On Wed, Mar 10, 1999 at 03:03:23PM -0500, Brad Shelton wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 10, 1999 at 06:27:14PM -0000, Russell Nelson wrote:
> > Rick McMillin writes:
> > > Does anyone know of any good reasons as to why QMail is better
> > > suited to handle this attack?
> >
>
> This whole thread has me wondering. I had a site start hitting on my smtp
> port a week or so ago. It just kept hitting the port, but didn't appear to
> be actually trying to negotiate any protocol transfers. There was no mail from
> or rcpt to, yet they just kept hitting the port, twice per second.
One site, mtshasta.snowcrest.net, connects to my port 25 every once in a while
(sometimes with more than a month in between) and doesn't seem to deliver anything..
Anybody seen this too?
Greetz, Peter.
--
.| Peter van Dijk | <mo|VERWEG> stoned worden of coden
.| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | <mo|VERWEG> dat is de levensvraag
| <mo|VERWEG> coden of stoned worden
| <mo|VERWEG> stonend worden En coden
| <mo|VERWEG> hmm
| <mo|VERWEG> dan maar stoned worden en slashdot lezen:)
