Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 15:21:49 -0500 From: "Matt Crawford" <crawdad@fnal.gov> To: "Pleschutznig, Andreas" <Andreas.Pleschutznig@Schwab.COM> Cc: "'Leif Neland'" <leifn@neland.dk>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dropping connections without RST Message-ID: <199908172021.PAA04143@gungnir.fnal.gov> In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 17 Aug 1999 14:55:38 EDT. <11585F032846CF11867900805FE2A57706D6191C@n1002smx.nt.schwab.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > This reminds me of a proposal for sendmail; instead of rejecting > > mail from known spammers, one would accept the connection, but > > slow traffic down to the slowest possible, so the spammer could > > only deliver very few messages. Instead of killing the spammer, > > make every mailserver like quicksand, drawing him down and > > drowning him :-] > > And afterwards we still could remove the mail. I second this motion ;-)What > happened to this proposal? My own thought for this a year or so ago was to accept SMTP connections with an absurdly small windows size. Open up the window (by increasing the buffer size -- if that setsockopt() is accepted at that point, otherwise hack the socket layer so it is accepted) and process normally if the HELO and MAIL From/RCPT To look all right; otherwise continue to read small gulps of the DATA at slow intervals, then answer the final "." with a *temporary* failure code. Mroo hah hah. Matt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199908172021.PAA04143>