RE: How's this for fun?

["Fergie" <fergdawg () netzero net>]

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.