funsec mailing list archives
RE: How's this for fun?
From: "Fergie" <fergdawg () netzero net>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 16:32:35 GMT
Easier said than done. What I mean is, what can indeed be done in theory does not always get implemented in practice (due to whatever reason). It's been my experience that alot of ISP's go the "all-or-none" route. But then again, I'm not trying to a attribute to malice what can quite easily be explained by ignorance on their part. ;-) - ferg -- "Larry Seltzer" <larry () larryseltzer com> wrote:
Their inability to distinguish between legitimate SMTP traffic and
malicious (spam) SMTP traffic.
That's pretty damned unreasonable in my book.
There are numerous ways for collateral damage to be avoided when ISPs block port 25: For instance, users can use port 587 where appropriate, or ISPs can simply whitelist users who request not to be blocked. -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg () netzero net or fergdawg () sbcglobal net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
Current thread:
- Re: How's this for fun?, (continued)
- Re: How's this for fun? Dr. Neal Krawetz (Oct 26)
- RE: How's this for fun? Discini, Sonny (Oct 26)
- RE: How's this for fun? Fergie (Oct 26)
- RE: How's this for fun? Larry Seltzer (Oct 26)
- Re: How's this for fun? John Payne (Oct 27)
- RE: How's this for fun? Larry Seltzer (Oct 27)
- Re: How's this for fun? John Payne (Oct 27)
- RE: How's this for fun? Larry Seltzer (Oct 26)
- RE: How's this for fun? Richard M. Smith (Oct 26)
- RE: How's this for fun? Aditya Deshmukh (Oct 27)
- RE: How's this for fun? Larry Seltzer (Oct 27)
- Re: How's this for fun? Valdis . Kletnieks (Oct 26)
- Re: How's this for fun? Drsolly (Oct 26)
- RE: How's this for fun? Drsolly (Oct 27)
- Re: How's this for fun? Valdis . Kletnieks (Oct 27)