From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Feb 25 22:04:04 2007
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E468516A400
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 25 Feb 2007 22:04:04 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org)
Received: from mail5.sea5.speakeasy.net (mail5.sea5.speakeasy.net
	[69.17.117.7]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0CDC13C442
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 25 Feb 2007 22:04:00 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org)
Received: (qmail 32246 invoked from network); 25 Feb 2007 22:04:00 -0000
Received: from dsl092-078-145.bos1.dsl.speakeasy.net (HELO be-well.ilk.org)
	([66.92.78.145])
	(envelope-sender <freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org>)
	by mail5.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; 25 Feb 2007 22:04:00 -0000
Received: from Lowell-Desk.localdomain (Lowell-Desk.lan [172.30.250.6])
	by be-well.ilk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E44CD28426;
	Sun, 25 Feb 2007 17:03:56 -0500 (EST)
Received: by Lowell-Desk.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1147)
	id 9F7501CE6A; Sun, 25 Feb 2007 17:03:56 -0500 (EST)
To: ck <ck@yourserveradmin.com>
References: <45DE5F5A.5010707@yourserveradmin.com>
From: Lowell Gilbert <freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org>
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 17:03:56 -0500
In-Reply-To: <45DE5F5A.5010707@yourserveradmin.com> (ck@yourserveradmin.com's
	message of "Fri\, 23 Feb 2007 05\:28\:26 +0200")
Message-ID: <44vehpopwz.fsf@Lowell-Desk.lan>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.93 (berkeley-unix)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: replacing port in outgoing packets to any host
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 22:04:05 -0000

ck <ck@yourserveradmin.com> writes:

> Hello, participants!
>
> In constant effort to prevent trojans to send spam following question
> came to my mind.
>
> Is there any way to replace port number for all outgoing packets?
>
> Long version:
>
> I want to block outgoing port 25 completely for network behind NAT
> router and allow port 8025 for example. But it means that router will
> have to replace outgoing port 8025 with port 25. After intensive
> googling it looks like my idea is... well... not popular. So, I just
> wonder if this is possible at all? Something like this:

If it *were* popular, the spammers' viruses would be taught to use
it.  None of these kinds of "solutions" are scalable.

> rdr any to any port 8025 -> any port 25
>
> PS Yes, I know that I can redirect port to open-relay on known static IP.

You can do something like that, but once you're going to that much
effort, it's a lot easier (*and* more effective) to just force
everyone to use an internal smarthost.