On 2/20/20 3:02 AM, Benoit Panizzon via mailop wrote:
Hi

Hi,

The Spamtrap / HoneyPot in question not only listens to port 25 but also listens on port 465 (smtps) and 587 (submission).

Okay.

It sounds like your spam trap / honey pot is designed to detect IPs that are perpetrating abusive behavior. And that the ToR exit nodes happen to be perpetrating said abusive behavior.

If an attacker is doing some dictionary attack on this to check for valid passwords (every authentication attempt is accepted) or attempts to relay spam mails (every relay attempt is answered with 200 OK) he is being blacklisted and an ARF reports is sent to the abuse contact of the submitting IP range.

I don't see any problem with that. That's how you have chosen to run your spam trap / honey pot. That's your choice.

This is what causes those reports, not emails received on port 25.

I don't care what the behavior is. If you have designed your spam trap / honey pot to react to a specific behavior and someone is triggering the trap, then so be it.

But I guess, just silently blacklisting Tor exist nodes and not sending a ARF report to the ISP could be an option to solve that issue.

That's your call. But I feel like it's akin to a thief asking you to disable your security system and / or not call the police. Why do you want to honor a request from an apparent bad actor who is asking you to ignore their bad actions.

I feel like this is a good use for a company policy, whatever it may be. As a company, make a policy, and configure systems in accordance with that policy. You can re-visit the policy at any point in the future. But in the mean time, things should remain configured as mandated by the policy.

I don't think that your policy (current behavior representative there of) would quite likely not have any adverse impact on legitimate use of ToR. Meaning that anybody using ToR for white hat purposes to reach their business / university email servers will quite likely not connecting to your spam trap / honey pot. As such, I don't feel like your policy does anything negative to the ToR community or Internet at large.

This really seems like whining on the part of ToR Exit Node operators.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Reply via email to