Search:  

 
 
   All ForumsHot TopicsGallery






how-to block ads


 
Forums » Blocking Port 25 Traffic » Thanks Idiots!
Search Topic:
Share Topic:
RSS topic:
toggle:
flat / full
normal / watch
Post a:
Post a:
Comcast SMTP not needed here? »
« Other port 25 checks  
AuthorAll Replies


Steve
Security is inefficient
Consultant
join:2001-03-10
Tustin, CA

reply to Camelot One
Re: Thanks Idiots!

said by Camelot One See Profile:
I am in the same boat. This will prevent all users from being able to say, send email from their work address at home. Anyone with a Road Runner accoun tfor example can only send email from their rr email address.

Stupid. Just plain stupid.
What's stupid is that Road Runner even considers the "From" address when relaying email - this is no kind of security (I understand Verizon did this too, perhaps they still do).

If the source IP address is from a "trusted" source - from within RoadRunner's own network - there is no good reason for disallowing users to include any From: address they wish, including valid work addresses.

An ISP that blocks outbound 25/tcp and limits users to the @isp.net From address is doing a bad thing.

Steve
--
Stephen J. Friedl * Security Consultant * Tustin, California USA * my web site


keith2468
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-03
Winnipeg, MB

That is what REPLY-TO/reply address is for

quote:
I am in the same boat. This will prevent all users from being able to say, send email from their work address at home. Anyone with a Road Runner accoun tfor example can only send email from their rr email address.
That is what the REPLY-TO (in OE accounts, the "reply address") is for.

SENT-BY (FROM or, in OE accounts, the "email address") is formally supposed to be the email address on the ISP the computer is actually on. As noted by another poster, only a few ISPs check this.

ISPs should not be limiting the REPLY-TO (unless maybe the customer has been a problem), but to follow the original intent of the standards, they all should have been limiting the SENT-BY.

My personal feeling is that ideally such filtering (port 25, spam, email virus) should a user configurable, and default to filtering for new accounts.

I think the problem is technical:
1. It increases overhead to add a bunch of individual IP addresses to port blocking rules in the router.
2. There is a bit of manual effort involved in updating the rules for individual customers.

It isn't dumb users that are responsible for "reduced functionality", it is the hackers and spammers who exploit them.


Steve
Security is inefficient
Consultant
join:2001-03-10
Tustin, CA

said by keith2468 See Profile:
That is what the REPLY-TO (in OE accounts, the "reply address") is for.

SENT-BY (FROM or, in OE accounts, the "email address") is formally supposed to be the email address on the ISP the computer is actually on.
Says who?

This premise cannot possibly hold water, and it's hard to even know where to start.

First, and most broadly, your online identity is anything you want it to be, and in my book, you "are" any email address to which you have valid access to the mailbox. This gives me probably a half a dozen email addresses, none of which is the "real" address unless I say one of them is.

Second, many people purchase IP services with the sole intent of routing IP packets, and they do not buy into the additional services (email, web space, home page) that the ISP may offer. I have Pac*Bell DSL, but as far as I know I don't have a @pacbell.net email address.

Finally, there is no required connection between "email address" and "physical location" - otherwise this premise would play havoc with the salesman on the road: does he get a new "Sent-From" email address in every hotel?

Steve
--
Stephen J. Friedl * Security Consultant * Tustin, California USA * my web site
-
Forums » Blocking Port 25 TrafficComcast SMTP not needed here? »
« Other port 25 checks  


Saturday, 30-Aug 02:46:27 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 9 years online! © 1999-2008 dslreports.com.
page compression OFF
Most commented news this week
· [330] Comcast 250GB Cap Goes Live October 1
· [223] FBI To Allow Warrantless Investigations
· [154] Industry Reacts To Comcast Cap Plans
· [130] AT&T Thanks Democrats For Telecom Immunity
· [123] Time Warner Cable Cripples TiVO, Gets FCC Fine
· [120] Why Run FTTH When You Can Pretend You Do?
· [68] Friday Open Thread
· [67] Telus CAPS 'Unlimited' EVDO Data Plans
· [65] Game Publishers Follow The RIAA's Lead
· [60] Qwest Defends Not Running FTTH
Most people now reading
· Comcast has new Acceptable Use Policy besides the 250GB cap [Comcast HSI]
· [iPhone] Did I Buy A Fake iPhone? [All things Macintosh]
· Steele vs Paypal - Hoax or Not - You Make the Call [Security]
· 2 Lines + Pfsense Load Balancing = Whoot! [TekSavvy]
· Windows Genuine Advantage Notification (KB905474) [Security]
· Bandwidth Monitor for Computers-Suggestions? [Comcast HSI]
· Battlegrounds Auto-queue, Auto-Join Add-ons [World of Warcraft]