Re: Earthlink SMTP for Mobile Users
GTE/Verizon has been doing this for quite some time now (almost a year or two?). I cannot recall the last time I've received SPAM from a GTE/Verizon Internet customer since this policy. I recall before this policy was in place, we got quite a large amount of spam from *.gte.net. Additionally, as you mentioned before, the From mailbox field can be falsified. This is intended to allow you to remove yourself from mailling lists amongst other things that require you to send from your email that may be hosted else where. Some say this is a security hole, but realistically your IP will be logged by Earthlink's SMTPD in the header anyways, so an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] would most likely tag the users count as mischevious.. This policy combined with tarpitting and a few other anti-spam techniques seems to be the best way to run a responsible SMTPD for your access customers. Just my 2 cents.. - Original Message - From: "Crist J. Clark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 4:22 PM Subject: Re: Earthlink SMTP for Mobile Users > > I was stuck in a dial-up-only hell for a few months and used quite a > bit of Earthlink dial-up. I during that time, I did a variety of > tinkering of the email headers (like masquerading envelopes). It sure > didn't seem to me that Earthlink cared at all what domain was in the > return path. Their SMTP servers would relay _anything_ provided you're > source IP was in their IP-space. > > So, AFAIK, you can do whatever you want with respect to outgoing mail > (any source domain in the envelope or headers that you want) and > Earthlink's SMTP servers will relay it. > > Not that I didn't get annoyed with the blocking from time to > time. Sometimes I wanted to talk directly to a remote SMTP server with > telnet to debug a client's setup or see if they were the open relay I > was getting SPAM from. IIRC, you get ICMP admin-prohibited messages > back when you try to connect to port 25. But I probably have to say > that I think Earthlink is doing the right thing, IMHO. > > Aren't the other big US dial-up providers doing this kind of thing? > I assumed they all were. Despite the continuous rise in total SPAM > levels, don't see very much SPAM from the US mega-huge dial-ups > anymore. > -- > Crist J. Clark | [EMAIL PROTECTED] >| [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://people.freebsd.org/~cjc/| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Earthlink SMTP for Mobile Users
Hi all, I have been traveling extensively recently and I eventually tired of changing accounts/profiles/settings in Outlook. After having an eLink account for 3+ years, I switched to AT&T Worldnet which allows me to use different smtp servers by just requesting smtp pass through permission for my AT&T account. I think this is excellent that AT&T has found a common medium to this issue, and I have been very happy with the service I have received from them. Now, I am no big fan of AT&T, but I do recognize good service when I see it. Ymmv. -Jim P. > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Cutler, James R > Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 6:04 AM > To: 'Jim Hickstein' > Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: Earthlink SMTP for Mobile Users > > > > Jim, > > Yes, SMTP settings will to have to be changed to match whatever service, > different from Earthlink.net, that you happen to use. As an > outlook user, I > simply created multiple profiles which referred to the same local mail > store. This technique even works with the VPN to the corporate Exchange > system. I just click the correct shortcut (alias) to activate the correct > configuration for my connection status. > > My experience with Earthlink.net using several domains has been quite > positive. My understanding is that Earthlink can support this because the > subscriber connection itself is authenticated, giving the > required traceback > to the end user for UCE policy enforcement. > > JimC > > > --On Thursday, May 9, 2002 8:37 PM -0700 "Rowland, Alan D" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > For more on EarthLink's Port 25 policy see: > > > > http://help.earthlink.net/port25/ > > That's very helpful! Thank you! > > One clarification: Can these users relay through that host, using SMTP > AUTH, from anywhere, or only from within your network? I observe, for > instance, that the instructions for Outlook 2000 (Windows) does not have > them check "my [outgoing SMTP] server requires authentication". > > If the former, great! I'll inform my affected customers. If the latter, > they'll have to fool with settings as they move around -- which you no > doubt already know is asking too much of 99% of the population. :-) >
Re: Earthlink SMTP for Mobile Users
I was stuck in a dial-up-only hell for a few months and used quite a bit of Earthlink dial-up. I during that time, I did a variety of tinkering of the email headers (like masquerading envelopes). It sure didn't seem to me that Earthlink cared at all what domain was in the return path. Their SMTP servers would relay _anything_ provided you're source IP was in their IP-space. So, AFAIK, you can do whatever you want with respect to outgoing mail (any source domain in the envelope or headers that you want) and Earthlink's SMTP servers will relay it. Not that I didn't get annoyed with the blocking from time to time. Sometimes I wanted to talk directly to a remote SMTP server with telnet to debug a client's setup or see if they were the open relay I was getting SPAM from. IIRC, you get ICMP admin-prohibited messages back when you try to connect to port 25. But I probably have to say that I think Earthlink is doing the right thing, IMHO. Aren't the other big US dial-up providers doing this kind of thing? I assumed they all were. Despite the continuous rise in total SPAM levels, don't see very much SPAM from the US mega-huge dial-ups anymore. -- Crist J. Clark | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://people.freebsd.org/~cjc/| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Earthlink SMTP for Mobile Users
Jim, Yes, SMTP settings will to have to be changed to match whatever service, different from Earthlink.net, that you happen to use. As an outlook user, I simply created multiple profiles which referred to the same local mail store. This technique even works with the VPN to the corporate Exchange system. I just click the correct shortcut (alias) to activate the correct configuration for my connection status. My experience with Earthlink.net using several domains has been quite positive. My understanding is that Earthlink can support this because the subscriber connection itself is authenticated, giving the required traceback to the end user for UCE policy enforcement. JimC --On Thursday, May 9, 2002 8:37 PM -0700 "Rowland, Alan D" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For more on EarthLink's Port 25 policy see: > > http://help.earthlink.net/port25/ That's very helpful! Thank you! One clarification: Can these users relay through that host, using SMTP AUTH, from anywhere, or only from within your network? I observe, for instance, that the instructions for Outlook 2000 (Windows) does not have them check "my [outgoing SMTP] server requires authentication". If the former, great! I'll inform my affected customers. If the latter, they'll have to fool with settings as they move around -- which you no doubt already know is asking too much of 99% of the population. :-)
