outbount port 25 blocking

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Mike O'Dell" <mo () ccr org>
Date: March 15, 2007 11:10:45 PM EDT
To: dpreed () reed com
Cc: dave () farber net
Subject: outbount port 25 blocking


Dave,
i believe in end-to-end connectivity at least
as much as anyone else i know, but outbound blocking
of port 25 *for consumers with an unknown clue density*
does indeed help at least some.  as for people who wish
to run their own email infrastructure, an ISP who doesn't
provide an escape hatch for people willing to be held to
a higher standard than "luser" is making enemies when
he could be making friends. that doesn't mean there are
no bone-headed ISPs out there, but there is often (usually?
frequently?) a way to demonstrate both the skill and responsibility
to warrant unfettered access to outbound port 25.

as for the prevalence of bots, alas, i wish your claim were true, but
having spent a while looking at the problem (botnets) and talking to
people who monitor them continuously, they are indeed pervasive.
frankly, if one wishes to complain about the ills caused by the sins
of the few being foisted on the many, one should complain about the
damage done by a colossal monoculture of software, the quality of
which makes the safety of a Corvair look like a Volvo by comparison.

if the epidemic was infecting humans instead of computers,
borders would have been long-closed, travel suspended, and
the carriers hunted down and isolated.  but people chose to
put up with the result of their choices instead of doing
something constructive about them.  blocking outbound port 25
by default for "consumer" PeeCees is a public health response
to that behavior.

i don't like it, but i don't know what else to do, and believe
me, i've spent a great many hours trying.

   -mo


-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/247/@now
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com