nanog mailing list archives
Re: ISP port blocking practice
From: Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists () gmail com>
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 07:52:04 +0530
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 7:29 AM, Randy Bush <randy () psg com> wrote:
i keep hearing that, but am having a hard time finding supporting data.
Might see the stats from http://cbl.abuseat.org - by AS. Then compare the stats on a non port 25 filtered network (they have stats by AS) to stats on a network that is filtered on port 25 The networks that are filtered on port 25 will of course have any bots on that network originating spam by other means (social networks, webmail scripting etc), or other types of nastiness (DDoS etc). But you won't find them mailing out direct on port 25. The bots are very much there - and if the port 25 filtering were to be taken out, you'd at once see the increase in spam volumes. --srs -- Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists () gmail com)
Current thread:
- Re: ISP port blocking practice, (continued)
- Re: ISP port blocking practice Franck Martin (Sep 05)
- Re: ISP port blocking practice Jon Auer (Sep 06)
- Re: ISP port blocking practice Scott Howard (Sep 11)
- Re: ISP port blocking practice Brett Frankenberger (Sep 06)
- Re: ISP port blocking practice Patrick W. Gilmore (Sep 06)
- Re: ISP port blocking practice deleskie (Sep 06)
- Re: ISP port blocking practice Brett Frankenberger (Sep 06)
- Re: ISP port blocking practice Randy Bush (Sep 06)
- Re: ISP port blocking practice Suresh Ramasubramanian (Sep 06)
- Re: ISP port blocking practice Randy Bush (Sep 06)
- Re: ISP port blocking practice Suresh Ramasubramanian (Sep 06)
- Re: ISP port blocking practice Randy Bush (Sep 07)
- Re: ISP port blocking practice John Levine (Sep 09)
- Re: ISP port blocking practice Owen DeLong (Sep 05)
- RE: ISP port blocking practice Brian Johnson (Sep 13)
- Re: RE: ISP port blocking practice Joshua William Klubi (Sep 13)
- Re: ISP port blocking practice Franck Martin (Sep 02)
- Re: ISP port blocking practice Owen DeLong (Sep 03)