how-to block ads
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·DSL EXTREME
| reply to cowboy
Re: its about time
No... you're missing the point...
*) I am not a business
*) I have personal web based mail, as does my ISP, my company and groups I do volunteer work for DO NOT !
*) Some of the groups I volunteer for DO NOT have VPNs setup
*) I have a VPN to work - unfortunately it is Windows only - there is a hack to do similiar on Linux, but it is *NOT* supported - and often broken.
A) Get your company to get up to date, with either web based access or VPN based access. If they require you to access remotely, then they should be providing a reasonable/secure access method.
If your answer is for me to become a business - upgrade my phone and DSL (usually both have to be done) to work around poorly planned and implimented filters by ISPs - and lack of decent company support.... then too much of your income comes from the ISP/telco side.
Work with your ISP, they might give you port 25 for no charge. While I agree that there are going still going to be holes in almost any fix, and blocking port 25 is only a bandaid to a much more serious problem.
Good for them ! Do they also allow authenticated sending from outside their network ?
Yes! | |
cowboy
So Much For Subtlety
Premium
join:2000-03-14
Morgan Hill, CA
·Covad Communications
·DSL EXTREME
| reply to en102
This is just another reason to have
A) A Business account, which would not restrict these ports (vs. standard!), and could allow you to run servers if you want
B) Web based email.
C) VPN to your email / business
No... you're missing the point...
*) I am not a business
*) I have personal web based mail, as does my ISP, my company and groups I do volunteer work for DO NOT !
*) Some of the groups I volunteer for DO NOT have VPNs setup
*) I have a VPN to work - unfortunately it is Windows only - there is a hack to do similiar on Linux, but it is *NOT* supported - and often broken.
If your answer is for me to become a business - upgrade my phone and DSL (usually both have to be done) to work around poorly planned and implimented filters by ISPs - and lack of decent company support.... then too much of your income comes from the ISP/telco side.
I agree that ISPs could offer to allow port 25 in exchange for scanning. I have SBC, which requires authentication for sending email as well as recieving, and I for one do not mind.
Good for them ! Do they also allow authenticated sending from outside their network ?
On a daily basis at work, my domains see between 2000 and 5000 spam messages a day, and those are the ones that don't get rejected due to fake domains, etc. It's a waste of bandwidth and resources. I agree that this will not stop everything, as spam is big business.
Right... so after filtering, we'll suffer through SPF, DomainKeys, etc... and each will fail to stop the problem  Remember, spam isn't SPFs selling point - it is forged senders... but all these break in subtle ways with forwarding, and/or have other issues.
And unfortunately, a some of that money winds up in the ISPs pockets... Thats why netblocks (or the threats of same) used to be resorted to...
--
Richard Nelson | |
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
| reply to cowboy
Without doing this properly, the ISP are screwing with telecomuters, tech folk, etc...
For example, I regulary sendmail from whatever box I'm on (work, home, laptop during travel) from any one of at least six different domains ! Yes, I use my ISP as a smarthost at times, but at times I can't.
This is just another reason to have
A) A Business account, which would not restrict these ports (vs. standard!), and could allow you to run servers if you want
B) Web based email.
C) VPN to your email / business
The only saving grace for me, is that my ISP allowed me to opt out of the port 25 block (in exchange for scanning, which I'm cool with - no open proxies) - so in a pinch I can always bounce mail through my home box to wherever I need it to go (via STARTTLS/AUTH on port 587, of course).
I agree that ISPs could offer to allow port 25 in exchange for scanning. I have SBC, which requires authentication for sending email as well as recieving, and I for one do not mind. On a daily basis at work, my domains see between 2000 and 5000 spam messages a day, and those are the ones that don't get rejected due to fake domains, etc. It's a waste of bandwidth and resources. I agree that this will not stop everything, as spam is big business. | |
|
