|FROM ||Rick Moen
|SUBJECT ||Re: [Hangout of NYLXS] Fwd: Re: [Panix #26803] Undelivered Mail
|From hangout-bounces-at-nylxs.com Fri May 5 08:41:49 2017
Received: from www.mrbrklyn.com (www.mrbrklyn.com [126.96.36.199])
by mrbrklyn.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7ED7161312;
Fri, 5 May 2017 08:41:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from linuxmafia.com (linuxmafia.COM [188.8.131.52])
by mrbrklyn.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31A5E160E77
for ; Fri, 5 May 2017 08:41:44 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rick by linuxmafia.com with local (Exim 4.72)
(envelope-from ) id 1d6cYJ-0002Vs-R0
for hangout-at-nylxs.com; Fri, 05 May 2017 05:41:43 -0700
Date: Fri, 5 May 2017 05:41:43 -0700
From: Rick Moen
Organization: If you lived here, you'd be $HOME already.
X-Mas: Bah humbug.
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on linuxmafia.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Subject: Re: [Hangout of NYLXS] Fwd: Re: [Panix #26803] Undelivered Mail
Returned to Sender
List-Id: NYLXS Tech Talk and Politics
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Quoting Ruben Safir (ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com):
> My question, I suppose, is if anyone else thinks SORBS is a scam
I doubt it very much.
Reputable, well-run DNS BLs are objects of defamation, outright attacks,
legal threats, and malicious rumours all the time. So, of course, are
badly run and/or disreputable DNS BLs -- but the point is that they pile
up enemies, many of thempassive-aggressive.
This is one reason why, historically, groups that operate them do so for
only a couple of years and then -- statistically -- first turn grouchy
and peculiar and then figuratively say 'Fsck it' and shut down.
But I have yet to encounter an example of a significant DNS BL that
turned out to be a scam, and there is excellent reason to be highly
skeptical of rumours that SORBS is one. Also, given that it's now a
major operation of a publicly traded corporation (Proofpoint, Inc.),
that charge strikes me as even less credible, as economically
significant criminal operations would be very difficult to conceal from
the mandatory public disclosures (e.g., the SEC 10-K and 10-Qs). If a
major division of Proofpoint makes money through scamming the public,
how is that fact being hidden from investors? Hmm?
At bare minimum, I'd pose that question to people making the allegation:
Are they saying Proofpoint management are running a criminal conspiracy
that's somehow cleverly concealed in a public corporation? Are the
outside auditors attesting to the SEC filings in on the conspiracy?
Hangout mailing list