Home page logo

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

RE: ORBS (Re: Scanning)
From: "E.B. Dreger" <eddy+public+spam () noc everquick net>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 17:34:36 +0000 (GMT)

Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 10:24:57 -0700
From: Roeland Meyer <rmeyer () mhsc com>

So, you aren't happy when I build a poisoned cake for spammers, you want
me to use your specific recipe... even if mine works (better?). Tell me

Explain how yours works on the same level or better.

how a MAPS-blocked system can relay spam.

Nobody claimed that it could.  Tell me what percentage of open relays are
listed in MAPS.

MAPS does not probe like ORBS does.  By its more conservative nature, much
more spam gets by MAPS than ORBS.  Is this good?  Is it bad?  Judgement

Yes, I'll concede that your approach may work, albeit at higher HW cost
than my approach.

Let's factor in the cost of wasted bandwidth when one gets hijacked, and
the cost of having an MX handle the extra spam traffic.



Brotsman & Dreger, Inc.
EverQuick Internet Division

Phone: (316) 794-8922


Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 11:23:58 +0000 (GMT)
From: A Trap <blacklist () brics com>
To: blacklist () brics com
Subject: Please ignore this portion of my mail signature.

These last few lines are a trap for address-harvesting spambots.  Do NOT
send mail to <blacklist () brics com>, or you are likely to be blocked.

  By Date           By Thread  

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