As of yesterday, July 6, 2022, we have a service outage. The master DNS server lost connectivity to the Internet, it took a long time to get it back, and meanwhile, the secondary DNS servers’ copies of the zones expired. The master DNS server is back online but the Internet service provider was kind enough to implement a firewalling that wasn’t asked for that prevents the secondaries from connecting to it on port 53, so the zone can’t be refreshed and has been discarded. We will report when the service is back online.
We replied to your ticket about 28 hours ago. If your ticket system discards replies, that’s something we can’t help with. You have a reply, now go read it.
Apr 11 19:30:09 x postfix/smtp: CC4D713E055: to=<[email protected]>, relay=kvchosting.net[126.96.36.199]:25, delay=45, delays=0.07/0.02/20/24, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 OK id=1ndzji-0002fv-Sq)
Somebody wrote in asking about a single IP listing that is a part of a /24. Our reply is that it’s an escalation listing against a customer of $PROVIDER that is somebody else but the people writing in, and would they please send $PROVIDER to talk to us directly. The response is worth quoting in its entirety. Needless to say, responses like this get no traction with us. Nobody owes this person anything as a result of their choices, and if they’d like to operate a blocklist with their own principles, they can always start a new one. There’s room for more.
$PROVIDER certainly knows about it. Pushing anyone to change its provider the way $OTHER_BLOCKLIST is doing is not the right way forward. There are many reasons we can’t change provider. For instance because other provider is listed in other similar lists (like $OTHER_BLOCKLIST). And there are more other technical and business and even legal reasons.
So why do you list our IP? $OTHER_BLOCKLIST motivation is clear. They want money to whitelist hostages. And because they list whole AS they get more customers. But I don’t understand your motivation.
I don’t know if you noticed but many individuals and companies started blocking $OTHER_BLOCKLIST as a protest. And I noticed some chats about collective lawsuit against $OTHER_BLOCKLIST requiring compensation for business detriment.– anonymous correspondent to Scientific Spam
Knock yourself out, folks.
From: Mail Delivery System <[email protected]> <[email protected]>: host mx1.domain.example[127.5.6.7] said: 550 5.1.1 <[email protected]>: Recipient address rejected: User unknown in virtual mailbox table (in reply to RCPT TO command)
If you do write to us, please at least bother doing it from an address that can be replied to. It’s very difficult to get the information you request to you otherwise.
The response that could not be delivered today is that your IP is included in a /24 listing that your Email Service Provider has allowed to go unattended for more than two years. Please talk to them about it.
Today marks the seventh anniversary of this project.
The decline in queries continues. In 2020, the IP address blocklist saw 1.459 billion queries, which is just short of four million a day, down from 1.7B the year before (15% less). The drop was even more marked for the domain name list, going from 1.4B to 457M (1.25M per day). If the same trend continues, by the end of 2021 we might consider the experiment concluded.
All records older than Sunday, August 28, 2016 3:59:25 PM have been purged. The reason for this is simply the number of records causing issues with the outsourced DNS distribution.
ScientificSpam DNSBL has always considered itself a blocklist.
We get delisting requests from hosting providers for whose networks we have escalation listings. Sometimes they are asking for the escalation to be removed in favour of targeted listings for the spammer, implying that they’re okay hosting the spammer even though they understand why we listed them.
We get email that starts with
<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
and all we can say is please adjust your email program so we can read what you wanted to say. That is, if you want us to read it and react to it.
We have already once commented in public on this website (see earlier article) about the difficulty of communicating with you when you write in from a ticket system. This is just a heads-up; we have responded to you. If you don’t see our response, it’s not our fault. If you expect us to respond in your ticket system rather than in e-mail, don’t hold your breath.
Mar 5 11:31:39 x postfix/smtp: 89B9413E055: to=[email protected], relay=aspmx2.spamshooter.com[188.8.131.52]:25, delay=203, delays=0.05/0.04/200/3.1, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 OK id=1j9oj3-0000Gh-CZ)
And as for the issue itself:
- Our services are not used by Yahoo, Hotmail and Gmail.
- Your RFC 5322 noncompliance issues are not related to Scientific Spam DNSBL listings and cannot be fixed by Scientific Spam.
- Get rid of OMICS.