On Mon, Jun 05, 2000 at 07:36:43PM +0200, Petr Novotny wrote:
[snip]
> On 5 Jun 00, at 19:27, Peter van Dijk wrote:
>
> > If one of your customers runs an open relay, you should force your customer
> > into fixing it, or make sure yourself that they can't cause any damage.
> > Open relays found by spammers tend to cause great network-loads too.
>
> Hell, ORBS doesn't make sure about that either. Imagine a
> customer behind a normal 28.8 dial-up. How much spam can he
> send through his "open relay"? ORBS tester also only tests if a
> single message gets through; but for a real spammer, less then ten
> thousand messages per hour is too slow.
Ok, so you found an example where the open relay won't cause network loads.
Big furry deal. There's more to it. An open relay prevents providers from
monitoring abuse by their own users.
> ORBS also lists tarpitting people, although as spam relays they
> are unsusable, too.
Anybody clueful enough to do tarpitting should block relaying.
> ORBS also lists people who allow only limited relay (only 40
> e-mails per sender address daily).
>
> Should I go on?
No. You obviously do not see my point. ORBS's job is to list open relays.
It does that, and it's good at it too. It also does not enforce this policy
on anybody.
You show the ORBS guy a way to distinguish relays like the ones you mention
above from relays with thick pipes and perhaps he'll consider doing several
kinds of listings. But I don't think so. Open relays are a bad thing
_always_.
> Open relays per se aren't bad; unguarded open relays behind a
> thick cable are bad. ORBS doesn't mind a difference. Sorry, not for
> me; in fact, enough for me to preach against.
I will not stop you in your preaching. I will disagree tho, and loudly too
:)
Greetz, Peter.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Peter van Dijk [student:developer:madly in love]
