SPEWS: # S542 request to remove block list 202.67.156.0/24
hkne...@gmail.com
According to http://spews.org/ask.cgi?x=202.67.156.152
Our ip block 202.67.156.0/24 listed on spew.org #S542 block list.
Would you please check and kindly help to remove.
1, 202.67.156.136, smallcapinvestor.com
1, 202.67.156.0/24, hknet.com (smallcapinvestor.com)
$ nslookup -q=any smallcapinvestor.com
Non-authoritative answer:
smallcapinvestor.com nameserver = a.ns.smallcapinvestor.com
Authoritative answers can be found from:
smallcapinvestor.com nameserver = a.ns.smallcapinvestor.com
a.ns.smallcapinvestor.com internet address = 64.237.99.71
Thanks and Regards,
Technical Support
HKNet
--
Comments posted to news.admin.net-abuse.blocklisting
are solely the responsibility of their author. Please
read the news.admin.net-abuse.blocklisting FAQ at
http://www.blocklisting.com/faq.html before posting.
phil-new...@ipal.net
| Our ip block 202.67.156.0/24 listed on spew.org #S542 block list.
| Would you please check and kindly help to remove.
|
| 1, 202.67.156.136, smallcapinvestor.com
| 1, 202.67.156.0/24, hknet.com (smallcapinvestor.com)
|
| $ nslookup -q=any smallcapinvestor.com
|
| Non-authoritative answer:
| smallcapinvestor.com nameserver = a.ns.smallcapinvestor.com
|
| Authoritative answers can be found from:
| smallcapinvestor.com nameserver = a.ns.smallcapinvestor.com
| a.ns.smallcapinvestor.com internet address = 64.237.99.71
In order to gain the trust and respect of others online, you must be clear
and forthcoming with your specific actions regarding the termination of
services to spammers and abusers. In this case, the SPEWS history shows
that you did host the spammer indicated for a sufficient period of time
beyond being properly notified of the situation that resulted in more of
your network being listed. If left unresolved, this would, of course,
eventually result in all of your network being listed. But to resolve it,
SPEWS may wish to know when you terminated the services of the spammer.
A specific date would be best. If the facts are such that you never did
terminate the spammer, and they just left on their own (such as by not
paying their bill), at least be honest and say so (and also tell everyone
what your new anti-spam enforcement policy is).
I am not SPEWS. Whoever is SPEWS apparently gets the information posted
that includes SPEWS in the subject line. Hoever, that someone will never
communicate directly or indirectly to you. They "communicate" only via
the listings (or lack thereof when the criteria for being listed is no
longer met). If the spammer is gone, SPEWS will eventually discover this
and take action. But it takes a very long time to do that because maybe
the spammer is just sitting idle for a while. By making a statement that
the spammer is gone, with supportive testimony about the reasons and/or
basis of this, SPEWS can, and often does, expedite removal on good faith.
Just don't "blow it" with any false statements because if such are found,
all trust and respect is forever lost.
--
|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below |
| first name lower case at ipal.net / spamtrap-200...@ipal.net |
|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|
huey.c...@gmail.com
> hkne...@gmail.com wrote:
> | Our ip block 202.67.156.0/24 listed on spew.org #S542 block list.
> | Would you please check and kindly help to remove.
> | 1, 202.67.156.136, smallcapinvestor.com
> | 1, 202.67.156.0/24, hknet.com (smallcapinvestor.com)
> | $ nslookup -q=any smallcapinvestor.com
> | Non-authoritative answer:
> | smallcapinvestor.com nameserver = a.ns.smallcapinvestor.com
> | Authoritative answers can be found from:
> | smallcapinvestor.com nameserver = a.ns.smallcapinvestor.com
> | a.ns.smallcapinvestor.com internet address = 64.237.99.71
> In order to gain the trust and respect of others online, you must be
> clear and forthcoming with your specific actions regarding the
> termination of services to spammers and abusers.
I believe those 'others' to be a tiny minority. I believe that, in order
to gain the trust and respect of others online, what ISP staff must do
is terminate services to spammers and abusers. And given the choice
between having those people spending their time being penitent to people
on usenet who are not SPEWS and spending their time terminating services
to spammers and abusers, I believe that the overwhelming majority of
people would prefer them to spend their time terminating services to
spammers and abusers.
> SPEWS may wish to know when you terminated the services of the
> spammer. A specific date would be best.
If SPEWS wished to know that, they would so indicate on their webpage.
They have not. Ergo, they don't.
> If the spammer is gone, SPEWS will eventually discover this and
> take action.
Presumably because the original poster just indicated that the spammer
is gone, and gave the means to verify this.
> By making a statement that the spammer is gone,
....which they have done...
> with supportive testimony about the reasons and/or basis of this,
....which SPEWS has never asked for, so presumably that's irrelevant...
> SPEWS can, and often does, expedite removal on good faith.
....they should be good.
> Just don't "blow it" with any false statements because if such are found,
> all trust and respect is forever lost.
FOREVER.
--
Huey
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
06/13/2006
at 08:37 AM, hkne...@gmail.com said:
>Dear Spews,
This is not SPEWS, and reposting your article won't help you but could
hurt you. You need to get rid of *all* of your spammers, not just the
ones mentioned in the record. Posting here might result in information
that helps you take the necessary action, but it is no substitute for
that action.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, truly insane Spews puppet
<http://patriot.net/~shmuel>
Unsolicited bulk E-mail will be subject to legal action. I reserve
the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to spam...@library.lspace.org
Seth Breidbart
<huey.c...@gmail.com> wrote:
>phil-new...@ipal.net wrote:
>> In order to gain the trust and respect of others online, you must be
>> clear and forthcoming with your specific actions regarding the
>> termination of services to spammers and abusers.
>
>I believe those 'others' to be a tiny minority. I believe that, in order
>to gain the trust and respect of others online, what ISP staff must do
>is terminate services to spammers and abusers. And given the choice
>between having those people spending their time being penitent to people
>on usenet who are not SPEWS and spending their time terminating services
>to spammers and abusers, I believe that the overwhelming majority of
>people would prefer them to spend their time terminating services to
>spammers and abusers.
On the other hand, Afterburner not only cleaned up EROLS, but he got
it unlisted much faster than merely cleaning it up would have done, by
publicizing exactly what he was doing.
So yes, cancelling the spammers quickly is the important thing.
Letting people know it was done can make for a much faster change in
reputation than would happen just doing it and waiting for others to
notice.
Seth
Clemens W
> Dear Spews,
No SPEWS here. SPEWS (whoever they are) might read it, but don't count
on it.
> According to http://spews.org/ask.cgi?x=202.67.156.152
>
> Our ip block 202.67.156.0/24 listed on spew.org #S542 block list.
> Would you please check and kindly help to remove.
>
> 1, 202.67.156.136, smallcapinvestor.com
> 1, 202.67.156.0/24, hknet.com (smallcapinvestor.com)
The last line indicates that SPEWS holds HKNET responsible for hosting
a spammer. Do you have the authority to speak for HKNET? If so, why are
you posting from a Gmail account?
> $ nslookup -q=any smallcapinvestor.com
>
> Non-authoritative answer:
> smallcapinvestor.com nameserver = a.ns.smallcapinvestor.com
>
> Authoritative answers can be found from:
> smallcapinvestor.com nameserver = a.ns.smallcapinvestor.com
> a.ns.smallcapinvestor.com internet address = 64.237.99.71
Which means that this spammer probably has moved on. However, HKNET
still as some spam problem:
http://www.spamhaus.org/sbl/listings.lasso?isp=hknet.com
Found 2 SBL listings for IPs under the responsibility of hknet.com
How is it possible that HKNET is allowing spammers to host their DNS
there for almost four months (SBL38392)?
Please read the SPEWS FAQ, Q42:
http://www.spews.org/faq.html
| Will this get your IP address/range removed from a SPEWS
| listing? Again, not if there are currently spam related
| problems with your host.
There are problems with your network. Please solve them (i.e. terminate
the spammers and keep them from coming back) first, then tell us about
it, and then, only then, ask for a de-listing again.
Otherwise your attempts will likely be futile.
FWIW, has anything changed at HKNET since this discussion?
http://groups.google.com/group/news.admin.net-abuse.blocklisting/msg/f19fbbe57836843a
I hope so, otherwise HKNET can expect to be blocklisted until the heat
death of the Universe plus several millenia (just to be sure).
Good luck,
A. Friend
--
The usual disclaimer:
I am not SPEWS. We (tinw) are not SPEWS. All comments are just my
private opinion, based on my observations of former actions of SPEWS.
Don't expect SPEWS to answer. SPEWS speaks through actions, not words.
--
"And lo, the LART did come down from the heavens trailing fire and
brimstone. Yea verily, the LART did implant itself in yon bozo's
forehead, its mighty blade cleaving his thick skull in twain and
exposing the empty spaces therein for all the world to gaze upon with
much mirth and frivolity" - Camille Klein
SPAMJAMR
huey.c...@gmail.com says...
>
>phil-new...@ipal.net wrote:
[snip]
>> In order to gain the trust and respect of others online, you must be
>> clear and forthcoming with your specific actions regarding the
>> termination of services to spammers and abusers.
>
>And given the choice
>between having those people spending their time being penitent to people
>on usenet who are not SPEWS
They dont have to be penitent. It is helpful when they participate.
MCI/UUnet/Worldcom lost the right to bid on our worldwide network due in part to
their unwillingness to accept responsibilty for their growing spam nest.
>and spending their time terminating services to spammers and abusers,
The assumption they must do one or the other is incorrect and misleading.
Providers can participate without having to dedicate a full timer to usenet.
>I believe that the overwhelming majority of people would prefer them to spend
>>their time terminating services to spammers and abusers.
That should be job one, but they can also participate in usenet.
>> SPEWS may wish to know when you terminated the services of the
>> spammer. A specific date would be best.
>
>If SPEWS wished to know that, they would so indicate on their webpage.
>They have not. Ergo, they don't.
Agreed. Far too many rumors have been started about what SPEWS wants and does.
One of, if not the worst being the screed that SPEWS listings live as long as
the spammers were on the providers network.
>> If the spammer is gone, SPEWS will eventually discover this and
>> take action.
>
>Presumably because the original poster just indicated that the spammer
>is gone, and gave the means to verify this.
Then particpating in Usenet was good.
--
--
Keep the Internet clean, practice spammus interruptus