Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 12:44:09 -0700 (PDT) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> To: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams) Cc: gary@eyelab.psy.msu.edu (Gary Schrock), current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: On hub.freebsd.org refusing to talk to dialups Message-ID: <199909241944.MAA03816@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> In-Reply-To: <199909241907.NAA28321@mt.sri.com> from Nate Williams at "Sep 24, 1999 01:07:27 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > I agree. > > > > > > > Your work also has a serious security concern if it allows this you to > > > > directly attatch to it's port 25. > > > > > > No it doesn't, but you do bring up another good point why not to use the > > > ISP's mail server. Security. I don't want email to bounce on your box > > > and potentially give the ISP's postmaster information they shouldn't be > > > having. (Including email about us switching ISP's because we hate their > > > email policy. :) > > > > If your mail is sensitive use a proper transport, encrypt it. > > All mail is senstive, it just that sometimes that the cost of encrypting > is more expensive than the cost of setting everyone up so they can > decrypt it. In short, there is no 'portable' way of > encrypting/decrypting mail. > > > > Yes, our ISP *could* sniff packets are read our email if they wanted, > > > but it would be a breach of contract for them to do so. > > > > No, it would not. > > *YES*, it would. Don't tell me what my ISP can/can not do, because you > have no idea. I think you should take a chill pill, then go read that contract again... there should at least be a clause that allows them to monitor (``sniff'') for the purpose of rendering service. If not, they really blew thier contract from a legal prespective as now they can't even hook up a sniffer to trouble shoot, run tcpdump, etc. > > > > Basically, I think not allowing ISP's to allow the Dialup lines to > > > forward email as a good thing, but for them to limit was businesses do > > > with their IP traffic is simply too big brother'ish, no matter what > > > their contract states. > > > > If _we_ don't start to do something about it, big brother _is_ going > > to do something about it. > > Now you're going off the deep-end. Big-brother has shown that they > simply don't *care* what happens, to the point that SPAM is still > legal to do in almost all cases, and people must opt-out of it. You haven't been around unregulated things much have you? HAM radio and the FCC use to be a pretty open page, now it's rules up the wazoo. Skydiving use to be totally unregulated, started out as a few pages in a FAR, now its getting bigger, and if the USPA had not taken drastics steps 5 years ago to impose it's own major self regulation the FCC was ready to cram some pretty tight rules down our throats. It took untold time and money to sway the FCC into letting us correct the problem ourselves. One reason spam is still legal is we (the internet community at large) has made inroads into cutting it down, and are infact at least trying to self regulate it. Uncle sam will only keep its hands off so long, but trust me, a few more kidnappings by email occur and your going to see some deadly serious laws proposed. We already have several laws on the books, one in Washigton, and another in California. There has been a propsed senate bill. If you think this is ``don't care'' aditude you had better wake up to just how the legislative process works. They never get it right the first 10 times, and by the time they get it done it's way more than what was ever needed. > > > They also have great benifits by agreeing to our standard AUP, they > > have RBL filtering done, etc, etc, etc. This is the _service_ part > > of ISP that every one else leaves out. > > As I stated before, any decent ISP will take the time to help a client > setup services they desire, not do it for them. Doing it for a customer > WHO WANTS TO DO IT THEMSELVES is the unix way. We're doing it, because > you're too stupid/clueless to do it yourself, and we're not going to > give out the 'secret' information. Then your an exception in the general populus of clients, as we are an exception in the general populas of ISP's. Most customers actually like it when you do something for them for free that they wanted done anyway. Like I said else where, most of this has been done at customer requests. > If the customer doesn't want to host it themselves, then by all means > have the ability to do it for them, and you can charge them for it > even. :) > > But, just because you think you are an ISP doesn't make you any more > expert than people running their own businesses off it. We don't think we are an ISP, we are. Myself, well, I'm not, I just do contract work for a dozen or so companies that call themselves ISP's. If you really think I am lost and off the deep end, well... thats your right. Several of the peers to us are loving what we do for them... and our attrition rate has gone done since we implemented many of these policies. Being able to tout ``Reduced spam internet service'' on a sales litrature is a selling point to many a client... -- Rod Grimes - KD7CAX - (RWG25) rgrimes@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net 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?199909241944.MAA03816>