or harboring spammers, both can be verified ("reviewed") without too much effort.
No. Assuming that ORBS servers were blocked at the edge (as is the case here), they have absolutely no way to test for open relays (not that it would do any good here, as we don't have any). If ORBS probes are blocked, ORBS will literally _invent_ the review of "open relay", and apply it to the "movie" (domain) they never had access to "see".
There is another dark side to ORBS which seems to be missed here: Most people's primary complaint about spammers is that they (the spammer) is making use of network services at someone elses expense, without permission of the spamee. ORBS is guilty of the EXACT same "crime" - but, the ORBS is Politically Correct, so nobody seems to mind...
Hypocrisy in action, eh?
Good riddance to bad trash. Now that ORBS is dead, when are you going to follow their fine example Declan?
Amusing. Last time I got a veiled death threat was when I wrote about UFOs.
You flatter yourself *way* too much Declan - I know of nobody who would waste a cartridge on your useless ass.
-Declan
-- Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin@mfn.org
If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place... --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001 measl@mfn.org wrote:
There is another dark side to ORBS which seems to be missed here: Most people's primary complaint about spammers is that they (the spammer) is making use of network services at someone elses expense, without permission of the spamee. ORBS is guilty of the EXACT same "crime" - but, the ORBS is Politically Correct, so nobody seems to mind...
Not really. My problem with spam is not so much the use of my network services sans permission as the use of my eyeballs and attention sans permission. I could give a flying leap about how busy my router is (well, within its capacity anyhow) as long as I can read my email without being pestered by advertisements. Bear
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Jim Choate wrote:
What ORBS and their ilk do is collect scans of IP's across the Internet, some do it directly, some do it through independent 3rd parties, and direct complaints.
Yes, if you participate in an open forum like the Internet, you can expect people to form an opinion about you. Or about your contribution to the infrastructure, as the case may be. Do you expect movie critics to stop going to new movies unless invited?
The only way ORBS will remove you from the database is if you allow(!) them to re-scan your MTA and verify to their satisfaction you are not in any way running an Open Relay.
Yep, building trust is hard work. Do you expect movie critics to retract their comments unless they see that the movie (or the theater) has actually changed for the better?
They then make this database (usually for some sort of fee) available to other groups who then actively filter submissions to their sites.
This would indeed be the definition of criticism. Do you expect movie critics to only write positive reviews, or to write for free, or the theaters to disregard comments made by critics they trust and possibly waste their money showing a crappy movie?
In other words if I have a friend who I want to exchange private mail with, ORBS's uses their trumped excuse for justification to inject their belief system into that.
Who's injecting what? If you and your friend are your own ISP's, ORBS never interferes with your business. If you're not, you're trying to impose your beliefs over how SMTP should be done on the relay operator. The ISP chose to use ORBS, not the other way around. It seems ORBS is deemed useful and trustworthy, a commendable achievement for a critic. Now the question is, why doesn't the ISP trust you over ORBS? Perhaps you haven't earned the trust?
Truly heinous.
Au contraire - finally something that works, and quite without any legislative intervention. Are you saying critics are a heinous invention? I always thought they were a real blessing for cultural progress. So did someone else, apparently, judging by the fact that critics are paid for their effort.
Since when did I have any sort of obligation to help them in their particular crusade?
You don't. It's just that you're placing yourself in a minority without any good reason. Configuring your relay as you want *is* your right, but exercising it means you have to be ready to deal with the consequences. Do you expect movie theaters and distributors to intentionally help spread garbage? To deal with studios that produce it?
There is no technical or legal standard to back their actions. There is no 'authority' for them to decide who may configure their software how (and the fact that they tell a private citizen is particularly irksome, more angels among men I guess).
But they do have every right to be dissatisfied with you, and broadcast their views to anyone who is willing to listen. If people decide, based on ORBS data, that your behavior is not ok and that ORBS is likely to correctly represent your actions, they have absolutely no obligation to deal with you. It's true that your clients will suffer, but you are the one that brought it on them, placing them in a minority without asking them. It's all parts of a whole, really. Are you saying movie critics have to follow your standards when they appraise a work? Do you expect the critic to praise the movie as a whole when the soundtrack totally sucks? (While I once argued that shunning isn't always ok and should sometimes be viewed as comparable to initiation of force, that argument *certainly* does not extend to today's version of cyberspace. Neither life nor liberty is at stake when someone refuses to relay some email.)
Just another fascist bastard.
Freedom for me, but not for thee...
So you're saying you should have the freedom to operate a relay that could well be used to transmit spam, yet other people have no right to protect themselves? What you're seeing with ORBS is a nice idea by an enterprising individual, and lots of enlightened self-interest on behalf of a bunch of ISPs. Clear signs of successful market self-organization. You on the other hand are trying to stamp that out so that your views may prevail, making you the fascist by a wide margin. Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy, mailto:decoy@iki.fi, gsm: +358-50-5756111 student/math+cs/helsinki university, http://www.iki.fi/~decoy/front
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
Yes, if you participate in an open forum like the Internet, you can expect people to form an opinion about you. Or about your contribution to the infrastructure, as the case may be. Do you expect movie critics to stop going to new movies unless invited?
Movie critics don't go around blocking me and my friends from seeing other movies besides the ones they want. -- ____________________________________________________________________ "...where annual election ends, tyranny begins;" Thomas Jefferson & Samuel Adams The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
The analogy's not perfect, but analogies never are. If you don't like what "spam critics" are doing, move to a different ISP. -Declan On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 07:07:16AM -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
Yes, if you participate in an open forum like the Internet, you can expect people to form an opinion about you. Or about your contribution to the infrastructure, as the case may be. Do you expect movie critics to stop going to new movies unless invited?
Movie critics don't go around blocking me and my friends from seeing other movies besides the ones they want.
-- ____________________________________________________________________
"...where annual election ends, tyranny begins;"
Thomas Jefferson & Samuel Adams
The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote:
The analogy's not perfect, but analogies never are.
Especially when you're involved in them.
If you don't like what "spam critics" are doing, move to a different ISP.
I *AM* my own ISP you dunderhead. I don't like some asshole with zero investment or liability through my acts telling me how to configure my mail server or how often to mow my front yard. Geesh, talk about one which flew over Declans Cookoo Nest. -- ____________________________________________________________________ "...where annual election ends, tyranny begins;" Thomas Jefferson & Samuel Adams The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 04:12:37PM -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
I *AM* my own ISP you dunderhead. I don't like some asshole with zero investment or liability through my acts telling me how to configure my mail server or how often to mow my front yard.
If you're listed on their naughtysiteslist, then route your mail through some other system that isn't. Or complain to the naughtysiteslist reviewer. Or launch a boycott of the reviewer. But don't try to say the reviewer somehow does not have the right to tell other people what he thinks about you. -Declan
At 07:07 AM 6/12/2001 -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
Yes, if you participate in an open forum like the Internet, you can expect people to form an opinion about you. Or about your contribution to the infrastructure, as the case may be. Do you expect movie critics to stop going to new movies unless invited?
Movie critics don't go around blocking me and my friends from seeing other movies besides the ones they want.
Movie theaters prevent me from watching movies I want to see by censoriously not showing them, frequently as a result of critics' or reviewers' comments about those movies and their quality or subject or genre. Those bastards! And the video store near my house doesn't have all of the DVDs I want to buy, either. Don't they know about the First Amendment? And some of the ones that I want are too expensive. Help! I'm being censored! Will you buy them for me, Jim? I am beginning to suspect that perhaps the newspaper is deliberately not printing all of the news . . . -- Greg Broiles gbroiles@well.com "Organized crime is the price we pay for organization." -- Raymond Chandler
At 8:27 AM -0700 6/12/01, Greg Broiles wrote:
At 07:07 AM 6/12/2001 -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
Yes, if you participate in an open forum like the Internet, you can expect people to form an opinion about you. Or about your contribution to the infrastructure, as the case may be. Do you expect movie critics to stop going to new movies unless invited?
Movie critics don't go around blocking me and my friends from seeing other movies besides the ones they want.
Movie theaters prevent me from watching movies I want to see by censoriously not showing them, frequently as a result of critics' or reviewers' comments about those movies and their quality or subject or genre. Those bastards!
And the video store near my house doesn't have all of the DVDs I want to buy, either. Don't they know about the First Amendment? And some of the ones that I want are too expensive. Help! I'm being censored! Will you buy them for me, Jim?
I am beginning to suspect that perhaps the newspaper is deliberately not printing all of the news . . .
I'm even more concerned, even angry, about some local restaurants _restricting content_ and _limiting my choices_. (Their excuse is that they talk to other restaurant and dietary experts, a la the ORBS conspiracy, and learn which food items are popular and which are not. Like ORBS, this is a de facto conspiracy to impose food censorship on the citizen units! RICO, anyone?) Like Choate, I believe we must stop the practice of ISPs deciding how to deal with their property as they choose. And we must stop this censorious practice of allowing restaurants to restrict content! And newspapers must be forced to carry anything the Peoples want to have published. Long live the Socialist Internationale! --Tim May -- Timothy C. May tcmay@got.net Corralitos, California Political: Co-founder Cypherpunks/crypto anarchy/Cyphernomicon Technical: physics/soft errors/Smalltalk/Squeak/agents/games/Go Personal: b.1951/UCSB/Intel '74-'86/retired/investor/motorcycles/guns
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Greg Broiles wrote:
Movie critics don't go around blocking me and my friends from seeing other movies besides the ones they want.
Movie theaters prevent me from watching movies I want to see by
A theatre is generaly not a critic. Apples and oranges. -- ____________________________________________________________________ "...where annual election ends, tyranny begins;" Thomas Jefferson & Samuel Adams The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
No but ORBS was not involuntary.. It did'nt make everyone on the internet
use it.. It was completely up to the ISP to use it or not... If you the
customer don't like it then voice your opinion with the ISP and see if they
will remove it.. If not.. Change your ISP.. Freedom of Choice.....
I am an ISP and I block approximately 10,000 attempted relays a day however
I never used ORBS. Not that I did'nt like it, I just never used it...
Jon Beets
Pacer Communications
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Choate"
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
Yes, if you participate in an open forum like the Internet, you can
expect
people to form an opinion about you. Or about your contribution to the infrastructure, as the case may be. Do you expect movie critics to stop going to new movies unless invited?
Movie critics don't go around blocking me and my friends from seeing other movies besides the ones they want.
-- ____________________________________________________________________
"...where annual election ends, tyranny begins;"
Thomas Jefferson & Samuel Adams
The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
At 07:07 AM 06/12/2001 -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
Yes, if you participate in an open forum like the Internet, you can expect people to form an opinion about you. Or about your contribution to the infrastructure, as the case may be. Do you expect movie critics to stop going to new movies unless invited?
Movie critics don't go around blocking me and my friends from seeing other movies besides the ones they want.
There are movie critics who'd *like* to block you from seeing some movies, and if you're under 17 they're somewhat successful at it (or under 13 at least.) And there are critics who make sure that some movie *scenes* don't get shown. And movie critics like Rudy Guiliani who block some kinds of movie theaters from at least some parts of their cities. And there are movie critics who have enough influence on the market that movies they pan don't stay on the market as long as they might otherwise, so you might miss a movie because of that. And that doesn't even count the movie critics who decide that some movies not commercial enough so they don't get made.
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Jim Choate wrote:
Movie critics don't go around blocking me and my friends from seeing other movies besides the ones they want.
Nor did ORBS block you and your friends from sending or recieving email. However you got on his list, he had no authority over anyone. He just published it. It was *other people* -- the ones running mail relays -- who chose to pick it up and use it as an information resource. If you are arguing against someone's right to configure their mail system to block a list of suspect domains, or their right to form a list of suspect domains in any damn way they choose including going out and reading the ORBS database, you are just wrong. Bear
ORBS *was* a reputation server - as with any real instance of such, the reputations it publishes are the opinions of the publisher, and the rest of the users of the higher-level reputation system have to decide how much creedence to give those opinions. In this case, a sufficiently large number of people rate ORBS the way Mac, Choate, and measl do, i.e. varying degrees of dislike, that they're now toast (and good riddance to them.) On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 11:19:29PM -0500, Mac Norton wrote:
Whoa. commie privacy leftie punks? what was ORBS? And we don't have to talk about holding guns to heads. We're talking about holding a boycott to heads. Sounds pretty commie leftie to me. Talk about sheeple, jeez.
Boycotting a boycott organizer, plus boycotting a boycott organizer who's boycotting another boycott organizer. While Declan's comment about Choate was a bit offtopic, you could draw analogies between ORBS and the McCarthyite Red Baiters. "I have a list here of 200 Spammunists, and if you don't trust my list, YOU must be a Spammunist Dupe and we'll put you on the list too!" Unlike Vixie's MAPS, which was mostly well-behaved and reasonable, ORBS was a loose cannon blasting around at random, and to continue the Anti-Commie analogy, they _did_ go busting into places hunting suspected Spammies, and harassing anybody who objected like FBI agents harassing anybody who insisted on seeing a warrant. A real reputation system needs to deal with extremes like this, including small, loud agitators, big quiet ones Disneyfying the culture or Moral Majoritarians, ranting Detweilers with axes to grind (who gave us invaluable practice before the spam floods hit) and all sorts of other problems. ORBS was a good learning experience. So is the trouble that people like John Gilmore (and to a lesser extent, me) are having with spam-blocker technology (mainly closed relays) blocking legitimate email. The 802.11 wireless LAN technology and the risks of drive-by spammers balanced with the desire for open access give us some more opportunities to find a good balance of openness vs. ease of abuse. Anybody want to build a hashcash-enabled SMTP relay for wireless? Or for that matter, a hashcash-enabled SMTP proxy for general use?
Whoa. commie privacy leftie punks? what was ORBS? And we don't have to talk about holding guns to heads. We're talking about holding a boycott to heads. Sounds pretty commie leftie to me. Talk about sheeple, jeez. MacN On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote:
Nobody's holding a gun to your head and telling you to configure your servers in a certain way.
ORBS is a reputation-publishing tool. Extremely cypherpunkish. One wonders why Choate is even on this list instead of commie-privacy-lefty-punks instead.
-Declan
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 04:27:17PM -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001 George@Orwellian.Org wrote:
http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2001/06/08/orbs/print.html # # A spam cop goes AWOL # # The ORBS blacklist, a controversial tool for stopping unsolicited # e-mail, is suddenly inaccessible.
It does no such thing. What ORBS does do is go around telling MTA operators how to configure their servers, or else.
I hope ORBS burns in hell.
-- ____________________________________________________________________
"...where annual election ends, tyranny begins;"
Thomas Jefferson & Samuel Adams
The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 11:19:29PM -0500, Mac Norton wrote:
Whoa. commie privacy leftie punks? what was ORBS? And we don't have to talk about holding guns to heads. We're talking about holding a boycott to heads. Sounds pretty commie leftie to me. Talk about sheeple, jeez.
Here's some background on ORBS etc. -Declan www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/19572.html www.salon.com/tech/feature/2001/06/08/orbs/index.html www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/19460.html www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/19417.html www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,35776,00.html
participants (13)
-
Bill Stewart -
Declan McCullagh -
George＠Orwellian.Org -
Greg Broiles -
Jim Choate -
Jim Choate -
Jon Beets -
Mac Norton -
measl＠mfn.org -
Ray Dillinger -
Riad S. Wahby -
Sampo Syreeni -
Tim May