Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

One Last Spamhaus Warning Before The End

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the going-down dept.

632

kog777 writes to mention that Spamhaus has released a final warning about an increase in junk email, as they prepare to lose their domain to an Illinois court ruling. From the article: "According to Spamhaus, more than 650 million Internet users - including those at the White House, the U.S. Army and the European Parliament - benefit from Spamhaus' 'blacklist' of spammers that helps identify which messages to block, send to a 'junk' folder or accept. Losing the domain name would make it more difficult for service providers and others to obtain the lists. 'If the domain got suspended, it would be an enormous hit for the Net,' said Steve Linford, Spamhaus' chief executive officer. 'It would create an enormous amount of damage on the Internet.'"

cancel ×

632 comments

I'm still a little fuzzy on e360 (3, Insightful)

ellem (147712) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378097)

Are they or aren't they Spammers. I have never seen their emails.

Re:I'm still a little fuzzy on e360 (1)

Low2000 (606536) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378165)

Spamhaus are the good guys. They run a real time blacklist to help fight spam.

Re:I'm still a little fuzzy on e360 (1)

Low2000 (606536) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378201)

Oh never mind. I thought you where asking abuot Spamhaus, not e360. Scratch that.

Re:I'm still a little fuzzy on e360 (1)

russ1337 (938915) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378555)

>> Spamhaus are the good guys. They run a real time blacklist to help fight spam.

But when they e-mail out their notification to everyone that the spam is going to increase, that message will be treated as spam.

How can they be legit? (3, Interesting)

krell (896769) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378167)

Go to e360's home page. All it shows is information on their frivolous lawsuit. There's nothing to offer their marketing services, to opt in, or even opt out.

Re:How can they be legit? (4, Interesting)

ellem (147712) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378401)

That page was clearly set up to talk aout their lawsuit.

The thing is you can definitely end up on Spamhaus with being a Spammer. You can usually get off the list but other times they are total dicks. They blocked an entire C class belonging to XO with the response that if you were "Stupid enough to use XO" it was your "own fault." Disregarding the fact that XO lights buildings and companies don't always have a choice in the matter. They later cleared that up but it took 3 weeks.

So while I am pro Spamhaus I wonder what e360's deal really is.

Minor nit-pick. (5, Insightful)

khasim (1285) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378585)

They blocked an entire C class belonging to XO with the response that if you were "Stupid enough to use XO" it was your "own fault."

Spamhaus does not "block" anything. All they do is list the addresses that meet their criteria for listing (yeah, I know that's redundant).

Mail admins can choose to reference that list (or not) and block / flag / delay / whatever based upon it.

I use Spamhaus with SpamAssassin, but I don't block or deny. It just adds to the spam score.

Spamhaus does not block. Spamhaus just lists.

Mail admins block.

Re:I'm still a little fuzzy on e360 (1)

TheOtherChimeraTwin (697085) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378181)

More importantly, what can I block so I won't see anything from e360 Insight in the future?

The IP Address (4, Informative)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378111)

Spamhaus has released a final warning about an increase in junk email, as they prepare to lose their domain to an Illinois court ruling.
Ok, so we might be making a bigger deal of this than we should. I mean, after a simple ping:
Pinging www.spamhaus.org [216.168.30.71]:

Ping #1: Got reply from 216.168.30.71 in 79ms [TTL=57]
Ping #2: Got reply from 216.168.30.71 in 84ms [TTL=57]
Ping #3: Got reply from 216.168.30.71 in 79ms [TTL=57]
Ping #4: Got reply from 216.168.30.71 in 79ms [TTL=57]

Variation: 5.0ms (+/- 6%)
Doesn't that mean that for all applications referencing Spamhaus, they need to push out patches that use 216.168.30.71 instead of http://www.spamhaus.org/ [spamhaus.org] ?

I mean, if we can get the word out to 650 million Internet users to use IP address 216.168.30.71, what damage is done? It will just take a while for people to tell ICANN how stupid they are. Maybe this is a good thing? Maybe this will cause the community to complain about ICANN and the American control of the internet?

Re: The IP Address (2, Insightful)

codegen (103601) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378151)

They could also get a .de name. Something beyond the jurisdiction of a US. Court.

Re: The IP Address (5, Informative)

Jaseoldboss (650728) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378349)

They could also get a .de name. Something beyond the jurisdiction of a US. Court.

Why would they want to do that? From the article;

Executives at the U.K.-based Spamhaus Project...

Re: The IP Address (4, Funny)

voice_of_all_reason (926702) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378487)

Anyone who speaks German can't possibly be bad!

Re: The IP Address (2, Insightful)

OverlordQ (264228) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378169)

Because just maybe they have some sort of load-balancing setup, so everybody hammering a single machine is just as effective as pulling the domain.

Proxy? (1)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378197)

Because just maybe they have some sort of load-balancing setup, so everybody hammering a single machine is just as effective as pulling the domain.
That's possible, but there is a proxy design scheme [wikipedia.org] they could implement for a single IP address that would allow them to stay in business. Is this uncommon or hard to do? I don't think dishing requests to other boxes is that hard of a thing to do.

Re:Proxy? (1)

OverlordQ (264228) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378253)

Yea, but hard-coding IP's is a very very bad thing to do, the better solution is to update your DNS servers to specify "Hey ignore the upstream servers and query spamhaus directly"

Re: The IP Address (1)

shaitand (626655) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378311)

Why don't they just register another domain? I've got a few unrelated but functional domains they can borrow.

Re: The IP Address (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16378239)

Americans are not stipud, they got 6 Nobel Prize this year. But the US gov. is another story, esp the head of administration, even New York Times (senior Bush was complaining NYT on one of the TV interviews he gave recently) agrees.

Re: The IP Address (3, Interesting)

From A Far Away Land (930780) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378249)

"Maybe this will cause the community to complain about ICANN and the American control of the internet?"

Is the US the only country that can compell ICANN to modify the DNS record list? Can't a judge in the UK overturn the US judge's ruling and compell ICANN to reinstate the address? If not, that's insane that US law is the end all of Internet law.

err doesn't work like that (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16378307)

quote--
"Suspending a domain name isn't the same as suspending a Web site," said Jonathan Zittrain, a law professor at Harvard and Oxford universities. "Spamhaus is intended for use by people who run mail servers - in other words, technically inclined people. If Spamhaus wanted to, it could simply pick a new domain name, or use no name at all."

Domain names are merely shortcuts to access a site's true, numeric Internet address. Spamhaus could simply distribute that address instead of the domain name.
------

this guy may be a law professor but he obviously doesn't know how it works.
If my mail server gets an email from 1.2.3.4 it will do a dns lookup on "4.3.2.1.sbl.spamhaus.org". if that dns request returns an address, that ip is in spamhaus' list, if it returns none existant domain, the ip isn't listed. The actual address
returned is not important (its usually 127.0.0.2).

It's very easy for spamhaus to choose a new domain, although it requires all users to upgrade their software, but they can't just hand out the ip.

Re: The IP Address (1)

nuzak (959558) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378465)

You can't easily query a DNSBL by its IP address. You can set up your local DNS to use it as an alternate root for just that zone, or you can issue queries directly to their DNS servers (basically doing the same thing), but many (perhaps most) companies have firewalls in place that run all DNS recursively through the gateway. Gateway resolver's not reconfigured, everyone behind it loses.

On the other hand, you can just use spamhaus.org.uk and you'll never notice.

Re: The IP Address (1)

rykoala (960363) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378525)

That's great and everything, but its a poor solution at best. A whois at arin.net shows that the IP belongs to supernews. What if Spamhaus changes ISP's? Or Supernews for some reason wants to change the IP number on them? No, they need their own domain name that won't get taken away from them. Do I have a better solution? No. Perhaps if tons of us all got together and made spamhaus.ourname.com dns entries and made them available, then spamhaus would be more decentralized. Shame on spamhaus for designing a system with a single point of failure such as this! Its ok Spamhaus, we still love ya!

Re: The IP Address (1)

MollyB (162595) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378571)

The article suggests that the Spamhaus Project is resisting that solution because of the "daunting" prospect of making such a change in all the systems that need a redirection to Spamhaus. Why this is so is beyond me, but that's their claim, anyway.

Shoulda seen this coming... (1, Insightful)

AceCaseOR (594637) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378123)

You know, if they had, say, actually defended themselves in court instead of not showing up and getting hit with the default judgement then perhaps they wouldn't be having this bloody problems . It's a shame they're going down, but it's a bigger shame that they're going down because of their own goddamn stupidity and arrogance.

That said, spamhaus.co.uk should still be up, right?

Re:Shoulda seen this coming... (3, Informative)

Bog Standard (743863) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378161)

you mean spamhaus.org.uk

Re:Shoulda seen this coming... (1)

AceCaseOR (594637) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378179)

Whuups, my mistake. Still, it's up, right?

Re:Shoulda seen this coming... (1)

Bog Standard (743863) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378199)

Yep its up, until ICANN pull the .uk tld....

Re:Shoulda seen this coming... (1)

AVee (557523) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378387)

Wrong, it will stay up. When ICANN pulls the .uk tld quite some dns admins may have some extra work, but most people won't even notice the difference.

Re:Shoulda seen this coming... (3, Funny)

nuzak (959558) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378691)

> Yep its up, until ICANN pull the .uk tld....

Much as I'd love to see that happen, since it would demolish ICANN once and for all, I seriously doubt it.

In other news: Spamhaus LLC (http://www.spamhaus.org.uk) experienced a temporary decrease in reachability today as one of its redundant domains became unreachable. Unnamed officials at Spamhaus have warned that the situation is expected to deteriorate somewhat when the US-based servers in its worldwide fault-tolerant network are shut down, and to expect slight increases in lookups due to this. One official was quoted as saying, "Backhoes, DDOS attacks, daft overreaching judges, it's all damage we're set up to route around."

Re:Shoulda seen this coming... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16378187)

It's a shame they're going down, but it's a bigger shame that they're going down because of their own goddamn stupidity and arrogance.

Yeah, because they just decided to let an $11.7 million default judgment fall into place so they could say "naner naner boo boo" to a US Court. Not even close.

They were trying to prevent themselves from becoming a target for a flurry of lawsuits from spammers everywhere who would ostensibly seek to clear their good name when in reality they'd just be trying to freely push their worthless junk on the populace. It's all in TFA, if you'd bothered to read it.

You didn't even get first post. Fail.

Re:Shoulda seen this coming... (1)

Karzz1 (306015) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378513)

"Yeah, because they just decided to let an $11.7 million default judgment fall into place so they could say "naner naner boo boo" to a US Court. Not even close."

ummmm yea...

You do know that Spamhaus appeared in the original Illinois state court only to request a change of venue to a federal court, right? In other words, they showed up, said "You state guys have no jurisdiction in this case, it needs to go to a federal court.", thus admitting that the feds *do have* jurisdiction over this case. After having done that, Spamhaus *then* decided to ignore the courts.

Personally I am saddened and gloating about the whole situation. Spamhaus has never had any accountability and routinely listed innocent networks. Anyone who has ever been erroneously listed in Spamhaus' database will probably know where I am coming from here and any attempt to rectify the situation usually got you in more trouble (with regard to Spamhuas) than where you started. Also their canned response of "Don't send spam and you won't get listed" is the epitomy of arrogance. I find it ironic that it was that same arrogance that got them into their current situation.

Re:Shoulda seen this coming... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16378217)

Since when does the US have juristiction on (us) Europeans ? Am I missing something ?

Re:Shoulda seen this coming... (1)

crayz (1056) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378639)

They have no jurisdiction over Spamhaus the company. ICANN has jurisdiction over spamhaus.org the domain name. As Spamhaus themselves points out though, going this route would be likely to piss off a great many people outside the US, unhappy that US influence on the net is being used to "enforce" a bogus and otherwise unenforceable US court decision

Re:Shoulda seen this coming... (0, Troll)

rajafarian (49150) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378697)

Since when does the US have juristiction on (us) Europeans ?

Since World War II, sir.

Am I missing something ?

A history book?

Re:Shoulda seen this coming... (5, Informative)

doctor_nation (924358) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378231)

The #1 reason they didn't defend themselves is because they are a UK company and not under US jurisdiction. The #2 reason is that if they were to spend the money to defend themselves, they would open a precedent for any other spammer to sue them the same way. I think it's perfectly reasonable for a foreign company to ignore a US court order in this case. A US court can't order a spammer in Russia to stop spamming, so why should they be able to order a spam-blocker to stop blocking spam? The whole internation commerce thing is pretty fuzzy to me, so I don't really understand what a US court CAN do to a foreign company that sells its services to a US company.

Re:Shoulda seen this coming... (2, Informative)

Bog Standard (743863) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378277)

Of course the problems start when a US court has juristriction over the organisation (ICANN) that can do things to a foreigh organisation....

Re:Shoulda seen this coming... (1)

Alex Pennace (27488) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378353)

The #1 reason they didn't defend themselves is because they are a UK company and not under US jurisdiction.

As stated repeatedly, Spamhaus implicity accepted jurisdiction when they had the case moved from state court to federal court.

Re:Shoulda seen this coming... (1)

thebdj (768618) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378469)

RIM tried using a similar defense, I believe, in their patent suit with NTP. They tried claiming a lack of jurisdiction. How successful would a company like Microsoft be in saying they are a US company, so we do not answer to another court? This notion is just out right stupid. The real problem that has been created is more with the Internet then with international commerce. It is sort of hard to draw national boundaries around it. So using your logic, if a spammer in Russia was breaking US laws, would he fall into US jurisidiction? Well this would be fuzzy. You could argue he transmitted message through networks on US soil, and assert jurisdiction that way. This is why they created treaties, in the hope of resolving problems like this.

Re:Shoulda seen this coming... (1)

AviLazar (741826) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378573)

I say if a spammer in russia sends spam to the US then he falls under US jursidiction. The crime, in my opinion, was comitted both in Russia and in the US, as such both countries should have a hand in pimp slapping the spammer. Now Russia may not have such laws, but the US does, and if Russia would like positive commerce treaties with the US - and assuming the US was smart enough to put such laws in the treaty - then Russia will extradite the criminal.

Re:Shoulda seen this coming... (1)

doctor_nation (924358) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378627)

Right, that's what I mean when I say it's fuzzy. Can the US court tell a UK court to shutdown Spamhaus operation? Can they tell a UK ISP to disconnect them? Could they restrict any US company from using their spam list? What exactly does the US court have jurisdiction to do here?

I would ask the same question in the RIM case- I don't remember what exactly the details were there that allowed the US court to threaten a shutdown of the system, but I would assume it entailed some physical presence on US soil, or violation of an international patent of some sort.

Re:Shoulda seen this coming... (2, Interesting)

AviLazar (741826) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378541)

The #2 reason is that if they were to spend the money to defend themselves, they would open a precedent for any other spammer to sue them the same way

No i do not understand this. In fact someone else mentioned it but it seems silly. If John decides to sue Bobby for X reason....if Bobby defends against X reason or not does prevent Dave from sueing Bobby for X reason. Remember, this is civil, not criminal, and that means the person can be sued a billion times over. So why not defend yourself? Spamhaus is also big enough that they have lawyers on the payroll who could have said "hey if you don't defend yoursel,f you will lose your domain name."

Re:Shoulda seen this coming... (1)

TheLinuxSRC (683475) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378591)

As I recall, Spamhaus fired their law team right after they requested (and thus accepted jurisdiction) a change of courts. Not too bright.

From what I understand (2, Informative)

hsoft (742011) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378233)

If they defend themselves, they open themselves to a "tidal wave of lawsuits by spammers". So it wasn't just a "Muahahah! You have no jusris-dick-tion here!", but it looks like a real legal strategy.

Re:From what I understand (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16378643)

But spamhaus had the case moved from state court (IL) to a federal court, then claimed "out of jurisdiction." Huge legal blunder on their part. If they kept it in state court, that may have flown (IANAL).

Re:Shoulda seen this coming... (1)

arivanov (12034) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378459)

Absolutely agree.

Just go and read the statement on the matter on the spamhouse.org website. It is absolute and utter bullshit.

One of my CS teachers before the days of politicall correctness used to say "You cannot have your penis in both hands and your soul in paradise" (to boys) and "There is no such thing as a little bit pregnant" (to the girls).

If they want to comply with US law they go and fight the court case.

If they claim that US law does not apply they tell the USA court to go and shaft themselves with a petard (and light it) and move the domain to the country under whose jurisdiction they operate. In fact operating under undefined jurisdiction while being subject to a defined legal regime in a civilised country is as stupid as stupidity can get. There is absolutely no legal grounds, no moral ground and no technical grounds to the cretinous claim they have put on their website about "We do not want to have a criminal record because we do not want to be in a contempt of court". If you care about a court judgement - fight it in court. If you do not - you do not. What an utter load of bollocks.

Further to this the technical bit of the argument is even further utter bollocks. Linford should tell us WTF is he smoking and why the F is he not sharing it:

1. Moving the domain - no technical problem. Just register a domain with nominet and that is it. In a few days all sysadmins will move their statements for spamhouse to the new domain. Painfull, impacting, but will still work.
2. Answering off one IP address and not mentioning any domains at all. Claimed by Mr Linford not to work because it will not scale. Vixie used to operate his RBL this way by using RFC 3258 DNS anycast. Level3 DNS operates this way. Verio DNS operates this way. All it takes is a provider willing to support an anycast service (there are ways to do that for a customer by the way).

All I see is that Mr Linford for whatever effing reason wants to get us into the ITU/USA/Internet governance debate. Frankly this has nothing to do with SPAM.

Re:Shoulda seen this coming... (1)

AviLazar (741826) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378613)

"There is no such thing as a little bit pregnant" (to the girls).

Why would this be politically incorrect? This is a statement of fact. Pregnancy is an on/off state. You are either pregnant or you are not. Any girl who says "i am a little bit pregnant" needs to wonder why her parents didn't use a condom.

Damage is what USA does best (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16378131)


One only has to read the news to see how much damage the USA does to the world, this will just add to that list, seriously its not the wild west anymore, you guys really need to shape up and get your act together before its too late

i say let the spam commence, a few weeks of 50,000 viagra/stock scams/drugs emails a day to the whitehouse and goverment emails (not to mention economic powerhouse companies) should change their minds pronto

Darren J

Re:Damage is what USA does best (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16378271)

What damage has the USA done? They were sued by a US corporation in a US court on injuries caused them by Spamhaus in the course of operations in the US. Spamhaus refused to defend themselves in court, and received a default judgment against them. This is pretty much the same thing that would happen in any other civilized country. With a verdict against Spamhaus, it becomes necessary to seize any assets that can be reached within US jurisdiction in order to pay the damages. The only asset they could find, with a big question mark on it, was their domain name. So, that's what they're going to try to take. They may not succeed based on how domain names are governed.

So tell me, counsellor, how exactly has the USA caused damage here? The courts have acted entirely within their jurisdiction and heard a claim by a claimant doing business in the US.

Re:Damage is what USA does best (1)

AVee (557523) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378535)

What damage has the USA done? They were sued by a US corporation in a US court on injuries caused them by Spamhaus in the course of operations in the US. Spamhaus refused to defend themselves in court, and received a default judgment against them. This is pretty much the same thing that would happen in any other civilized country.

Erm, nope...
Most 'other civilized countries' whould have applied, at the very very least, common sense to a judgment. Yes, even when the accused thus not defend himself.

Re:Damage is what USA does best (1)

AviLazar (741826) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378659)

Erm, nope... Most 'other civilized countries' whould have applied, at the very very least, common sense to a judgment. Yes, even when the accused thus not defend himself.

No, in most civilized countries if one party does not show up to support their argument they lose. How is a judge supposed to make an informed decision in favor of one side when that side is not there to, oh i don't know, inform him. It is spamhaus' fault for not showing up....period. They have money, they have lawyers, they f'd up. Do I like it that they lost, no, is it their fault yes.

Re:Damage is what USA does best (1)

moseman (190361) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378417)

Maybe North Korea can solve the problem. The international community can bring some flowers to Kim and ask him to Nuke ICANN. That would solve everyones problems, plus inflict a little pain on us poor bastards here in the US.

Re:Damage is what USA does best (0, Troll)

szembek (948327) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378467)

I think plenty of people will disagree with you. I notice you won't state where you are from, but apparently you live in a nation which does no wrong and everybody loves you. In fact the world loves America. As do I. Just because radicals and loonies are popping up more often with 'death to America' shit, doesn't mean that normal people across the globe don't like us. They fucking love us. They fucking love McDonald's, and they love MTV, and Levis. They love all of that shit. They also love when we pour billions of dollars into helping them. The good stuff that we do outweighs the bad stuff by such a large ratio that it doesn't even compare. Next time you decide to post some stupid anti-American shit on slashdot, Darren J, why don't you log in, and state what lovely nation you live in so I can bash it.

Re:Damage is what USA does best (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16378545)

No, the world does not love America. The world is scared shitless of America, the largest terrorist on the face of the planet.

Re:Damage is what USA does best (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16378617)

Riggghhhhhhhht......cough, cough....

Re:Damage is what USA does best (-1, Offtopic)

ProteusQ (665382) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378475)

Yeah, I'm sorry about the damage the US did to France and Germany in WWII. I wish Western Europe was speaking German right now. Of course, if that were the case, you'd be the whinging twit who complains that the US never gets involved....

Re:Damage is what USA does best (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16378645)

One only has to read the news to see how much damage the USA does to the world, this will just add to that list, seriously its not the wild west anymore, you guys really need to shape up and get your act together before its too late.

We get blamed for the things we do, the things we don't do, the things other people do that we didn't prevent, the things other people don't do that we didn't encourage...

Boy, life is tough in the most important country in the history of the world. I mean, we must be, if everything everywhere depends on the U.S. Perhaps if China becomes the superpower everyone seems to want, they'll be blamed for something once in awhile.

Nah, my guess is that people will just continue to blame the U.S., because they know the Chinese will never pay attention to their whining.

Re:Damage is what USA does best (0, Troll)

rkcth (262028) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378669)

National bigot.

Do they have to defy the court? (2, Insightful)

UbuntuDupe (970646) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378143)

As I understand it, Spamhaus just has a list that people use in making their own blocking decisions. (Though that "own blocking decision" is of course "Is it on Spamhaus? Then block it.") They don't actually block anyone. So they could comply with the ruling by removing the "approved" spammer and then saying to all current and future customers, "We had to remove this guy from our list, but you should probably block him anyway." Then it's just a bunch of email users "on their own" deciding to block the spammer. The complies with the court order, while still defeating the spammer's goal.

Or is my understanding about a mile off?

Re:Do they have to defy the court? (1)

crayz (1056) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378523)

You're misunderstanding the technical aspects of how spam blocking works. E-mail admins don't get messages saying "block this one dude" - especially for smaller orgs, they will rely on anyone who should be blocked being listed on one of the RBLs. You're not going to sit there manually adding records to some separate internal list, adjusting it every time a spammer changes his IP

Re:Do they have to defy the court? (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378597)

It tends not to work like that. The legal system is an adversarial process.

So e360's lawyers would argue that Spamhaus was violating the court order by doing this. It would then be up to the court to decide whether the order meant what e360's lawyers argue it means, or what Spamhaus say it means. It depends on whether a "reasonable man" would think that this violates the order based on the arguments provided.

Re:Do they have to defy the court? (1)

AVee (557523) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378619)

In really doubt that any judge will fall for it, not even in the US, but it is a briliant idea anyway. Simply comply to any legal thread by removing the entry from the spammers list and adding them to the 'these people wanted to be removed' list. They can hardly claim they should not be on that list, but when they do, you just move 'm back to the spammers list...

Briliant.

So...get a new domain? (5, Insightful)

Kadin2048 (468275) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378145)

What's stopping them from getting a domain name in a non-US-controlled TLD?

I don't see how a US court ruling could shut down a domain name in another country's TLD; so why don't they just go and get a name in the UK, or Switzerland, or Sealand.

Somehow I think enough people find Spamhaus useful, that if they asked they could probably take up collection and get enough money to afford a new domain, and right now they have enough press coverage to ensure that it would be publicized. Sure, it would be a PITA for a lot of mailserver admins who would need to change the address, but that's still a lot less work than filtering their spam by hand.

It sounds like Spamhaus is getting ready to 'cut off their nose to spite their face,' or in this case, destroy themselves in order to try and prove some point to a Federal Court in the US that couldn't give a damn one way or the other. If they're trying to make a point, this isn't the way to do it.

Re:So...get a new domain? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16378295)

fucke360.com .net .org. biz all seem to be open... take yer pick :))

Re:So...get a new domain? (1)

randomErr (172078) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378319)

How about just creating an open TLD system?

I've been trying to make a similar service in my spare time.

Re:So...get a new domain? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16378565)

Can you please give some details on what you are trying to do, and how you would do it? I'm not looking to do anything like that, just curious what you mean exactly.

Re:So...get a new domain? (1)

terrymr (316118) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378423)

A nice idea ... but the CCTLDs issued by ICANN to the various countries registrars, if ICANN can take down a .org name they could take down a .uk name too .... now why did the rest of he world want an independant ICANN again ?

Re:So...get a new domain? (1)

Frank T. Lofaro Jr. (142215) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378543)

Umm, no, since resolving a .uk name causes the DNS client to ask what the server for .uk is and then to continue from there.

It doesn't know what site is going to be ultimately asked for.

They'd need to block .uk totally to stop access to a .uk domain. I don't think that'll happen - and even if it did, people around the world would use alternate root servers.

Re:So...get a new domain? (5, Interesting)

MoralHazard (447833) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378445)

What's stopping them from getting a domain name in a non-US-controlled TLD?

I don't see how a US court ruling could shut down a domain name in another country's TLD; so why don't they just go and get a name in the UK, or Switzerland, or Sealand.


You're not the only person to make this mistake. The judge's order to pull the SOA for SpamHaus's domain has NOTHING TO DO with whether the TLD is .com, .uk, .de, or .mil. It doesn't matter where the domain is registered.

How can this be? Well, SpamHaus is subject to the jurisdiction of a U.S. court. Once a court (any court, not just American) decides that you're subject to its jurisdiction, it can issue an order compelling you to do whatever it wants. It can also issue a court order compelling a 3rd party (in this case, the domain registrar) to take some action in regards to you. It doesn't matter whether one party in the lawsuit, or the 3rd party who isn't involved in the suit, is actually resident in the U.S.

Enforcement of a court order is a slightly different issue. It may be very, very difficult to enforce the order of a U.S. court in a foreign country. It's easy enough in the U.S. because the court can hold the non-compliant party in contempt (and enact fines, jail time, etc.), but these mechanisms don't automatically work overseas. Some countries, under some circumstances, will honor civil court orders from other nations, but usually you would have to sue in the foreign country's courts to effect any action on the part of a foreign body.

An important exception to the above is that many entities have assets or physical presence in multiple countries. If (hypotheticallly) the German arm of Register.com operated the .de TLD, a U.S. court could fine the U.S. company, order their CEO to jail, or do whatever else it thought necessary in order to force the German part of the company to comply with its orders. The judge might even order a German executive (residing in Germany) to jail for contempt, and when the German doesn't comply, issue an arrest warrant for the German. While German authorities will probably not be willing to act on that warrant (extradition treaties don't normally extend that far), it will be awfully hard for the German executive to travel in the U.S. with an outstanding warrant.

In short, the Illinois court made a STUPID FUCKING BONEHEADED decision, and the judge or jury should probably be removed and caned, but it is certainly procedurally possible for them to hassle SpamHaus regardless of where you register the domain name.

Re:So...get a new domain? (1)

PinkyDead (862370) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378567)

I hope I'm wrong here but I was under the impression that legally ICANN is ultimately responsible for the Country TLDs or at the very least are responsible for maintaining the Root-Zone files.

Now obviously they would never interfere in the operation of the country TLDs - that would be just madness.

But what if spamhaus went with spamhaus.org.uk - and e360 decided they didn't like being in their list. The uk registry isn't going to delist spamhaus - why should they, they're out of jurisdiction.

So e360 goes back to court and says - hey judge, you've got to tell ICANN to delist .uk - yikes!!! The judge would have the power to do it, and would be kind of compelled to do it based on his earlier ruling.

I would be happy if someone would explain why I'm an idiot.

Re:So...get a new domain? (1)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378583)

What's stopping them from getting a domain name in a non-US-controlled TLD?
Nothing

It sounds like Spamhaus is getting ready to 'cut off their nose to spite their face,' or in this case, destroy themselves in order to try and prove some point to a Federal Court in the US that couldn't give a damn one way or the other. If they're trying to make a point, this isn't the way to do it.
That is exactly the way to do it, because Spamhaus can afford to wait for a week or a month to resolve their domain name problem.

In the mean time, everyone else is going to have an expensive problem on their hands.

None of this will destroy Spamhaus.
It will cause politicians to sit up and take notice.

It's an RBL, stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16378147)

Domain names are merely shortcuts to access a site's true, numeric Internet address. Spamhaus could simply distribute that address instead of the domain name.
That's true. They could bring up their website again by distributing an IP address -- but not their RBLs. That's what the ho-hum is about: if spamhaus.org disappears, then everything that queries the SBL/XBL will stop working. And so far this morning:
europa:/var/log# grep -c sbl-xbl mail.log
2624
That's 2624 connections denied because the SMTP client is on the Spamhaus combined RBL. I, for one, don't want to see the RBLs go away.

Nobody is suspending a domain over this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16378205)

If ICANN was compelled to do that, it would be the end of US net governance. The problem here is one spamming fucktard gaming the legal system and any sane judge would dismiss the case as being outside their juristiction.

This case is a fucking joke!

That's the problem. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16378261)

It's not a joke. It would be easier to deal with if it was.

Re:That's the problem. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16378531)

If the worlds domain names are subject to the juristiction of the US courts then every non-US domain holder is going to demand the situation be changed. Do you think one lousy spamtard is going to be allowed to end the internet-as-we-know-it? National governments are salvating at the bit for an excuse to wrestle net governance away from the US, I defy some silly little Illinois judge to give them that reason.

> It's not a joke. It would be easier to deal with if it was.

It is a joke.

Have YOU opted into e360? (1)

krell (896769) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378243)

Has anyone reading this ever opted into e360? Or have you heard of anyone that has? (I guess, to be fair, has anyone gotten email from e360 or any of its spamsocks such as bargaindepot.net ?)

Re:Have YOU opted into e360? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16378343)

I guess, to be fair, has anyone gotten email from e360 or any of its spamsocks such as bargaindepot.net ?

No, because I use SpamHaus, you insensitive clod.

Re:Have YOU opted into e360? (1)

Se7enLC (714730) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378533)

According to Spamhaus, These [google.com] emails originated from e360insight marketing.

Failure to Legislate (3, Insightful)

mpapet (761907) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378245)

Clearly Spamhaus does not have enough friends in high places. If they -had- K Street influence, (Cha-Ching! $$) their dire court situation would be relieved to a great extent by legislative or some other branch of gov't giving them a way out.

Look at how long and how much money it took for the Crackberry developer to get the federal gov't to do things like the "emergency review" and subsequent invalidation of the submarine patent owner that went after them while they were clearly set to lose in court to the submarine patent holder.

I would be very interested to see/hear if there isn't K Street pressure to kill spamhaus off so other companies that DO legislate can make consumers pay more for the "luxury" of good spam filtering.

Re:Failure to Legislate (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16378665)

Yes, because clearly that's the way a legitimate government should work.

Or were you being sarcastic? Or do you even know whether you were being sarcastic and where the line lies anymore?

If not, it offends me to see how deeply entrenched the acceptance of corruption, unaccountability and nepotism is in your mind.
That your first thought about the matter is so immoral is a seriously sad reflection on the state of your being. I believe you really
think "that's just the way things work". In which case you sir are the epitome of a defeatist and a coward.

Your ideals are the very antithesis of the American spirit as I once understood it.

Did you ever care to research the Spamhaus organisation? It's basically a two or three man show, voluntarily doing the work that
those oh so mighty governments and corporations dripping with money and resources have spectacularly *failed* to do.

Failed becuase they are so hopelessly corrupt, a corruption that you encourage.

Your attitude is just part of the problem.

Let them have it... (1)

AVee (557523) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378273)

I for one whould like to see how ICANN responds when ordered to turn in a domain name. I'd like to know how the rest of the world responds when the US starts using it's ownership this way.

As for the list, switching to spamhaus.org.uk will be trivial in most cases, i really doubt the rbl domains are hardcoded anywere. Perhaps spamhaus should see if they can make the list inaccesible to US users as well, since they seem to think everybody (even foreigners) is required to accept their commercial email.
Just let it happen, and see is anyone likes the result. That just seems to be the only way to introduce commen sense into things like this.

Re:Let them have it... (1)

crayz (1056) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378577)

They say on their site that they believe if they just switched domains, they would be found in criminal contempt of court. Also yes, I'm sure the address is hard-coded in many places, for example proprietary user-facing mail servers

Bullshit US Judgement (1)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378327)

How can a judge essentailly rule that a group of people, in another country, cannot add someone's already public information to a public list?

Re:Bullshit US Judgement (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16378675)

Because that's not what the judge did? Idiot.

Not such a bad thing (4, Interesting)

Exp315 (851386) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378345)

Spamhaus and other block-list pushers are a solution to spam that's worse than the problem. I understand that it's up to individual ISPs to decide what they do with these block lists, but too many were relying on them blindly to reject email from any source that ended up on a block list. Unfortunately many sources that ended up on these block lists are the common mail servers of other major ISPs, resulting in large volumes of false-positive emails being blocked. Perhaps it's indicative of the arrogant attitude of outfits like Spamhaus that this happened to them. Maybe this will serve as a wake-up call to other block-list operators to act more responsibly, but I suspect they'll ignore it and continue business as usual.

are you s@#%ing me .. (1)

rs232 (849320) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378511)

"Spamhaus and other block-list pushers are a solution to spam that's worse than the problem."

I've never had a problem not receiving legitimate e-mail. But spending 20 minutes a day clearing out my inbox of some tosser trying to sell me VltAGRA is a right pain. Right now in my unusable real e-mail box 238 unwanted adverts for s@#% I don't need.

re Re:Not such a bad thing

IP Address - No (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16378371)

RBLs use/are based on DNS. You cannot reference a simple IP address for RBL services.

He could, however use any domain name.

Spamcop (1)

MECC (8478) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378373)

What's the difference between spamhaus and spamcop? Don't they both have blackhole lists?

suspend US control of ICANN (1)

rs232 (849320) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378375)

This would be a good time to remove control of ICANN from the US government. A judgement in an Illinois court has no juristriction in an organization based in the UK. If they go ahead and suspend Spamhaus I can see the EU and the rest going their own way and setting up their own version of ICANN. Imagine what would happen if China arbitrally suspended falun.gong.org.

The Letter That Won US Internet Control [slashdot.org]

Spamhaus should sue ICANN (4, Insightful)

Theovon (109752) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378411)

In a UK court, Spamhaus should sue ICANN for unjustifiably removing their domain name. They could argue that ICANN removed their domain for reasons that do not legally apply to Spamhaus, on top of the fact that the Illinois court has not actually ruled against Spamhaus on anything (IIRC, the spammer was granted a temporary injunction prior to a final ruling). I'm an American who believes that having a single domain name registrar under a single government is really stupid and a great way for the US government (or agents thereof) to screw other countries. I believe that Americans should have power over America and over non-Americans who are a threat to personal liberties of Americans. Controlling ICANN and screwing with Spamhaus steps outside of those bounds. Perhaps after this, people will realize that it's necessary to liberalize ICANN.

This is a power play by Spamhaus, but it's a totally justified power play. And I applaud them for not giving in to the demands of a stupid court that has no jurisdiction over them or any reason in the first place to pass an injunction against them. If their domain name is removed, then the fallout from all of the additional SPAM will be cause a great deal of trouble.

Relax (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16378455)

You guys are blowing this all out of preportion.

LET them take the domain down. That way we can start attacking those spammers through the legal system once and for all!

I know it hurts, but THINK.

/etc/hosts (0)

_iris (92554) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378483)

Why doesn't SpamHaus publish a /etc/hosts file as a stop-gap?

a little clue (2, Insightful)

grapeape (137008) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378499)

If I subscribe to a RBL it means I dont want the junk no matter who is on the list. It means that opt out or opt in doesnt really matter to me. Im really tired of companies arrogant enough to think that my happening to hit their website once constitutes permission to spam the crap out of me on a daily basis. Here's another clue, the folks you are objecting to are the ones who you dont have a snowballs chance in hell of selling a product to. If we are smart enough to know what a RBL is we are smart enough not to read the crap your sending. At least with paper junk mail I know that it cost them something to get the crap to me and I can throw it out or burn it, spam is the only situation I know of where I have to pay for someone else to annoy me.

I really think the idea of white lists or per email fees is starting to come due. Yep its a hassle and the idea of paying for email kind of sucks but if done right it would have little effect on the average user but really make spammers accountable. I'd like to see a monthly or weekly cap over that and you pay. I also would like to see the Icann or someone rule that non working or non existant opt out's result in an immediate revocation of ALL domains owned by the offender.

ICANN suspending domain != no DNS (2, Interesting)

iambarry (134796) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378519)

As stated by numerous other posts, Spamhaus needs DNS records as the RBL works using DNS.

However, just because ICANN suspends a domain doesn't mean that its out of DNS. Anyone with a DNS server can still serve the records. Not all root servers are under ICANN control.

Many email servers have their own DNS server (if only for caching). I say, manually add the records in defiance of the SPAMers and their abuse of our legal system!

One lesson is that judges do matter (1)

Beryllium Sphere(tm) (193358) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378551)

They're not all created equal and citizens should pay attention to how they get on the bench.

Are you in a place that elects judges? It's hard to get good information about them, but the Bar Association ratings are better than nothing. Are you in a place that appoints judges? Maybe there are retention elections later.

Are you in a place that's completely appointed? Ask candidates how they would go about nominating judges. Watch their platform and their colleagues for signs that they might appoint sleazy hacks.

Ask the right questions. For a legislator, you check whether you agree with his/her decisions. For a judge, you ask whether the decisions are clueful and whether people in the judge's courtroom get a fair shake. If you agree with all a good judge's decisions, then you must be agreeing with all of the laws, which doesn't seem likely here on Slashdot. Expect to disagree: the question will be whether the decisions were soundly based and informed.

Big deal (2, Insightful)

saikou (211301) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378553)

People who chose to use them for filtering will just as easily update their configs to a new domain. Those who can't because they did it "automatically" probably shouldn't have as they need to understand how it works and how to balance black listing with other ways to control spam.

Smart play (1)

mortonda (5175) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378615)

Spamhaus doesn't think [spamhaus.org] that ICANN would be so stupid as to take the somain name away. ALso, it appears that Spamhaus has been planning all along to file an appeal. This was a smart play; they ignored an obviously bogus case, and now they can get an appeals court to smack it down, which will set a heavier precedent and make future lawsuits against them much harder. Very clever. There also may be a SLAPP countersuit available now too.

I've heard this somewhere before... (4, Funny)

InfinityWpi (175421) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378623)

...where was it... oh, I know! This is from Ghostbusters, right? Shutting down the containment grid would be a big mistake... cats and dogs, living together... government authority figure who thinks what he's doing is best... a storm of ectoplasmic spam descending on the world...

It's okay, guys. Spamhaus will lose their domain for a night, then get it back along with a huge government grant to go find a way to stop th emess that was made when they were shut down, and it'll all be cleaned up in time for a sequel.

Spamhaus shutting down may be a good thing (2, Interesting)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378629)

In the long run.

Think about it - let's say Spamhaus is effective enough that they're stemming the tide of spam (which I've noticed has increased 50% in the past month or two).

So they shut down, and everyone using them suddenly gets lots more spam. Those who only use Spamhaus as a suggestion won't notice too much, but now everyone else realizes how big the problem really is. Which may call for action, like revamping the email infrastructure. It only takes one important congresscritter to suddenly have his blackberry reject emails from other congresscritters because it was full of spam. Or heck, imagine government paralyzed because they're spending more time deleting than responding.

Sometimes you have to realize that spam filters may be part of the problem - those who rely on them start to get a distorted idea of how much spam is out there. So turning off the filters for a few weeks may be a better solution to get people moving.

Or rapidly degenerate email to the point where the only use of it is spam, so no one bothers using it anymore. Which would be a good solution too as it can lead to fast implementation of next-generation email solutions. (Forums have replaced mailing lists, IM has replaced quick "how are you doing?" emails, and so on). If people's phones ring multiple times a minute... or if a junk fax started using up all your paper and toner/ink in the course of an hour...

Like I for once would like to kill bounce emails - you'd be surprised at the number of MTAs and spamfilters that contribute to the spam problem - their bounce replies are spam basically (no viable From address, etc). And those that whitelist, well, depending on the mood, I intentionally whitelist them. If they spam me because they don't want spam and don't bother believing that From addresses can be forged, too bad.

Sometimes letting the broken thing (SMTP) break down is a good thing rather than continuously patching something to do what it really can't do.

wakeup call (3, Insightful)

Tom (822) | more than 7 years ago | (#16378635)

Maybe that's exactly what is needed. A flood of spam, drowning everything and especially e-commerce.

So far, the war has been fought by amateurs vs. increasingly aggressive and organized criminals. But the amateurs have been fairly successful, so nobody really noticed. Open the floodgates and let everyone realize that spam really is a problem that needs to be dealt with, once and for all.

One last time... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16378637)

Spamhaus implicitly asked the court to take jurisdiction when they ask for the case to be transferred from state to federal court.

If they had done nothing, the court probably would have dismissed the charges for lack of jurisdiction.

If they had asked the court to drop the charges because they were a UK entity and a US court doesn't have jurisdiction, the court probably would have agreed.

But no, they explicitly asked for the case to be transferred to federal court, implicitly acknowledging the jurisdiction of the court and then they never came back.

The judge is saying, "You asked for this. We went to a lot of trouble to accommodate you. Where are you? If you don't show up, I'll have to find for the plantiff."

They shot themselves in their own foot.

Matthew Prince has a good summary [securiteam.com] .
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...