Date: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 17:21:32 -0400 (EDT) From: Pat Lynch <lynch@bsdunix.net> To: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Cc: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>, Jacques Vidrine <n@nectar.com>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Filtering port 25 (was Re: On hub.freebsd.org refusing to talk to dialups) Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9909251716070.13093-100000@bytor.rush.net> In-Reply-To: <199909251959.MAA08225@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
yah, thats what I want to know. personall my feeling is that people who
abused the way things were before made it bad for those who haven't done
anything wrong. thats life. just like in school when the teacher punsihes
a whole class because she didn;t catch the perpetrator orf the "crime".
Ultimately those who have not done anything wrong are going to push to
make laws against those who did do something wrong (obviously this has
happened in some areas of California?).
I've seen mail servers been taken down and crippled by spammers. Its not
just an annoyance anymore.
personally I'm kindof a anti-spam crusader, I don;t want it keep it away,
and I can
block whatever I want from my machines. granted my machines are mine
personally and not those of an ISP. And I work at a school where all
security/connectivity policy is controlled by me on the particular subnet
I'm on, and I don;t do anythign heavy handed. I haven;t had a problem with
RBL/DUL there yet. Our Computer Center however has been blocked by ORBS
once though.
-Pat
___________________________________________________________________________
Pat Lynch lynch@rush.net
lynch@bsdunix.net
Systems Administrator Rush Networking
___________________________________________________________________________
On Sat, 25 Sep 1999, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
> > At 09:04 AM 9/25/99 -0700, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
> >
> > >Ahhhh.. so you might not mind so much if I had
> > >ipfw add 10251 divert ${MYSPECIALSMPTHANDLRE} any to any 25 out via lnc1
> >
> > Interesting idea. What would you put into MYSPECIALSMTPHANDLER?
>
> The port number of the process that hands your data off to the internal
> smarthost by some means. On the otherside of that port would probably be
> a sockpair tcp stream between the firewall and the smarthost that spoke
> a wrapping protocol around smtp that would inject your smtp session into
> sendmail properly. (Ie, there is the problem that you expect to be talking
> to a specific destination IP, or I would just use a redirect with no wrapping).
>
> The above ipfw rule is only the very beginning of what it would take to
> make this a functional mechanism. It is however based upon reality in
> the world of using web caches (which I don't see anyone objecting to)
> at ISP's to increase web access speed.
>
> Now why is it that folks are so opposed to what we are doing with port 25
> traffic, yet they think it is just a super thing to do with port 80 traffic.
> Go figure...
>
> --
> Rod Grimes - KD7CAX - (RWG25) rgrimes@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9909251716070.13093-100000>