[This is a resend. Ironically, the orignal was blocked by FreeBSD's spam filter, I've had to send this from another account]

I am not sure which list is best for this issue, hence the cross posting. I believe spam and anti-spam measures are security issues -- the 'Availability' part of C-I-A. I apologize if I am wrong. A FreeBSD ported package is contributing to an internet service availability problem that has me stumped. I believe that an unknowable quantity of other internet denizens are also affected.

I'm a long time fan of FreeBSD -- I run it on my small mail server and I've recommended it for many applications. I even bought a CD once. I write this missive with great reluctance. I've worked with a lot of strange software over the years, But this is a new first -- Software that slanders! Software that publicly called me a spammer!!! And not to my face, but to business associate. And then took action.

I recently discovered, and quite by accident, that a FreeBSD ported package -- spambnc (aka Spambouncer or SB) -- was blocking mail from me to an unknown number of businesses and individuals on the internet. I'll probably never have to correspond with most of these people, but I'm a freelancer -- this may have already cost me a job. [Dear reader, don't be surprised if you or your clients are also blocked. I strongly suggest that you check it out.]

Anti-spam products have a valuable place in the security arsenal. But, IMHO, this product is dangerous because it includes filters and rules that are overreaching, and inaccurate. Bad firewall rules and bad anti-spam rules may be OK for an individual site. However, spambnc's bad advice is being mass marketed through the good offices of FreeBSD, and it is putting potholes in the net for the rest of us. Until it is fixed, and proven harmless, FreeBSD should stop distributing this product.

Basically, the default built-in policies for blocking mail aren't fully described, and there is no mechanism to universally correct the inevitable mistakes in a timely manner. Users (people who install this product) are mislead about the probably of filtering the wrong mail. I am sure that the software was developed with the very best intentions, but in its zeal to block lots and lots of spam, SB is hurting good people.

The SB rule blocking my mail host has nothing to do with me. Even though, it can use dynamic anti-spam DNS services, SB hard codes its rules for filtering bad domains by name and by IP address. My nemisis is buried in a 1476 line file, sb-blockdomains.rc, which installs by default, and is not documented outside the code. Along with others, it blocks the entire 66.45.0.0/17 space because spammers might live there. This is sort of like a corporate mail room throwing away all NJ postmarked mail because of the bulk mail distribution centers in Secaucus.

My mail host address gets a clean bill of health from every anti-spam site that I can find, such as SPEWS. I've checked at least 30 of them.

My tiny x/29 block is sub-allocated from my DSL provider's x/23 block. The DSL provider's block is a sub-allocation from Inflow.com's 66.45.0.0/17 block. Spambouncer doesn't like Inflow. While they have a right to their opinions, they don't have a right to publicly tar me because of my neighbors.

If I read sb-blockdomains # comments correctly, it is policy to not only block known spammers, but to ALSO block entire networks based on their handling of spam complaints. This is like as a business receptionist checking callerID and then ignoring incoming calls from Verizon subscribers because Verizon tolerates (and probably invented) telemarketing.

I have written to both the Spambouncer contact address <ari...@spambouncer.org> and the FreeBSD maintainer, but without a response. Possibly they are on holiday, or spambouncer is eating my mail. Perhaps I'm just too impatient.

I have also contacted my ISP's support. They don't know how to help me. They vouch for Inflow. They don't recommend it, but for a fee, my service could be switched to a different PVC, and I'd get an address from a different carrier. But of course, the new address could be black-listed on a whim.

Regardless, I assume that these are reasonable people, and that they will oil the squeaky wheel as soon as it is convenient. But how will I ever know that EVERY copy of spambouncer has been fixed? What about other innocent ISP subscribers who are also black-listed?

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majo...@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message