Home page logo

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: Stealth Blocking
From: Mitch Halmu <mitch () netside net>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 13:00:50 -0400 (EDT)

On Wed, 23 May 2001, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote:

      Okay, I don't want to perpetuate this lil battle more than it needs
to however I do have a few observations that are blindingly glaring to me
and perhaps been overlooked...

Mitch Halmu was said to been seen saying:
Second, open relays were the norm until Paul Vixie decided you should do
otherwise. And in many cases, he convinced thy by brute force that his
way is the right way is the only way. But it wasn't the legal way. Most
providers bent over and silently took the punishment. We won't. Do I seem
to whine here?

      Point blank open-relays are not a good idea, they may have when
the technology was not there to do otherwise but come on, with SMTP AUTH
and TLS capabilities in most "reputable" mail servers there is absolutely
no excuse for it. If you remove the open relays you remove a good bit of
the fscking spam that pollutes the net and annoys the hell out of most
people. And SMTP AUTH and TLS would not prevent your roaming customers
from sending and receiving and would actually HELP you verify it is them.

<snipped what I felt didn't need further encouragement>

      Jeremy T. Bouse

As I answered in a private post to a similar observation, you don't have
to take my word for it. Perhaps you believe what Chip Rosenthal, the daddy
of MAPS TSI, states on his own site about POP-before-SMTP Authorization:
"Our users hated it - particularly those using MS Outlook".


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]