CircleID

The Anti-Spam Research Group (ASRG) published a draft for an Overview of Email DNSBL Best Practices. We can take a step back and review paragraph 2.2.5 (Conflict of Interest):

Some DNSBLs used for blocking/negative reputation have had a practice of requiring fees or donations to charities from the listee for delisting. It is generally considered entirely appropriate for a DNSBL to charge for access to it by its users — the definition of a commercial DNSBL. However, the practice of requiring a listee to pay for delisting from a negative connotation DNSBL steers perilously close to notions of extortion, blackmail or a "protection racket". Even if such accusations are entirely unjustified the practice causes uproar and damage to the DNSBLs reputation, if not the entire DNSBL mechanism as a whole. Colloquially, 'it smells bad'. Therefore, negative-connotation DNSBLs MUST not charge fees or require donations for delisting or "faster handling", and it is RECOMMENDED that such DNSBLs that do charge fees or require donations not be used."

It will be interesting to see how this works out after the draft is reviewed, and a decision is made.

Looking from another angle, this jogs my memory back to a recent blog post by an industry colleague on ReturnPath's "Received" blog about How To (or How Not To) Operate a Blacklist, which digs deeper into blacklist operations. For the industry in general, what stands out is being professional — so maybe it's time to really sit down and re-visit the subject of "Best Practices on how to run a blacklist".

By Udeme Ukutt, Postmaster. Visit the blog maintained by Udeme Ukutt here.

Related topics: Email, Policy & Regulation, Spam