date:20030617

On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 21:30, John P Verel wrote:
> 
> On 06/17/03 16:23 -0400, Michael Kalus wrote:
> > 
> > Try telnetting to your mailserver on port 25, you can send the message
> > directly, no server on your end involved. It's all plain Text.
> I get this in response to telnet localhost 25:
> 
> 220 John.optonline.net ESMTP Sendmail 8.12.8/8.12.8; Tue, 17 Jun 2003 22:27:58 -0400
> 
> I run Sendmail to deliver my mail to my ISP.  Does this constitute
> running a server?
> 

John

I was going to reply to an earlier message of yours since you are having
trouble.  I don't think your mail is going through your isp's server. At
least the ones you send to the list are not.

>From the headers of your mail very ugly due to wrapping I put a line
feed between each line for readability:

Received: from John.optonline.net
(IDENT:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[67.86.51.46]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id
h5I2SpH08627 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 17 Jun 2003 22:28:51
-0400

Received: from John.optonline.net (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by
John.optonline.net (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h5I2UV3x001914 for
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 17 Jun 2003 22:30:31 -0400

Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) by John.optonline.net
(8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h5I2UVkK001911 for [EMAIL PROTECTED];
Tue, 17 Jun 2003 22:30:31 -0400

I had decided that your isp's mx  must be john but now that I see your
post I understand it is not.  Either your mua or sendmail needs to be
set to relay through what ever the mx of your isp is.

At least I think that is not happening but I am far from a mail guru.

Bret


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

2003-06-17 Thread rm

On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 21:30, John P Verel wrote:
> On 06/17/03 16:23 -0400, Michael Kalus wrote:
> > 
> > Try telnetting to your mailserver on port 25, you can send the message
> > directly, no server on your end involved. It's all plain Text.
> I get this in response to telnet localhost 25:
> 
> 220 John.optonline.net ESMTP Sendmail 8.12.8/8.12.8; Tue, 17 Jun 2003 22:27:58 -0400
> 
> I run Sendmail to deliver my mail to my ISP.  Does this constitute
> running a server?
> 
> John

Well yeah, technically I guess it does.  Although I'm a proponent of 
running my own mail server (I prefer qmail), I've got to ask; What do
you gain by running Sendmail, and just dumping it off to your ISP's 
smtp?  

Wouldn't it be faster, easier, safer to just use a mail client?

just curious

regis 
-- 
rm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

RE: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

Pretty much.

-Drew


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of John P Verel
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 10:31 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May
Be OT]


On 06/17/03 16:23 -0400, Michael Kalus wrote:
> 
> Try telnetting to your mailserver on port 25, you can send the message
> directly, no server on your end involved. It's all plain Text.
I get this in response to telnet localhost 25:

220 John.optonline.net ESMTP Sendmail 8.12.8/8.12.8; Tue, 17 Jun 2003
22:27:58 -0400

I run Sendmail to deliver my mail to my ISP.  Does this constitute
running a server?

John


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

2003-06-17 Thread John P Verel


On 06/17/03 16:23 -0400, Michael Kalus wrote:
> 
> Try telnetting to your mailserver on port 25, you can send the message
> directly, no server on your end involved. It's all plain Text.
I get this in response to telnet localhost 25:

220 John.optonline.net ESMTP Sendmail 8.12.8/8.12.8; Tue, 17 Jun 2003 22:27:58 -0400

I run Sendmail to deliver my mail to my ISP.  Does this constitute
running a server?

John


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

TP770ED Kernel 2.4.20 Crashes on Boot

2003-06-17 Thread Ronald W. Heiby

Hello redhat-list,

I sent this to the Linux on ThinkPads list and the Psyche list about a
week ago, and haven't seen any response. Trying a wider audience now.
Does anyone have a suggestion on how I can proceed? Thanks!

Ron.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Hello linux-thinkpad,

I'm running RH 8.0 on my 770ED. The system sits on a dock where the
floppy resides, along with a TDK CD-RW drive. On the dock's SCSI,
there is a Syquest SyJet with no disk in the drive. In the PCMCIA
slot, I have a 3Com/Megahertz 3CCFEM556 Ethernet/Modem card.

Running kernel 2.4.18-27.0, and several others before that, things
have been working pretty well. However, when I tried moving to the
first 2.4.20 kernel update that RH released, I had trouble. After
seeing some discussion here, it looked like it might have been caused
by PCMCIA difficulties. It looked more like that once I successfully
upgraded my A21p and three desktop systems (none of which use any
PCMCIA cards).

Now, I've tried upgrading to the latest 2.4.20-18.8, and my system is
still locking up at boot time. I am assuming that this is a "panic",
but since I can't remember seeing one on Linux before and since it
goes on for enough lines to scroll off the top of the screen, who
knows?

In /var/log/messages, the last few lines from my 2.4.20-18.8 boot
attempt are (without the date stamps):

pcmcia:  cardmgr.
cardmgr[598]: starting, version is 3.1.31
rc: Starting pcmcia:  succeeded
cardmgr[598]: config error, file 'config' line 2129: no function
bindings
cardmgr[598]: watching 4 sockets
cardmgr[598]: Card services release does not match

Note that the complaint about line 2129 also happens in the 2.4.18
boot. Note that the "Card services release does not match" complaint
also happens in the 2.4.18 boot.

In the 2.4.18 boot, what follows are lines from kernel/cs relating to
IO port probing, followed by the initialization of the Ethernet/Modem
card.

So, I guess I'm still suspicious of PCMCIA issues. Further evidence
pointing at PCMCIA is that when I pulled the card and re-booted, the
system came up fine (althouth, of course, not on the network).

Where do I go from here??? Thanks!

Ron.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.5.8
Comment: Until recently, the last PGP with full source disclosure.

iQA/AwUBPua2dm8pw+2/9pUJEQI7AACeKKQFURSVE3eXq8nBGYVWMC8sVZsAoOuD
7KQ3bTP4K8m9dW0qR1u7CILS
=f2iu
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: bonding 2 DSL lines.

2003-06-17 Thread Manish Kathuria

Please check out LARTC - http://www.lartc.org/. The HOW-TO has examples 
dealing with the situation. You will have to apply some patches ( 
http://www.ssi.bg/~ja/#routes) to your kernel and recompile if you want 
dead gateway detection in addition to plain load balancing. I have done 
it and it works great.

- Manish Kathuria

Jeff Bearer wrote:
I can't find an application that will allow me to equalize traffic
across two DSL lines such as this router does.
http://www.nexland.com/turbo.cfm




--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

Daryl Hunt wrote:

Sounds like you may need a better provider if one is available.  It seems
the areas that are abused the most are from areas that offer the least
services.


There are two other ISP's in town, both are more expensive for their 
basic broad band service

--
Wielder of the mighty +1 LARTsaber of Unsubscribe Instructions At End of 
Message,
the +3 Clue-by-Four of No Attachments to a Mailing List,
and the -4 Shield of No Spell Checker

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]


- Original Message -
From: "Joseph A Nagy Jr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 1:22 PM
Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be
OT]


> Daryl Hunt wrote:
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Michael Kalus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> >>I wouldn't mind having my own fixed IP but they are hard to come by
these
> >>days.
> >
> >
> > I bought mine.
>
> They aren't exactly cheap though. For me to get a static IP from my
> current ISP would cost me $300+ a MONTH.

Sounds like you may need a better provider if one is available.  It seems
the areas that are abused the most are from areas that offer the least
services.



-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

Bret Hughes wrote:

Looking through my spam folder to which  procmail sends all stuff tagged
by spamassassin I see a lot of stuff from various names but niether the
the originating machine or the first server if it did not go straight to
verio (my webhosting co) have nothing to  do with yahoo bigfoot or aol
even though return email address indicates that is where the user is. 
If you check the IP in the headers, I've found 99% of my spam doesn't 
come from yahoo.com (or any other ISP (and I've seen a few spoofed email 
addy's)), which is based in the US, but from some ISP in either South 
America, Eastern Europe, or Asia (less so then the other two)

This leads me to believe that they are either using someone else's open
relay or sending direct and that is exactly what aol is trying to stop. 
The open relays get blacklisted sooner or later :) and aol is being
proactive in stopping the direct guys.
What they should do is shut down their relay's. If that much spam is 
getting passed through AOL's servers, I'm left to wonder if they are 
using open relay's themselves. What they should do is stop spam 
originating from AOL accounts.

Is this horse dead yet?
I think so.

--
Wielder of the mighty +1 LARTsaber of Unsubscribe Instructions At End of 
Message,
the +3 Clue-by-Four of No Attachments to a Mailing List,
and the -4 Shield of No Spell Checker

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

2003-06-17 Thread John P Verel


On 06/18/03 06:05 +1000, Peter Kiem wrote:
> > I am a home user, running stock Red Hat 9, using Sendmail.  The only
> > "server" software I run on this box is MySQL, for local use only.  I do
> > not run any DHCP sofware on this machine.  My ISP, Cablevision, does.
> > So, this AOL policy blocks ALL Optonline subscribers from sending to any
> > AOL customer.  This is grossly offensive by AOL.
> 
> Sorry John, no it doesn't.  If you are on a DHCP assigned address then you
> should be relaying email through your ISP not directly out.

That is what I'm doing.

> 
> If you are using your ISP's mailserver then you have no problems emailing
> AOL.

Well, I do.  What I've not yet read in this thread is how I (a
developer, not a mail guru) can do to fix this... if anything.


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Encrypting filesystem?

2003-06-17 Thread Benjamin J. Weiss

Hello!

I've searched the archives, but the last time that I can find that this 
issue was addressed was back in 2001, so I thought I'd check for updates.

I'm looking for a (hopefully easy) way to set up an AES encrypted 
partition on my RedHat 9 system.  I have a clean drive to use, and I do 
not want to patch the kernel, because then my RedHat Network won't keep 
track of my kernel updates (I know, I know, I'm not a true guru, I'm 
still learning this stuff. :))

I've found references to the loop-AES and looked at it a bit.  I'm 
cautious about replacing several system utilities, but if that's the only 
way, I'll give it a shot.  What the heck, might be a good chance to see if 
my backup strategy is actually working! ;)

I saw references to having encrypted filesystems available in the next 
kernel release.  If that's the case, and it's due out in the not to 
distant future, I could hold off.

Thanks!

Ben Weiss


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: bonding 2 DSL lines.

2003-06-17 Thread Ian Mortimer

> /usr/src/linux/Documentation/networking/bonding.txt
> Among other things (on my RH8 system). I have no idea how well this
> works or how much PITA.

It works very well and is simple to setup.  But it only works for
ethernet and requires a corresponding configuration on the switch.

It has to be a single switch and it has to support etherchannel,
link aggregation, port trunking, channel bonding (or whatever other 
name the switch manufacturer decided to call it).

The alternative, if you have intel cards, is Intel's Advanced Networking 
Software (possibly you only need one intel card to get this to work).

Hard to see how bonding could work for 2 DSL lines (but I've never tried
it).  Might be possible with the intel software depending on the DSL setup.


-- 
Ian
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]Ian Mortimer
 Tel: +61 7 3365 3436 Physics
 Fax: +61 7 3365 1242 University of Queensland



-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 16:47, Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:
> Bret Hughes wrote:
> 
> > It is analogous to spending 30 minutes in a security line at an airport
> > and having to check your pocket knife because of the terrorist activity
> > in our current environment.  
> > 
> > Bret
> > 
> > 
> 
> Sorry, that's BS. Had those passengers eigher A) been more ballsy or B) 
> been allowed to have weapons, some fuck heads with BOX CUTTERS wouldn't 
> have been able to hijack a fucking plane.
> 
No argument there.

> Your analogy is also not quite correct. Instead of trying to kill 
> incoming spam (almsot impossible), ISP's NEED to focus on killing 
> INTERNAL spam. Spam also needs to become LESS profitable then it is, but 
> that'll never happen 'cause it is measurably effective.
> 
I figured that I was stretching the point a little bit but the main
theme holds true I believe.  There is inconvienince for some due to the
actions of a nefarious group of jerks working on their own agenda.

I also believe that a lot of isps do try an limit the amount of spam
emerging from their servers.  If that was not the case then spammers
would not need to use dynamic accounts for launching their attacks.

Looking through my spam folder to which  procmail sends all stuff tagged
by spamassassin I see a lot of stuff from various names but niether the
the originating machine or the first server if it did not go straight to
verio (my webhosting co) have nothing to  do with yahoo bigfoot or aol
even though return email address indicates that is where the user is. 

This leads me to believe that they are either using someone else's open
relay or sending direct and that is exactly what aol is trying to stop. 
The open relays get blacklisted sooner or later :) and aol is being
proactive in stopping the direct guys.

Is this horse dead yet?

Bret

-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

Hi Brett,

> what about the mail command? Doesn't it send directly to smtp servers?
> It is only running for the time it takes to send the mail.

OK granted, but you are sending emails to your relatives on AOL using the
mail command?

What a masochist :)

> Now that I look at it it appears to call send mail.  Looks like it calls
> sendmail.

Yes usually it is a wrapper to a proper MTA.

-- 
Regards,
+-+-+
| Peter Kiem.^.   | E-Mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
| Zordah IT /V\   | Mobile: +61 0414 724 766|
|   IT Consultancy &  /(   )\ | WWW   : www.zordah.net  |
|   Internet Hosting   ^^-^^  | ICQ   : "Zordah" 81 |
+-+-+
   My current spamtrap address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]



-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: bonding 2 DSL lines.

2003-06-17 Thread Hal Burgiss

On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 05:32:59PM -0400, Jeff Bearer wrote:
> 
> Does something like this exist and I simply didn't look in the right
> place?

$locate bonding

/usr/src/linux/Documentation/networking/bonding.txt

[...]

/usr/src/linux/drivers/net/bonding.c
/usr/src/linux/drivers/net/bonding.o

[...]

Among other things (on my RH8 system). I have no idea how well this
works or how much PITA.

-- 
Hal Burgiss
 


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: SYSFONT Question

2003-06-17 Thread Stephen Kuhn

On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 22:08, Tom wrote:

> So I changed  SYSFONT="latarcyrheb-sun16"
> to SYSFONT="fixed"  just to see if it would make any difference.
> 
> It worked!  Text looks good now, but I do get a failure on boot when
> it
> try's to set DEFAULT FONT.  Says cannot find font "fixed".
> 
> Since it works, this does not appear to be a problem, but what other
> fonts could I put in the i18n file that would work?
> 
> Thanks,
>Tom

SYSFONT=lat0-16

...this seems to work when all else fails...(at least for me...)
-- 
Wed Jun 18 08:50:01 EST 2003
 08:50:01 up 4 days, 16:04,  4 users,  load average: 0.36, 0.36, 0.23
-
|____  |kuhn media australia|
|   /-oo /| |'-.   |http://kma.0catch.com   |
|  .\__/ || |   |  ||
|   _ /  `._ \|_|_.-'  |stephen kuhn|
|  | /  \__.`=._) (_   | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
-
 linux user #:267497 linux machine #:194239 * MDK 9.1 & RH 7.3  
 Mandrake Linux Kernel 2.4.21-11mdk Cooker for i586
-
 * This message was composed on a 100% Microsoft free computer *

Help a man when he is in trouble and he will remember you when he is in trouble again
-- Sad Truths of Life n7


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

John Nichel wrote:
Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:

Daryl Hunt wrote:

- Original Message -
From: "Michael Kalus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>




I wouldn't mind having my own fixed IP but they are hard to come by 
these
days.




I bought mine.


They aren't exactly cheap though. For me to get a static IP from my 
current ISP would cost me $300+ a MONTH.


Jesus.  With I-55, you get one static on for $50 a month (this includes 
your connection to the net), and additional statics are only $10 a month 
more.


No kidding. I forgot to mention they DON'T offer static IP's to 
residential customers at all. Sucks hard.

--
Wielder of the mighty +1 LARTsaber of Unsubscribe Instructions At End of 
Message,
the +3 Clue-by-Four of No Attachments to a Mailing List,
and the -4 Shield of No Spell Checker

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

2003-06-17 Thread John Nichel

Peter Kiem wrote:
Hi John,


(my account has one static and 5 dynamic ip's).  I use the static for my
business website, my mail server is on one of the dynamic ip's, and a


Why don't you run your mailserver on the same IP as your website?  They can
co-exist happily you know :)
Regards,
+-+-+
| Peter Kiem.^.   | E-Mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
| Zordah IT /V\   | Mobile: +61 0414 724 766|
|   IT Consultancy &  /(   )\ | WWW   : www.zordah.net  |
|   Internet Hosting   ^^-^^  | ICQ   : "Zordah" 81 |
+-+-+
   My current spamtrap address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yeah, I had it set up like that when we only had one IP, but I must 
tinker.  :)

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

2003-06-17 Thread John Nichel

Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:
Daryl Hunt wrote:

- Original Message -
From: "Michael Kalus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


I wouldn't mind having my own fixed IP but they are hard to come by 
these
days.


I bought mine.


They aren't exactly cheap though. For me to get a static IP from my 
current ISP would cost me $300+ a MONTH.
Jesus.  With I-55, you get one static on for $50 a month (this includes 
your connection to the net), and additional statics are only $10 a month 
more.

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

2003-06-17 Thread John Nichel

Daryl Hunt wrote:

No gray area at all.  You are running a Dynamic IP which will not pass the
Reverse DNS lookup many email servers (including mine) will do when you
attempt to send it.


My mail server does have reverse DNS.  At least that is what DynDNS.org 
states...DNS isn't my strong point.

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 06:18:06AM +1000, Peter Kiem wrote:
> OK that is fine but a large majority of spam is sent from dynamic IP
> addresses which are NOT open relays but just used to spew out millions of
> emails to the rest of us poor suckers.
> 
In other words, ALL the ISP's you peer with are not doing what they need
to do to keep spammers from using their access points to attack,
penetrate and use other systems as mail relays.

Gee - what would happen if you actually verified who a person was before
giving them an account?

ISP's don't do anything to prevent thousands of
spammers from getting access to internet, and then they claim they have to
shut down normal rfc-correct practices because the spammers are causing
you so much pain.

They should just stop peering with any ISP who doesn't verify the real
identity of their customers before giving them an account.

The real reason spammers exist is the ISP's. The ISP's are so worried
about getting every possible penny out of every possible client that
they won't even use the identity verification tools ALREADY AVAILABLE
from the credit card services to keep the spammers off the net.

How about re-writing your peering arrangements so that any ISP who fails
to do proper identity checks and cross checks against a database of
spammers loses their peering privileges.  

This would, of course, cost money, so it won't happen.  

It would also, of course, mean most of the third world ISP's would lose
peering for a while, until they got their houses in order.

heh - So would AOL, I think.  :-)

Spammers would then (as they are already doing), pay other people to let
them use their accounts to send spam with and those folks would also go
in the database.  Too bad.

> Those of us that have to process THOUSANDS of emails every day know the
> VALUE of rejected dynamic address SMTP for cutting down the junk.

I agree it is a practical approach to reducing spam, but it is pretty
much contrary to the original design and intent of the Internet.

Switch to Bayesian filtering.  Much smarter.  You can even use it on 
the customer sign up process.  :-)   You can use Bayesian filters on
just about anything.  (Its similar, in a crude way, to the tools used 
to perform speech recognition.)

Then once you've identified a customer as a repeat spammer, I think
its very appropriate to use a tactical nuke.  ;-)

-- 
Jeff Kinz, Open-PC, Emergent Research,  Hudson, MA.  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
copyright 2003.  Use is restricted. Any use is an 
acceptance of the offer at http://www.kinz.org/policy.html.
Don't forget to change your password often.

-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: Mail Conversion

2003-06-17 Thread Kostas Sfakiotakis

Greetings Rober ,

Robert Jones wrote:
On Monday 16 June 2003 01:45 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Message: 28
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 02:44:44 +0300
From: Kostas Sfakiotakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Mail Conversion
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

All i want to ask is , if there is a simple way to convert
Mozilla mailboxes to KDE Mail or visa versa ( whichever is
more simple ) .  I have Mozilla 1.4 and KDE Mail 1.4.3 ( Using
KDE 3.0.5a-0.73.1 ) . I currently use Redhat 7.3
Thanks in advance for your time
Kind Regards,
   Kostas

I'm using Kmail 1.4.1 (as you can see -- duh --) which accomodates both 
mbox and maildir formats. 
Well i have Kmail 1.4.3 but i guess this doesn't affect things much.
The mbox flat files can be copied 'tween Kmail
and Netscape (or Mozilla). Of course, index files will have to be 
rebuilt by the destination program. Within Kmail, mail can be moved 
between boxes using different formats. 
So, assume you want to consolidate your mail in Kmail and that you 
accepted the default of maildir for your mailboxes. (Settings --> 
Configure Kmail --> Miscellaneous ).  Simply create "Inbox2" and 
configure **only that box** to use the mbox format. (Folder --> Create 
then type the name and choose Mbox from the drop-down). Now you can copy 
your Mozilla Inbox file to ~/Mail/Inbox2 . Now, you can select the 
Inbox2 folder in Kmail and, after Kmail has finished building its index, 
read the mail you just copied from Mozilla.  Once the mail is accessible 
by Kmail, you can move messages between the two dissimilar boxes in the 
same manner as you move SPAM to the trash box.
Now let's see if i got things straight . You mean that Mozilla actually
uses mbox format files to store email and by using the procedure you
describe i can port them to Kmail
For example i take the Transiberian :
 /root/.mozilla/root/a4337ieb.slt/Mail/mypop3server and copy it
under a  newly created folder Inbox2 under /root/Mail
Correct ?
Really, the most difficult part is trying to remember the path to the 
Mozilla Inbox.
Tell me about that .

Kind Regards,
  Kostas

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

Bret Hughes wrote:

It is analogous to spending 30 minutes in a security line at an airport
and having to check your pocket knife because of the terrorist activity
in our current environment.  

Bret


Sorry, that's BS. Had those passengers eigher A) been more ballsy or B) 
been allowed to have weapons, some fuck heads with BOX CUTTERS wouldn't 
have been able to hijack a fucking plane.

Your analogy is also not quite correct. Instead of trying to kill 
incoming spam (almsot impossible), ISP's NEED to focus on killing 
INTERNAL spam. Spam also needs to become LESS profitable then it is, but 
that'll never happen 'cause it is measurably effective.

--
Wielder of the mighty +1 LARTsaber of Unsubscribe Instructions At End of 
Message,
the +3 Clue-by-Four of No Attachments to a Mailing List,
and the -4 Shield of No Spell Checker

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 16:00, Peter Kiem wrote:
> Joseph,
> 
> > You awesome too much. For one thing, I don't run an MTA (nor a web
> > server anymore due to the high CPU demand of RH9). But I do have
> > relatives I might possibly be unable to email because of AOL's shit
> > policy. I think it's very relevant.
> 
> If you don't run an MTA then how do you email your relatives?  Through your
> ISP's mailserver of course!
> 

How do you get it to the isp? and MTA of course.

Bret


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 16:10, Jeff Kinz wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 06:05:33AM +1000, Peter Kiem wrote:
> > > I am a home user, running stock Red Hat 9, using Sendmail.  The only
> > > "server" software I run on this box is MySQL, for local use only.  I do
> > > not run any DHCP sofware on this machine.  My ISP, Cablevision, does.
> > > So, this AOL policy blocks ALL Optonline subscribers from sending to any
> > > AOL customer.  This is grossly offensive by AOL.
> > 
> > Sorry John, no it doesn't.  If you are on a DHCP assigned address then you
> > should be relaying email through your ISP not directly out.
> 
> 
> Can you explain why a DHCP address shoud not do a direct SMTP connect please?
> 
> After all a direct smtp connect is faster and and the protocol was
> designed to allow it.
> 

The issue is that spammers do it since they are not allowed to use valid
smtp relays once some figures out what is going on.  You on the other
hand have a alternative, your isp.  It is not quite stopping you from
communicating but does cause you do perhaps experience some lag.  One of
the things I miss is the ability to go into the maillog and see that the
mail was accepted by a domain's mail server and when.

It is analogous to spending 30 minutes in a security line at an airport
and having to check your pocket knife because of the terrorist activity
in our current environment.  

Bret

-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

Peter Kiem wrote:
Hi Joseph,


It's very safe to assume that, but it's not always the case. On occasion
I've been known to pop open pine and send an email from there.


And pine does direct to remote SMTP email?  Doubt it.  Surely you had to
configure a POP3 and SMTP server in Pine so it knew how to send/receive?
I've been through the configure for Pine, I don't think it does remote 
mail at all.



If they are just blocking all residential IP's, then any mail I send
would be blocked (I haven't actually had issue to send my Aunt an email
as of late) as all MY mail would have MY IP attached.


No it would have your ISP's mailserver's IP address.  Yours would only be in
the headers of the email but the connection doesn't come from your IP
address!
True.

--
Wielder of the mighty +1 LARTsaber of Unsubscribe Instructions At End of 
Message,
the +3 Clue-by-Four of No Attachments to a Mailing List,
and the -4 Shield of No Spell Checker

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

RE: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

2003-06-17 Thread Randy Perkins

On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 15:18, Michael Kalus wrote:

> AOL is NOT doing a reverse lookup all they are doing is seeing that the IP
> address belongs to an upstream provider and is not part of their "declared"
> mail servers and drops the message.
> 

if you do a reverse lookup on your ip address,
does it have dhcp in it. ?
??

mine does

it is like
dhcp16613035.indy.rr.com

i just assummed aol is rejecting any mail from ip who's
reverse lookup contains the word 'dhcp'

as far as i know
my ip address or range of addresses is not on a blacklist

if i wanted to spam
all i would have to do is change my network card,
request a new lease from thier dhcp server,
and i would get a new ip address.
spam away for awhile

then when i am done,
within 12 hours,
re install my original network card,
and i would get my old ip address back.

i can see how it cuts down on spam
but it does make my life harder.

see ya
randy

-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

bonding 2 DSL lines.

2003-06-17 Thread Jeff Bearer

I can't find an application that will allow me to equalize traffic
across two DSL lines such as this router does.

http://www.nexland.com/turbo.cfm

I understand why it's tricky and it wouldn't work with the normal
networking stack. But I'm surprised that nobody has some kernel module
or that can handle it.

The problem is that EQL only works with point to point connections, the
default route needs to be the EQL device, which means both ethernet
devices don't have default routes, so they can't get out of their
respective subnets.

I don't expect to find magic, but with the proper kernel module, I'd
assume that you could configure the real interfaces so they are handled 
where they are seperate and both can be configured with default routes,
but not visible to the system and not in the route table etc., then
create the virtual shared interface that looks like a normal linux
interface, that the system uses just like any ethernet interface.

Does something like this exist and I simply didn't look in the right
place?

-- 
Jeff Bearer, RHCE
Webmaster, PittsburghLIVE.com


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

Hi Joseph,

> Completely agreed, and your second option is very nice indeed.
> 
> I just wish I could buy a static IP for less then $300/month!

Yeah I hear ya :(

Regards,
+-+-+
| Peter Kiem.^.   | E-Mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
| Zordah IT /V\   | Mobile: +61 0414 724 766|
|   IT Consultancy &  /(   )\ | WWW   : www.zordah.net  |
|   Internet Hosting   ^^-^^  | ICQ   : "Zordah" 81 |
+-+-+
   My current spamtrap address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

Hi Jeff,

> > Sorry John, no it doesn't.  If you are on a DHCP assigned address then
you
> > should be relaying email through your ISP not directly out.
>
> Can you explain why a DHCP address shoud not do a direct SMTP connect
please?
>
> After all a direct smtp connect is faster and and the protocol was
> designed to allow it.

Because it is abused and there is no recourse for the recipient.

The fact is that 99% of email sent from DHCP addresses is SPAM!  If you want
to run a mailserver then do it properly!

The same way there are laws as to what you can drive on the roads in
whatever country you live in.  Why don't we all drive go karts as they would
be cheaper and the roads are designed to allow it :)

Regards,
+-+-+
| Peter Kiem.^.   | E-Mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
| Zordah IT /V\   | Mobile: +61 0414 724 766|
|   IT Consultancy &  /(   )\ | WWW   : www.zordah.net  |
|   Internet Hosting   ^^-^^  | ICQ   : "Zordah" 81 |
+-+-+
   My current spamtrap address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

Hi Joseph,

> It's very safe to assume that, but it's not always the case. On occasion
> I've been known to pop open pine and send an email from there.

And pine does direct to remote SMTP email?  Doubt it.  Surely you had to
configure a POP3 and SMTP server in Pine so it knew how to send/receive?

> If they are just blocking all residential IP's, then any mail I send
> would be blocked (I haven't actually had issue to send my Aunt an email
> as of late) as all MY mail would have MY IP attached.

No it would have your ISP's mailserver's IP address.  Yours would only be in
the headers of the email but the connection doesn't come from your IP
address!

Regards,
+-+-+
| Peter Kiem.^.   | E-Mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
| Zordah IT /V\   | Mobile: +61 0414 724 766|
|   IT Consultancy &  /(   )\ | WWW   : www.zordah.net  |
|   Internet Hosting   ^^-^^  | ICQ   : "Zordah" 81 |
+-+-+
   My current spamtrap address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

Bret Hughes wrote:
On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 14:11, rm wrote:

It's of course their right to block whatever they want, but I too believe it to
be both poor business and ineffective spam control. Aol lost 1 million subscribers in the
last 6 months, and are projected to lose another 1 million in the next 6 months.
They must be doing something wrong.

I have to say something here. While I have never subscribed to AOL I
have an inkling of what it must be like to have such a large network. I

Having turned completely to the Dark Side once (I was using WinME AND
AOhelL), I can tell you EXACTLY why they are losing so many userse to
Real ISP's(TM).

1) When you log on, a banner ad automatically pops up. You can only turn
this off for a set period of time, then it's back.

2) Passwords are forced to be short. Even with an alphanumeric password,
my account was getting hacked on a WEEKLY basis (changed pw each time
and I never downloaded anything off the AOL network) for sending spam to
other AOL users.

3) Their tech support people are ultra-aggressive about keeping you as a
customer no matter WHAT. I was talked out of leaving TWICE before I told
them to fuck off (no seriously, I believe I told them the service is
shit and to literally fuck off). Even then they tried to get me to stay.
Two months AFTER I "unsubscribe" I get a "past due" bill for $77 (the
past due being the two months it took them to send me the bill, even
though I was unsubbed (btw, I have yet to pay it)).

I can tell you this, that come hell or high water I will never use AOL
again. I don't care if they were the last ISP on the planet. I'd rather
use my computer to write viruses in Perl to exploit purposely made
security holes on my computer.

Like Luke Skywalker from the SW's novels that come after Episode VI (in
one series, he is actually turned to the Dark Side, but he fights his
way back), I shall never turn to the Dark Side again. The power/ease is
an illusion.

--
Wielder of the mighty +1 LARTsaber of Unsubscribe Instructions At End of
Message,
the +3 Clue-by-Four of No Attachments to a Mailing List,
and the -4 Shield of No Spell Checker

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 15:38, Peter Kiem wrote:
> Michael, Michael, Michael,
> 
> > Try telnetting to your mailserver on port 25, you can send the message
> > directly, no server on your end involved. It's all plain Text.
> >
> > All an SMTP Server does is follow the protocol but any human being can do
> > the same thing, it's all plain text.
> 
> You miss my point.  You are telnetting to a REMOTE server using the SMTP
> protocol.
> Anyone not running a local mailserver can do that.  So what?
> 
> If your dynamically assigned IP address is sending SMTP traffic directly to
> remote hosts on the Internet (instead of only to your ISP) then either you
> are:
> 
> 1) Running a local SMTP ***SERVER*** on/behind that IP address
> 2) You are doing a LOT of telnets :)
> 

what about the mail command? Doesn't it send directly to smtp servers? 
It is only running for the time it takes to send the mail. 

Now that I look at it it appears to call send mail.  Looks like it calls
sendmail.

Bret


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 06:10:52AM +1000, Peter Kiem wrote:
> Hi John,
> 
> > (my account has one static and 5 dynamic ip's).  I use the static for my
> > business website, my mail server is on one of the dynamic ip's, and a
> 
> Why don't you run your mailserver on the same IP as your website?  They can
> co-exist happily you know :)

Until the traffic gets heavy.  then it makes sense to split the
functions to different machines. (Ask Drew).  However you can have more
than one machine appear to be the same IP, so there is a way to work
that. (Again, Ask Drew! :-) )



> 
> Regards,
> +-+-+
> | Peter Kiem.^.   | E-Mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
> | Zordah IT /V\   | Mobile: +61 0414 724 766|
> |   IT Consultancy &  /(   )\ | WWW   : www.zordah.net  |
> |   Internet Hosting   ^^-^^  | ICQ   : "Zordah" 81 |
> +-+-+
>My current spamtrap address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> -- 
> redhat-list mailing list
> unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
> 

-- 
Jeff Kinz, Open-PC, Emergent Research,  Hudson, MA.  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
copyright 2003.  Use is restricted. Any use is an 
acceptance of the offer at http://www.kinz.org/policy.html.
Don't forget to change your password often.


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 06:08:10AM +1000, Peter Kiem wrote:
> Jeff,
> 
> > "server" being forbidden certainly appears in my TOS, but just being
> > smtp capable, incoming or outgoing does not a server make.
> >
> > Don't confuse the use of certain protocols with running servers.  They
> > are not the same thing.
> 
> What protocol is used to send email?  SMTP!
> Where does your mail client use SMTP to?  A SMTP ***SERVER***
> 
> For you to be sending out SMTP traffic directly to AOL you have to be
> running some sort of mailserver so yes you are running a server and in
> violation of your TOS.

Hi Peter,

Sorry - no.  there are literally over 30 programs capable of running
smtp protocol which are not servers and cannot be classified as MTA's
either.   How is using these programs a violation of the TOS?

You and Drew are the ones playing semenatic games by trying to equate
the use of SMTP to be equal to a server.

It isn't.

I understand the practical aspects for an ISP using this
"killing a rabbit with tactical nuke" approach" but from an engineering
point of view its sheer laziness and innapropriate.

I have noticed in the many versions of this discussion I have seen and
participated in that the people who think it "OK" almost always work
for an ISP, or were people who didn't know how to protect their own
systems from spammers.

The majority of end-users who use SMTP are almost always thinking the
opposite.

> 
> Regards,
> +-+-+
> | Peter Kiem.^.   | E-Mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
> | Zordah IT /V\   | Mobile: +61 0414 724 766|
> |   IT Consultancy &  /(   )\ | WWW   : www.zordah.net  |
> |   Internet Hosting   ^^-^^  | ICQ   : "Zordah" 81 |
> +-+-+
>My current spamtrap address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> -- 
> redhat-list mailing list
> unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
> 

-- 
Jeff Kinz, Open-PC, Emergent Research,  Hudson, MA.  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
copyright 2003.  Use is restricted. Any use is an 
acceptance of the offer at http://www.kinz.org/policy.html.
Don't forget to change your password often.

-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

2003-06-17 Thread rm

On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 14:57, Michael H. Warfield wrote:

> > While they may be running MAPS or SPEWS also, what they are doing here
> > is different.  They are blocking (as explained to me) ALL IP's that
> > they've defined as "residential."  My IP doesn't show up in MAPS or
> > SPEWS, but my mail is still rejected from aol.
> 
>   Really?  Have you checked DULS?  


Yes,

And so far as I can tell, only aol has routinely bounced our mail.


-- 
rm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: Unable to convert root file system to ext3

2003-06-17 Thread Paul F. Williams

That was the solution.  I did not realize that you
needed to recreate the initrd-xxx since there was
one there already.  Thanks for reiterating the
proper procedure.
paulw


Message: 21
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 20:34:02 +0200
From: Michael Schwendt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Unable to convert root file system to ext3
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 17 Jun 2003 12:19:02 -0500, Paul F. Williams wrote:

> I recently upgraded a redhat system from 7.1 to 7.2
> and unfortunately must have missed the opportunity
> to convert from ext2 to ext3 during the upgrade.
>
> Later I happened to notice that it still was using
> ext2 so went through the steps to convert to ext3
> that I found on the internet.  There seemded to be some
> disagreement  whether the root file system could be converted
> while mounted or whether you needed to boot from the
> 7.2 system cd and then convert.
>
> In any case, I originally ran the following command
> while root was mounted.
>
> For the root file system
>
> /sbin/tune2fs -j /dev/ida/c0d0p8
>
> /sbin/tune2fs -c 0 -i 0 /dev/cida/c0d0p8
>
> Also, I changed the /etc/fstab to mount an ext3 file system.
>
> When the system boots it will only mount / as an ext2 file
> system, but it does mount all the others as ext3.
Did you re-create your initrd after changing /etc/fstab to
ext3?
If not, look in /boot and read "man mkinitrd".


--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

Peter Kiem wrote:
Because eventually I want to run a web hosting/design business and I
think it's cheaper to re-invent the wheel (you learn a helluva lot mroe
too) then pay $300+ month for decent, reliable hosting (I say
$300+/month because my company is also going to be hosting an extremely
high band width site in the near future).


So get a box in a co-location which is completely under your control.  You
can set up the webserver, email server etc yourself.
You can either get a service where they run the servers and you just
subscribe to it or you can get a service where you provide the machine and
all they do is put it in the racks, hook it up to power and the Internet.
Either way **IS** better than running it on dynamically assigned addresses!
Completely agreed, and your second option is very nice indeed.

I just wish I could buy a static IP for less then $300/month!

--
Wielder of the mighty +1 LARTsaber of Unsubscribe Instructions At End of 
Message,
the +3 Clue-by-Four of No Attachments to a Mailing List,
and the -4 Shield of No Spell Checker

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 06:05:33AM +1000, Peter Kiem wrote:
> > I am a home user, running stock Red Hat 9, using Sendmail.  The only
> > "server" software I run on this box is MySQL, for local use only.  I do
> > not run any DHCP sofware on this machine.  My ISP, Cablevision, does.
> > So, this AOL policy blocks ALL Optonline subscribers from sending to any
> > AOL customer.  This is grossly offensive by AOL.
> 
> Sorry John, no it doesn't.  If you are on a DHCP assigned address then you
> should be relaying email through your ISP not directly out.


Can you explain why a DHCP address shoud not do a direct SMTP connect please?

After all a direct smtp connect is faster and and the protocol was
designed to allow it.


> 
> If you are using your ISP's mailserver then you have no problems emailing
> AOL.
> 
> Regards,
> +-+-+
> | Peter Kiem.^.   | E-Mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
> | Zordah IT /V\   | Mobile: +61 0414 724 766|
> |   IT Consultancy &  /(   )\ | WWW   : www.zordah.net  |
> |   Internet Hosting   ^^-^^  | ICQ   : "Zordah" 81 |
> +-+-+
>My current spamtrap address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> -- 
> redhat-list mailing list
> unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
> 

-- 
Jeff Kinz, Open-PC, Emergent Research,  Hudson, MA.  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
copyright 2003.  Use is restricted. Any use is an 
acceptance of the offer at http://www.kinz.org/policy.html.
Don't forget to change your password often.


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:
Michael H. Warfield wrote:

On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 03:25:06PM -0500, Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:


Unfortunately I am without funds to do so. The cheapest DSL access 
(offered by local telco co-op) is approx. $30 more a month then our 
cable modem, otherwise I would (and be happily running websites off 
my box, or not, RH9 sucks up a shit load of resources)


Typical...

Champagne taste...  Beer budget...  I fail to see the point.
You want "A" and can't aford "A" so you purchase "B" and complaint that
"B" doesn't give you "A".  Not relevant.
Mike


You awesome too much. For one thing, I don't run an MTA (nor a web 
server anymore due to the high CPU demand of RH9). But I do have 
relatives I might possibly be unable to email because of AOL's shit 
policy. I think it's very relevant.

Correction: awesome = assume

--
Wielder of the mighty +1 LARTsaber of Unsubscribe Instructions At End of 
Message,
the +3 Clue-by-Four of No Attachments to a Mailing List,
and the -4 Shield of No Spell Checker

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

Peter Kiem wrote:
Joseph,


You awesome too much. For one thing, I don't run an MTA (nor a web
server anymore due to the high CPU demand of RH9). But I do have
relatives I might possibly be unable to email because of AOL's shit
policy. I think it's very relevant.


If you don't run an MTA then how do you email your relatives?  Through your
ISP's mailserver of course!
It's very safe to assume that, but it's not always the case. On occasion 
I've been known to pop open pine and send an email from there.

So for you the whole thing is a non-issue or are you telling me that AOL is
blocking your ISP?
If they are just blocking all residential IP's, then any mail I send 
would be blocked (I haven't actually had issue to send my Aunt an email 
as of late) as all MY mail would have MY IP attached.

--
Wielder of the mighty +1 LARTsaber of Unsubscribe Instructions At End of 
Message,
the +3 Clue-by-Four of No Attachments to a Mailing List,
and the -4 Shield of No Spell Checker

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

Hi Brett,

> and if AOL can work with other ISPs to take an aggressive stance to
> eliminate as much of it as possible I say more power to them.  Perhaps

The problem is they are controlling the spam coming IN to them, not OUT from
them!
We need all the large ISPs to tackle the problem BOTH ways!

Regards,
+-+-+
| Peter Kiem.^.   | E-Mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
| Zordah IT /V\   | Mobile: +61 0414 724 766|
|   IT Consultancy &  /(   )\ | WWW   : www.zordah.net  |
|   Internet Hosting   ^^-^^  | ICQ   : "Zordah" 81 |
+-+-+
   My current spamtrap address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

> Because eventually I want to run a web hosting/design business and I
> think it's cheaper to re-invent the wheel (you learn a helluva lot mroe
> too) then pay $300+ month for decent, reliable hosting (I say
> $300+/month because my company is also going to be hosting an extremely
> high band width site in the near future).

So get a box in a co-location which is completely under your control.  You
can set up the webserver, email server etc yourself.

You can either get a service where they run the servers and you just
subscribe to it or you can get a service where you provide the machine and
all they do is put it in the racks, hook it up to power and the Internet.

Either way **IS** better than running it on dynamically assigned addresses!

Regards,
+-+-+
| Peter Kiem.^.   | E-Mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
| Zordah IT /V\   | Mobile: +61 0414 724 766|
|   IT Consultancy &  /(   )\ | WWW   : www.zordah.net  |
|   Internet Hosting   ^^-^^  | ICQ   : "Zordah" 81 |
+-+-+
   My current spamtrap address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

Joseph,

> You awesome too much. For one thing, I don't run an MTA (nor a web
> server anymore due to the high CPU demand of RH9). But I do have
> relatives I might possibly be unable to email because of AOL's shit
> policy. I think it's very relevant.

If you don't run an MTA then how do you email your relatives?  Through your
ISP's mailserver of course!

So for you the whole thing is a non-issue or are you telling me that AOL is
blocking your ISP?

Regards,
+-+-+
| Peter Kiem.^.   | E-Mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
| Zordah IT /V\   | Mobile: +61 0414 724 766|
|   IT Consultancy &  /(   )\ | WWW   : www.zordah.net  |
|   Internet Hosting   ^^-^^  | ICQ   : "Zordah" 81 |
+-+-+
   My current spamtrap address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 14:11, rm wrote:
> It's of course their right to block whatever they want, but I too believe it to
> be both poor business and ineffective spam control.  Aol lost 1 million subscribers 
> in the 
> last 6 months, and are projected to lose another 1 million in the next 6 months.
> They must be doing something wrong.
> 

I have to say something here.  While I have never subscribed to AOL I
have an inkling of what it must be like to have such a large network.  I
remember being in Raliegh at the linux conference a few years ago right
after aol bought netscape.  One of the speakers was a netscape exec who
had been given some title like chief techology officer or some such
thing and I will never forget the comment that he made.  To paraphrase:

"I know guys who are really great technologists and are pretty smug
about designing and maintaining a network that has tens of thousands of
users.  I got my first glimpse into a real network in my first aol
meeting after the merger and they were talking about TEN MILLION
simultaneous users of the network.  Do not be fooled, these guys know
what they are doing."

Of course that speaks to the technical expertise and not the business
side :)

I think one could postulate that spam is the bane of the internet user
and if AOL can work with other ISPs to take an aggressive stance to
eliminate as much of it as possible I say more power to them.  Perhaps
the AOL marketing dept decided that spam was one of the primary reasons
folks were leaving and THAT is the reason for the aggressive stance.  If
they can reduce each users spam count by 1 per day that is approx 30
Million emails a day that don't have to get processed by the system and
probably saves a couple of man years.  Hmmm lets look:

assumption: each spam mail takes 30 seconds of user time - DLing reading
deleting, etc.

30M /2 - 15 million man minutes
15M man minutes/1440 minutes/day = 10416 man days
10416 man days /365 days / year = 28.5 man years saved for each spam
message not sent to all users.

Agressive spam prevention seems like a laudable goal when I see it in
those terms.

Not sure why I got on this rabbit trail sorry for the wasted time but
sense I wrote it, I am going to send it.

Bret 

-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

Drew Weaver wrote:
Unfortunately I am without funds to do so. The cheapest DSL access 
(offered by local telco co-op) is approx. $30 more a month then our 
cable modem, otherwise I would (and be happily running websites off my 
box, or not, RH9 sucks up a shit load of resources)



In these scenarios I always wonder why people dont look to Co-Location
and/or Dedicated servers instead of trying to reinvent the wheel at their
own facility, its alot less headaches and generally more reliable due to
the multimillion dollar power/ac/connectivity.
Thanks,
-Drew

Because eventually I want to run a web hosting/design business and I 
think it's cheaper to re-invent the wheel (you learn a helluva lot mroe 
too) then pay $300+ month for decent, reliable hosting (I say 
$300+/month because my company is also going to be hosting an extremely 
high band width site in the near future).

--
Wielder of the mighty +1 LARTsaber of Unsubscribe Instructions At End of 
Message,
the +3 Clue-by-Four of No Attachments to a Mailing List,
and the -4 Shield of No Spell Checker

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:

Not always possible. Only have the cable company, Co-op telco (Baby Bell 
called Ben Lomand Rural Telephone Co-Op (although they now also operate 
in the city (to compete with Citizens/Frontier I imagine))), and 
Frontier (a Citizens Communications Company). From BLomand, a DSL line 
(from which I can run servers from my box all I want, although I'm not 
sure if they assign dynamic or static IP's) is $30 more a month then 
what we (me and my parents) are currently playing (as soon as I find 
some work though we ARE switching), and Frontier is at LEAST 460/month 
more AND we'd have to switch to their telephone service (sorry, 
EXTREMELY happy with BLomand which is cheaper all around then Frontier).

Correction: 460/month = $60/month

--
Wielder of the mighty +1 LARTsaber of Unsubscribe Instructions At End of 
Message,
the +3 Clue-by-Four of No Attachments to a Mailing List,
and the -4 Shield of No Spell Checker

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

Hi Michael,

> > OK that is fine but a large majority of spam is sent from
> > dynamic IP addresses which are NOT open relays but just used
> > to spew out millions of emails to the rest of us poor suckers.
>
> So we have tons of people out there who have their windows machines wide
> open and are getting infected by worms, maybe we should just completely
shut
> those people off the net?

Hell if they are that poor an admin to be infected by worms that usually
exploit OLD vunerabilities then HELL YES they deserve to be ignored on the
Internet!

Try having your mailserver bombarded by thousands of machines around the
world from such poor people as you describe and you won't have any sympathy
for them.

I routinely firewall consistent spammers so they cannot even get through to
my mailserver.  I only block port 25 though so it is only email I ignore
from them.  This is perfectly legitimate defence against mail "attacks" in
my books.

> > Not only does being on the dynamic IP address make it hard to
> > track down who is responsible but also makes it hard to block
> > effectively.
> >
>
> My ISP has names associated with all the IP addresses, those names are in
> return my customer ID. So far my IP has changed only when I moved,
otherwise
> it remained the same and even if I would move and get a new IP according
to
> my DNS Rcord by my ISP you could identify me (and anybody else on the
> network).

So your ISP changes the reverse DNS of your IP address every time you shift
to a new IP address?

> > Add to that the people on dynamic addresses who THINK they
> > know how to set up mailservers but don't have a clue about
> > proper configuration and security.  This makes open relays
> > and adds even more problems.
>
> I think most people who know this don't even set them up on purpose. If
you
> install certain Windows development packages you get IIS, and with IIS you
> get a mailserver and that thing was (in the past) by default open.

And the rest of us should suffer because of this?  I think not!

> > The fact is, if you are running a mailserver then you should
> > be doing it from a static IP address which makes you easily
> > identified if there is a problem so you can either fix it or
> > we can ignore your server if you wont.
> >
>
> You could do the same thing: Email comes in on a dynamic address, see if
it
> is an open relay. Even easier: Only do it if you get a certain amount of
> addresses it is delivering to or x amount of connections in y period of
> time.

But it is NOT JUST OPEN RELAYS that spew out this garbage!  You seem
obsessed that the only place spam comes from is open relays!  A lot of spam
comes from machines that are dynamically assigned addresses that are NOT
open relays.
You cannot block them cause they shift around.  If they are on static IP
addresses they are easy to firewall and/or code reject rules in your
mailserver to ignore that particular problem IP address.

> In both cases you have the same effect without closing the door on
> everybody.

Nope, not the same thing.

> > So use your ISP's mail relay.  That is what they are for!
>
> Which (ironically enough) doesn't allow me to relay with my OWN domain
name.
> I can only relay with my ISP's domain name which sort of makes that thing
> useless to me.

OK that's bugger then.  So look for:
1) A web hosting company who can host your domain and email on a static IP
address for you!
2) Find a few friends and share a co-location box?

> > It is normally the home users that get steamed up about not
> > allowing dynamic IP addresses to send email because their
> > occaisonal email gets rejected.
>
> I just find it very irritating that I am accused of having an open relay
> when I don't. And those "blanket approach" to spam fighting doesn't seem
to
> work, looking at my mailbox every day.

Again with the open relay obsessiveness!  You are not being accused of being
an open relay.  You are being accused of running a mailserver on a
"residential" class IP address.
They are not the same thing my friend.

Regards,
+-+-+
| Peter Kiem.^.   | E-Mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
| Zordah IT /V\   | Mobile: +61 0414 724 766|
|   IT Consultancy &  /(   )\ | WWW   : www.zordah.net  |
|   Internet Hosting   ^^-^^  | ICQ   : "Zordah" 81 |
+-+-+
   My current spamtrap address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

Michael H. Warfield wrote:
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 03:25:06PM -0500, Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:

Unfortunately I am without funds to do so. The cheapest DSL access 
(offered by local telco co-op) is approx. $30 more a month then our 
cable modem, otherwise I would (and be happily running websites off my 
box, or not, RH9 sucks up a shit load of resources)


	Typical...

Champagne taste...  Beer budget...  I fail to see the point.
You want "A" and can't aford "A" so you purchase "B" and complaint that
"B" doesn't give you "A".  Not relevant.
	Mike
You awesome too much. For one thing, I don't run an MTA (nor a web 
server anymore due to the high CPU demand of RH9). But I do have 
relatives I might possibly be unable to email because of AOL's shit 
policy. I think it's very relevant.

--
Wielder of the mighty +1 LARTsaber of Unsubscribe Instructions At End of 
Message,
the +3 Clue-by-Four of No Attachments to a Mailing List,
and the -4 Shield of No Spell Checker

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

> So we have tons of people out there who have their windows machines wide
> open and are getting infected by worms, maybe we should just completely
shut
> those people off the net?

Sounds ok to me.

> My ISP has names associated with all the IP addresses, those names are in
> return my customer ID. So far my IP has changed only when I moved,
otherwise
> it remained the same and even if I would move and get a new IP according
to
> my DNS Rcord by my ISP you could identify me (and anybody else on the
> network).

Alot of ISPs used to run software that automatically updated your PTR record
based on your userid for example if you logged into ip 10.0.1.7, the PTR for
10.0.1.7
would be userid.isp.net that way it was easy to identify who it was, until
people
started using that as a method of privacy invasion, off the top of my head i
could think
of 30 reasons why THIS is a bad idea.

> I think most people who know this don't even set them up on purpose. If
you
> install certain Windows development packages you get IIS, and with IIS you
> get a mailserver and that thing was (in the past) by default open.

This doesn't make it OK.

> I don't think may Linux distributions are a lot better in that regards
> either.

It's really about the same these days, but Linux distros were FIRST in
security by default as
a standard practice.

> You could do the same thing: Email comes in on a dynamic address, see if
it
> is an open relay. Even easier: Only do it if you get a certain amount of
> addresses it is delivering to or x amount of connections in y period of
> time.

You'd invariably get false positives, but you always do so i guess that isnt
a valid arguement.

> In both cases you have the same effect without closing the door on
> everybody.

It just boils down to odds, odds are probably 7/10 of MTAs running on DHCP
assigned addresses are either misconfigured, or used for spam.

> Which (ironically enough) doesn't allow me to relay with my OWN domain
name.
> I can only relay with my ISP's domain name which sort of makes that thing
> useless to me.

Your ISPs server probably only accepts outbound mail for their own domain,
this
is a tactic to prevent from spoofing the from: field.

> I just find it very irritating that I am accused of having an open relay
> when I don't. And those "blanket approach" to spam fighting doesn't seem
to
> work, looking at my mailbox every day.

Well, would you rather we just let it fly? Eventually the current iteration
of the 'net
is going to be a waste of time unless something is done.

> I know what you are going through because I had your job at one point in
> time as well. So you're preaching (in my case) to the choir :)

I hear ya.

-Drew



-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

Peter Kiem wrote:
They aren't exactly cheap though. For me to get a static IP from my
current ISP would cost me $300+ a MONTH.
Then by god get a new ISP.


Not always possible I guess.

FWIW, 8 static IPs on my DSL service cost $100 a YEAR!
Damn

It is worth shopping around.

Not always possible. Only have the cable company, Co-op telco (Baby Bell 
called Ben Lomand Rural Telephone Co-Op (although they now also operate 
in the city (to compete with Citizens/Frontier I imagine))), and 
Frontier (a Citizens Communications Company). From BLomand, a DSL line 
(from which I can run servers from my box all I want, although I'm not 
sure if they assign dynamic or static IP's) is $30 more a month then 
what we (me and my parents) are currently playing (as soon as I find 
some work though we ARE switching), and Frontier is at LEAST 460/month 
more AND we'd have to switch to their telephone service (sorry, 
EXTREMELY happy with BLomand which is cheaper all around then Frontier).

--
Wielder of the mighty +1 LARTsaber of Unsubscribe Instructions At End of 
Message,
the +3 Clue-by-Four of No Attachments to a Mailing List,
and the -4 Shield of No Spell Checker

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

Figured you may find our stats interesting:

these are messages we have rejected since 00:00 (EST) here.

1 SMTP Exceeded Hard Error Limit after HELO
1 SMTP invalid [EMAIL PROTECTED]
2 SMTP Exceeded Hard Error Limit after CONNECT
4 ACL mta_clients_relay
6 SMTP Exceeded Hard Error Limit after MAIL
6 ACL from_senders_clueless
7 ACL [EMAIL PROTECTED]
7 ACL mta_clients_senders_regexp
7 SMTP unauthorized pipelining
18 ACL helo_hostnames
18 SMTP invalid [EMAIL PROTECTED]
39 ACL mta_clients_slet
45 SMTP Exceeded Hard Error Limit after DATA
93 ACL to_recipients_dead
113 ACL mta_clients_bogus
131 ACL to_local_recipients unknown recipient
132 ACL unauthorized relay
230 ACL mta_clients_blaksender
253 ACL from_senders_nxdomain
633 ACL mta_clients_dead
1028 SMTP sender address verification in progress
1075 ACL from_senders_black
1364 DNS timeout for MTA PTR hostname (forged @sender.domain)
2507 ACL from_senders_slet
3238 ACL from_senders_black_regexp
3527 DNS no A/MX for @sender.domain
4322 RBL rbl-plus.mail-abuse.org
4706 SMTP sender address undeliverable
5469 ACL from_senders_imgfx
5580 DNS nxdomain for MTA PTR hostname (forged @sender.domain)
6087 ACL mta_clients_bw
11741 SMTP sender address unverifiable
106831 SMTP Exceeded Hard Error Limit after RCPT
333818 ACL to_relay_recipients unknown recipient <-- dictionary attacks

493039 TOTAL

We're a high traffic site.

-Drew

- Original Message - 
From: "Drew Weaver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 4:32 PM
Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be
OT]


> > Add to that the people on dynamic addresses who THINK they know how to
set
> > up mailservers but don't have a clue about proper configuration and
> > security.  This makes open relays and adds even more problems.
>
> You'd be surprised what a MCSE does for people.
>
> > Those of us that have to process THOUSANDS of emails every day know the
> > VALUE of rejected dynamic address SMTP for cutting down the junk.
>
> I'm glad someone understands this perspective here, I was beginning to
think
> I was the
> only one.
>
> -Drew
>
>
> -- 
> redhat-list mailing list
> unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
>


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

Michael, Michael, Michael,

> Try telnetting to your mailserver on port 25, you can send the message
> directly, no server on your end involved. It's all plain Text.
>
> All an SMTP Server does is follow the protocol but any human being can do
> the same thing, it's all plain text.

You miss my point.  You are telnetting to a REMOTE server using the SMTP
protocol.
Anyone not running a local mailserver can do that.  So what?

If your dynamically assigned IP address is sending SMTP traffic directly to
remote hosts on the Internet (instead of only to your ISP) then either you
are:

1) Running a local SMTP ***SERVER*** on/behind that IP address
2) You are doing a LOT of telnets :)

Regards,
+-+-+
| Peter Kiem.^.   | E-Mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
| Zordah IT /V\   | Mobile: +61 0414 724 766|
|   IT Consultancy &  /(   )\ | WWW   : www.zordah.net  |
|   Internet Hosting   ^^-^^  | ICQ   : "Zordah" 81 |
+-+-+
   My current spamtrap address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: Limit users to home folders

Drew Weaver wrote:

I have created users who are in the users group on a Red Hat 8.0 server.
They have bash shell login.  How do I restrict users to their home
folders?  I don't want them to be able to leave their home folders.
Thanks


You may want to be careful how exactly you manage this because in the past
i've seen Jails so tight that the users couldnt even access their shell ;-)
which
basically makes the whole thing pointless.
;-)

-Drew


The chroot jail HOW-TO on TLDP[0] explains how to setup a proper jail. 
It's a very tedious and manual process (although I imagine it COULD be 
possible to automate the process) which I (being as inept as I really 
am) have actually had limited success in setting up.

--
Wielder of the mighty +1 LARTsaber of Unsubscribe Instructions At End of 
Message,
the +3 Clue-by-Four of No Attachments to a Mailing List,
and the -4 Shield of No Spell Checker

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]


> Chucks servers at moongroup.com were the first ones to bite me on this
> well over a year ago.  I ended up routing everything through my isp
> (SBC) because IIUC my mailserver at the office on a machine called
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and masqueraded behind the static ip address
> of our firewall would fail to resolve.  Same thing on my laptop named
> bretsony.

In your scenario all that would be required is to ensure that the 'NET
FACING' IP
(aka the DMZ address) has proper PTR and A Records, we do this for some of
our
ISDN customers, they have a Pipeline 75 router /w 1 Static IP but they have
like a /24
of Non routable (NAT IPs). As long as the IP of their Pipeline 75 is
properly configured
in DNS, they dont have an issue.

-Drew


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 03:25:06PM -0500, Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:

:

> >>They aren't exactly cheap though. For me to get a static IP from my
> >>current ISP would cost me $300+ a MONTH.


> >Then by god get a new ISP.

> >-Drew


> Unfortunately I am without funds to do so. The cheapest DSL access 
> (offered by local telco co-op) is approx. $30 more a month then our 
> cable modem, otherwise I would (and be happily running websites off my 
> box, or not, RH9 sucks up a shit load of resources)

Typical...

Champagne taste...  Beer budget...  I fail to see the point.
You want "A" and can't aford "A" so you purchase "B" and complaint that
"B" doesn't give you "A".  Not relevant.

Mike
-- 
 Michael H. Warfield|  (770) 985-6132   |  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  /\/\|=mhw=|\/\/   |  (678) 463-0932   |  http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/
  NIC whois:  MHW9  |  An optimist believes we live in the best of all
 PGP Key: 0xDF1DD471|  possible worlds.  A pessimist is sure of it!


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

> Unfortunately I am without funds to do so. The cheapest DSL access 
> (offered by local telco co-op) is approx. $30 more a month then our 
> cable modem, otherwise I would (and be happily running websites off my 
> box, or not, RH9 sucks up a shit load of resources)
> 

In these scenarios I always wonder why people dont look to Co-Location
and/or Dedicated servers instead of trying to reinvent the wheel at their
own facility, its alot less headaches and generally more reliable due to
the multimillion dollar power/ac/connectivity.

Thanks,
-Drew


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Red Carpet 2.0.1 on RedHat 9.0

Is anyone else having problems updating their systems via RedCarpet? I'm 
trying to update only three packages at a time (because I'm being 
limited to 5KB/sec on RC's end) and right now, I'm not able to even 
start the process of retrieving those files (whether I run it as root or 
a priviledged RC user).
--
Wielder of the mighty +1 LARTsaber of Unsubscribe Instructions At End of 
Message,
the +3 Clue-by-Four of No Attachments to a Mailing List,
and the -4 Shield of No Spell Checker

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

RE: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

2003-06-17 Thread Michael Kalus

> > I do run my own mailserver, it does NOT relay and if you try it you 
> > get dropped with an error code, I had people try to use it 
> as a relay 
> > but even my own ISP only probes it and then went away when they 
> > realized it was closed.
> 
> OK that is fine but a large majority of spam is sent from 
> dynamic IP addresses which are NOT open relays but just used 
> to spew out millions of emails to the rest of us poor suckers.

So we have tons of people out there who have their windows machines wide
open and are getting infected by worms, maybe we should just completely shut
those people off the net?


> 
> Not only does being on the dynamic IP address make it hard to 
> track down who is responsible but also makes it hard to block 
> effectively.
> 

My ISP has names associated with all the IP addresses, those names are in
return my customer ID. So far my IP has changed only when I moved, otherwise
it remained the same and even if I would move and get a new IP according to
my DNS Rcord by my ISP you could identify me (and anybody else on the
network).


> Add to that the people on dynamic addresses who THINK they 
> know how to set up mailservers but don't have a clue about 
> proper configuration and security.  This makes open relays 
> and adds even more problems.
> 

I think most people who know this don't even set them up on purpose. If you
install certain Windows development packages you get IIS, and with IIS you
get a mailserver and that thing was (in the past) by default open.

I don't think may Linux distributions are a lot better in that regards
either.



> The fact is, if you are running a mailserver then you should 
> be doing it from a static IP address which makes you easily 
> identified if there is a problem so you can either fix it or 
> we can ignore your server if you wont.
> 

You could do the same thing: Email comes in on a dynamic address, see if it
is an open relay. Even easier: Only do it if you get a certain amount of
addresses it is delivering to or x amount of connections in y period of
time.

In both cases you have the same effect without closing the door on
everybody.


> > I wouldn't mind having my own fixed IP but they are hard to come by 
> > these days.
> 
> So use your ISP's mail relay.  That is what they are for!
> 

Which (ironically enough) doesn't allow me to relay with my OWN domain name.
I can only relay with my ISP's domain name which sort of makes that thing
useless to me.

> 
> It is normally the home users that get steamed up about not 
> allowing dynamic IP addresses to send email because their 
> occaisonal email gets rejected.
> 

I just find it very irritating that I am accused of having an open relay
when I don't. And those "blanket approach" to spam fighting doesn't seem to
work, looking at my mailbox every day.


> Those of us that have to process THOUSANDS of emails every 
> day know the VALUE of rejected dynamic address SMTP for 
> cutting down the junk.
> 

I know what you are going through because I had your job at one point in
time as well. So you're preaching (in my case) to the choir :)

M.


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 04:21:35PM -0400, Drew Weaver wrote:
> > I don't think they check for the reverse lookup matching the forward.
> > If they do, it will break way too many legitimate servers. They may
> > be bouncing mail with NO reverse lookup (I do that myself)

> Technically it is not legitimate unless the A matches the PTR record. No 2
> ways about it.

Many ways about it.  In fact, it's total bullshit.

There is NO one-to-one mapping of A records and PTR records.  No
two ways about it.  A given IP address may have many names associated
with it (that's a given with name based virtual hosting).  By the same
token, a given name may have many IP addresses associated with it (that's
a given with server farms and mirrors and back systems).  There is NO
one to one mapping of A records and PTR records.

Now, you could loop on A and PTR records and see if you ever
achieve a resolution...

Host "foo" has IP addresses that include "IP-A".

"IP-A" has PTR record to name "bar".

Name "bar" has IP addresses that include "IP-B".

"IP-B" has PTR record to name "bar".

Loop complete.  Where do you terminate loop?  How deep before
loop terminates with failure?

> > Sounds like they may be using the MAPS (Mail Abuse Prevention System)
> > DUL (Dial Up Listing). Most of the addresses on this list were
> > reported to the list by the ISP's responsible for them. And lots of
> > systems other than AOL use this list.
> 
> Yeah, but ISPs are constantly adding new pools, phasing out old pools et
> cetera, the ISPs
> may not even own this block of IP anymore and it could be assigned to a
> Co-Lo someplace
> and peoples' mail could be getting rejected because sometime in the past it
> was announced
> as a DUL pool.
> 
> > If they are using the MAPS DUL, they are in good company and it does
> > stop a lot of spam. Not as much as it used to, but still quite a bit.
> > Enough so that most spammers are now abusing open proxies rather than
> > sending direct to mx or using open relays.
> 
> This is true, with the advent of the vulnerability that SQL slammer abused,
> I've
> seen countless instances of people injecting masked port 25 proxies into
> windows
> machines. Its probably the most common vulnerability i've seen abused in the
> last
> 2-3 months.
> 
> -Drew
> 
> 
> -- 
> redhat-list mailing list
> unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

-- 
 Michael H. Warfield|  (770) 985-6132   |  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  /\/\|=mhw=|\/\/   |  (678) 463-0932   |  http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/
  NIC whois:  MHW9  |  An optimist believes we live in the best of all
 PGP Key: 0xDF1DD471|  possible worlds.  A pessimist is sure of it!


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

> Add to that the people on dynamic addresses who THINK they know how to set
> up mailservers but don't have a clue about proper configuration and
> security.  This makes open relays and adds even more problems.

You'd be surprised what a MCSE does for people.

> Those of us that have to process THOUSANDS of emails every day know the
> VALUE of rejected dynamic address SMTP for cutting down the junk.

I'm glad someone understands this perspective here, I was beginning to think
I was the
only one.

-Drew


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 04:14:16PM -0400, Drew Weaver wrote:

> Yeah, lets play the symantics game. If your computer is acting as a MTA,
> then you're running a SMTP server, thus violating the ToS of your ISP(in
> your case).

Ok...  Let's play the semantics game.  Your workstation can use
SMTP as a mail transport without running a MTA daemon.  The spammers
do it all the time on their throwdown dynamic addresses which is
EXACTLY WHAT GOT US IN THIS MESS.  No server required.

> Thanks,
> -Drew

Mike
-- 
 Michael H. Warfield|  (770) 985-6132   |  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  /\/\|=mhw=|\/\/   |  (678) 463-0932   |  http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/
  NIC whois:  MHW9  |  An optimist believes we live in the best of all
 PGP Key: 0xDF1DD471|  possible worlds.  A pessimist is sure of it!

pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

> Jeff,
>
> > "server" being forbidden certainly appears in my TOS, but just being
> > smtp capable, incoming or outgoing does not a server make.
> >
> > Don't confuse the use of certain protocols with running servers.  They
> > are not the same thing.
>
> What protocol is used to send email?  SMTP!
> Where does your mail client use SMTP to?  A SMTP ***SERVER***
>
> For you to be sending out SMTP traffic directly to AOL you have to be
> running some sort of mailserver so yes you are running a server and in
> violation of your TOS.
>

I guess I need to update our ToS to include the phrase "if you are running
an MTA"

instead of mail server, to make Jeff happy. ;-)

-Drew


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 14:22, Daryl Hunt wrote:
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "Drew Weaver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 1:02 PM
> Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be
> OT]
> 
> 
> > Thats not true really, I am employed at an ISP and our Forwards and
> reverses
> > all match, and we have a /19.
> 
> Let's not compare credentials here. It would be just a pissing match.  You
> may think I am wrong but if you send your message to any of my servers and
> it bounced from AOL, it will bounce on mine as well   .
> 

Can't this an issue that either the hostname of the sending machine does
not match the reverse lookup of the ipaddress that sent it  and not that
the ipaddress (static or other wise) of the internet connection does not
have a correct reverse entry?

Chucks servers at moongroup.com were the first ones to bite me on this
well over a year ago.  I ended up routing everything through my isp
(SBC) because IIUC my mailserver at the office on a machine called
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and masqueraded behind the static ip address
of our firewall would fail to resolve.  Same thing on my laptop named
bretsony.

Just a thought.

Bret

-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

Drew Weaver wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Michael Kalus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


I wouldn't mind having my own fixed IP but they are hard to come by
these

days.


I bought mine.
They aren't exactly cheap though. For me to get a static IP from my
current ISP would cost me $300+ a MONTH.


Then by god get a new ISP.

-Drew


Unfortunately I am without funds to do so. The cheapest DSL access 
(offered by local telco co-op) is approx. $30 more a month then our 
cable modem, otherwise I would (and be happily running websites off my 
box, or not, RH9 sucks up a shit load of resources)

--
Wielder of the mighty +1 LARTsaber of Unsubscribe Instructions At End of 
Message,
the +3 Clue-by-Four of No Attachments to a Mailing List,
and the -4 Shield of No Spell Checker

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

> While they may be running MAPS or SPEWS also, what they are doing here
> is different.  They are blocking (as explained to me) ALL IP's that
> they've defined as "residential."  My IP doesn't show up in MAPS or
> SPEWS, but my mail is still rejected from aol.
>
I feverently advise against using SPEWS, they have admittedly in the past
added netblocks of people they "just dont like" to their list because they
could.
Doesn't seem like a good bunch of guys, oh and once you're actually LISTED
in
SPEWS its almost impossible to get out of it, which means 99% of their
listings
are out of date and/or for personal reasons (i.e. you disagree with them on
N.A.N.A.E)

-Drew


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

> > They aren't exactly cheap though. For me to get a static IP from my
> > current ISP would cost me $300+ a MONTH.
> 
> Then by god get a new ISP.

Not always possible I guess.

FWIW, 8 static IPs on my DSL service cost $100 a YEAR!

It is worth shopping around.

Regards,
+-+-+
| Peter Kiem.^.   | E-Mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
| Zordah IT /V\   | Mobile: +61 0414 724 766|
|   IT Consultancy &  /(   )\ | WWW   : www.zordah.net  |
|   Internet Hosting   ^^-^^  | ICQ   : "Zordah" 81 |
+-+-+
   My current spamtrap address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: Limit users to home folders



> I have created users who are in the users group on a Red Hat 8.0 server.
> They have bash shell login.  How do I restrict users to their home
> folders?  I don't want them to be able to leave their home folders.
>
> Thanks

You may want to be careful how exactly you manage this because in the past
i've seen Jails so tight that the users couldnt even access their shell ;-)
which
basically makes the whole thing pointless.

;-)

-Drew


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

> I don't think they check for the reverse lookup matching the forward.
> If they do, it will break way too many legitimate servers. They may
> be bouncing mail with NO reverse lookup (I do that myself)

Technically it is not legitimate unless the A matches the PTR record. No 2
ways about it.

> Sounds like they may be using the MAPS (Mail Abuse Prevention System)
> DUL (Dial Up Listing). Most of the addresses on this list were
> reported to the list by the ISP's responsible for them. And lots of
> systems other than AOL use this list.

Yeah, but ISPs are constantly adding new pools, phasing out old pools et
cetera, the ISPs
may not even own this block of IP anymore and it could be assigned to a
Co-Lo someplace
and peoples' mail could be getting rejected because sometime in the past it
was announced
as a DUL pool.

> If they are using the MAPS DUL, they are in good company and it does
> stop a lot of spam. Not as much as it used to, but still quite a bit.
> Enough so that most spammers are now abusing open proxies rather than
> sending direct to mx or using open relays.

This is true, with the advent of the vulnerability that SQL slammer abused,
I've
seen countless instances of people injecting masked port 25 proxies into
windows
machines. Its probably the most common vulnerability i've seen abused in the
last
2-3 months.

-Drew


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

RE: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

2003-06-17 Thread Michael Kalus

> For you to be sending out SMTP traffic directly to AOL you 
> have to be running some sort of mailserver so yes you are 
> running a server and in violation of your TOS.

Try telnetting to your mailserver on port 25, you can send the message
directly, no server on your end involved. It's all plain Text.

All an SMTP Server does is follow the protocol but any human being can do
the same thing, it's all plain text.

M.


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

RE: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

2003-06-17 Thread Michael Kalus

> >
> > What AOL should do is (if they really want to prevent spam) 
> to go out 
> > to
> the
> > mailserver that makes the connection and see if they can relay to 
> > themselves, if they can then block it, if not let the mail 
> go through.
> 
> They use Reverse DNS Lookup just like the rest of us that run 
> legal servers.
> 

And yet I do bounce. I do have an MX record on my mail server but for a
SUBdomain of my own not on the main domain (out of the simple reason that
the thing is called differently) yet I had it in the past as well that when
I tried to email to AOL it bounces back.

AOL is NOT doing a reverse lookup all they are doing is seeing that the IP
address belongs to an upstream provider and is not part of their "declared"
mail servers and drops the message.


> If your mail is bouncing, it's does not meet the criteria for 
> AOL and any other properly setup Email Server.

I call BS here, I work with a couple of people who configure Mailserver for
a living at a pretty busy website and those servers use RBLs as well as
internal spam filter and the aforementioned open relay test and none of my
messages ever bounced back, in fact it is only AOL who blacklists entire IP
blocks.


M.


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

Hi Michael,

> I do run my own mailserver, it does NOT relay and if you try it you get
> dropped with an error code, I had people try to use it as a relay but even
> my own ISP only probes it and then went away when they realized it was
> closed.

OK that is fine but a large majority of spam is sent from dynamic IP
addresses which are NOT open relays but just used to spew out millions of
emails to the rest of us poor suckers.

Not only does being on the dynamic IP address make it hard to track down who
is responsible but also makes it hard to block effectively.

Add to that the people on dynamic addresses who THINK they know how to set
up mailservers but don't have a clue about proper configuration and
security.  This makes open relays and adds even more problems.

The fact is, if you are running a mailserver then you should be doing it
from a static IP address which makes you easily identified if there is a
problem so you can either fix it or we can ignore your server if you wont.

> I wouldn't mind having my own fixed IP but they are hard to come by these
> days.

So use your ISP's mail relay.  That is what they are for!


It is normally the home users that get steamed up about not allowing dynamic
IP addresses to send email because their occaisonal email gets rejected.

Those of us that have to process THOUSANDS of emails every day know the
VALUE of rejected dynamic address SMTP for cutting down the junk.

Regards,
+-+-+
| Peter Kiem.^.   | E-Mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
| Zordah IT /V\   | Mobile: +61 0414 724 766|
|   IT Consultancy &  /(   )\ | WWW   : www.zordah.net  |
|   Internet Hosting   ^^-^^  | ICQ   : "Zordah" 81 |
+-+-+
   My current spamtrap address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Michael Kalus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> >>I wouldn't mind having my own fixed IP but they are hard to come by
these
> >>days.
> >
> >
> > I bought mine.
>
> They aren't exactly cheap though. For me to get a static IP from my
> current ISP would cost me $300+ a MONTH.

Then by god get a new ISP.

-Drew


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

> > Thats not true really, I am employed at an ISP and our Forwards and
> reverses
> > all match, and we have a /19.
>
> Let's not compare credentials here. It would be just a pissing match.  You
> may think I am wrong but if you send your message to any of my servers and
> it bounced from AOL, it will bounce on mine as well.

The original point someone made implied that they believed the cause of AOL
blocking their mail was
directly related to the lack of PTR records on their IP addresses. As us,
being an ISP with /19 of
Dynamically assigned IP addresses (Dial-up users) can tell you, not all ISPs
that have dynamically assigned
IP address pools are ignoring the standards for DNS.

Thanks,
-Drew



-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]


> On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 02:42:53PM -0400, Drew Weaver wrote:
> > actually, alot of ISPs including one we resell dont allow you to even
make
> > outgoing smtp connections unless you're going to there servers, and I
know
> > that MOST if not all of the Broadband providers in the US for
residential
> > service clearly state that you are NOT to run daemons of any kind on
their
> > service.
>
> Well a daemon is any background process.  If your ISP doesn't allow
> "daemons" then no Windows or *Nix systems can connect to those ISP's
> legally.
>
> By the way - The term daemon does not appear in any of the TOS I've ever
> had.  Perhaps you have it confused with "server"?
>
> "server" being forbidden certainly appears in my TOS, but just being
> smtp capable, incoming or outgoing does not a server make.
>
> Don't confuse the use of certain protocols with running servers.  They
> are not the same thing.
>
Yeah, lets play the symantics game. If your computer is acting as a MTA,
then you're running a SMTP server, thus violating the ToS of your ISP(in
your case).

Thanks,
-Drew


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

Hi John,

> (my account has one static and 5 dynamic ip's).  I use the static for my
> business website, my mail server is on one of the dynamic ip's, and a

Why don't you run your mailserver on the same IP as your website?  They can
co-exist happily you know :)

Regards,
+-+-+
| Peter Kiem.^.   | E-Mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
| Zordah IT /V\   | Mobile: +61 0414 724 766|
|   IT Consultancy &  /(   )\ | WWW   : www.zordah.net  |
|   Internet Hosting   ^^-^^  | ICQ   : "Zordah" 81 |
+-+-+
   My current spamtrap address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Slow Printing

2003-06-17 Thread Jake Colman


HP LaserJet Series II connected directly to a RedHat 7.2 server.  There is a
significant delay for each page to print.  I must have misconfigured
something but what?

TIA!

-- 
Jake Colman 

Principia Partners LLC  Phone: (201) 209-2467
Harborside Financial Center   Fax: (201) 946-0320
902 Plaza Two  E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jersey City, NJ 07311  www.principiapartners.com


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

Jeff,

> "server" being forbidden certainly appears in my TOS, but just being
> smtp capable, incoming or outgoing does not a server make.
>
> Don't confuse the use of certain protocols with running servers.  They
> are not the same thing.

What protocol is used to send email?  SMTP!
Where does your mail client use SMTP to?  A SMTP ***SERVER***

For you to be sending out SMTP traffic directly to AOL you have to be
running some sort of mailserver so yes you are running a server and in
violation of your TOS.

Regards,
+-+-+
| Peter Kiem.^.   | E-Mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
| Zordah IT /V\   | Mobile: +61 0414 724 766|
|   IT Consultancy &  /(   )\ | WWW   : www.zordah.net  |
|   Internet Hosting   ^^-^^  | ICQ   : "Zordah" 81 |
+-+-+
   My current spamtrap address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: Configuring sendmail as a backup relay

2003-06-17 Thread Jake Colman

Steve,

Your instructions were superb and my backup mail exchanger is in place and
working.  Thanks again!

...Jake

-- 
Jake Colman 

Principia Partners LLC  Phone: (201) 209-2467
Harborside Financial Center   Fax: (201) 946-0320
902 Plaza Two  E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jersey City, NJ 07311  www.principiapartners.com


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

> I am a home user, running stock Red Hat 9, using Sendmail.  The only
> "server" software I run on this box is MySQL, for local use only.  I do
> not run any DHCP sofware on this machine.  My ISP, Cablevision, does.
> So, this AOL policy blocks ALL Optonline subscribers from sending to any
> AOL customer.  This is grossly offensive by AOL.

Sorry John, no it doesn't.  If you are on a DHCP assigned address then you
should be relaying email through your ISP not directly out.

If you are using your ISP's mailserver then you have no problems emailing
AOL.

Regards,
+-+-+
| Peter Kiem.^.   | E-Mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
| Zordah IT /V\   | Mobile: +61 0414 724 766|
|   IT Consultancy &  /(   )\ | WWW   : www.zordah.net  |
|   Internet Hosting   ^^-^^  | ICQ   : "Zordah" 81 |
+-+-+
   My current spamtrap address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 02:44:48PM -0500, rm wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 14:23, Ray Abbitt wrote:

> > Sounds like they may be using the MAPS (Mail Abuse Prevention System)
> > DUL (Dial Up Listing). Most of the addresses on this list were 
> > reported to the list by the ISP's responsible for them. And lots of 
> > systems other than AOL use this list. 


> While they may be running MAPS or SPEWS also, what they are doing here
> is different.  They are blocking (as explained to me) ALL IP's that
> they've defined as "residential."  My IP doesn't show up in MAPS or
> SPEWS, but my mail is still rejected from aol.

Really?  Have you checked DULS?  He specifically mentioned it.
You specifically did not.  It specifically targets dynamic ranges
such as xDSL, cable modem, and dialup ranges.

> regis
> -- 
> rm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Mike
-- 
 Michael H. Warfield|  (770) 985-6132   |  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  /\/\|=mhw=|\/\/   |  (678) 463-0932   |  http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/
  NIC whois:  MHW9  |  An optimist believes we live in the best of all
 PGP Key: 0xDF1DD471|  possible worlds.  A pessimist is sure of it!


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

2003-06-17 Thread rm

On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 14:23, Ray Abbitt wrote:

> Sounds like they may be using the MAPS (Mail Abuse Prevention System)
> DUL (Dial Up Listing). Most of the addresses on this list were 
> reported to the list by the ISP's responsible for them. And lots of 
> systems other than AOL use this list. 
> 

While they may be running MAPS or SPEWS also, what they are doing here
is different.  They are blocking (as explained to me) ALL IP's that
they've defined as "residential."  My IP doesn't show up in MAPS or
SPEWS, but my mail is still rejected from aol.

regis
-- 
rm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 12:58:14PM -0600, Daryl Hunt wrote:
Hi Daryl - please fix your email client:  use one line for the
attribution, not four. (I know, MS-Outlook is a pain isn't it?)
> 
> From: "Jeff Kinz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > John is quite correct here.  AOl and many other large ISP's have
> > arbitrarily cut off millions of IP addresses which they have no evidence
> > are the source of SPAM simply because some of those IP's are dynamically
> > assigned. And some of those are sources of SPAM.
> 
> I guess I do it for money also. Yes, I do it to keep the illegal spammers
> from hijacking my Email server to send out the junk I get in my inbox.  Many

You have misunderstood the problem.  This one below was your fault for leaving
your email server open to relay for the entire world.   Should those of
us who are able to keep from relaying email for the worlds spammers be
punished because you messed up ?

> spammers use their Dynamic IPs to transmit that trash.  A simple reverse DNS
> Lookup setting and plugging the relay to anyone outside the database cures
> the problem.  You will not that RH has a very bad problem when you plug the
> holes, you just plugged any hopes of any outside relay.  Not a good thing.

Its just sendmail working the way it was designed.  A Good Thing. (TM)
You want an outside relay? It can be done but you have to specify
who/what is allowed to do it so YOU don't enable spammers to relay thru
you.  Get the bat book from O'Reilly. 

> 
> This has nothing to do with using a Dynamic number at all.  If you have your
> MX record pointed to your static IP or even your dynamic IP, AOL will pass
> the mail test.  

I do and it doesn't.  the Big ISP's are not doing this only on mx
record.  They have specific ranges of IP # they will not accept email
from even if there is an mx record for that ip.

Why?
I could create an mx record for many dynamic IP's I don't own.  So
could you.


> the MX record then it will bounce.  The next time you open your email and
> recieve spam, think about it.  
I don't get spam.  I use the "MIGHTY BOGOFILTER"  FAST, ADAPTIVE, NOT
SUSCEPTIBLE TO FALSE BLACK-LISTINGS!"

Try it - its excellent.
FAQ: http://bogofilter.sourceforge.net/bogofilter-faq.html

> That is how most spam is sent through
> unprotected Servers that have the MX record and the IP properly linked.
WOW, No kidding, Really?  Its only been true since the beginning of
SMTP use on the internet.  In the early days all SMTP servers were wide
open relays, very one of 'em.  Welcome to the internet.
> 
> I completely disagree with the rest of your post when I had one of my email
> server unprotected for about an hour and some spammer from China attempted
> to send over 30k message through it.  All spam and all of them were
> advertising US Companies.

Just goes to show, Some folks should only have email clients. :-)



-- 
Jeff Kinz, Open-PC, Emergent Research,  Hudson, MA.  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
copyright 2003.  Use is restricted. Any use is an 
acceptance of the offer at http://www.kinz.org/policy.html.
Don't forget to change your password often.


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: Limit users to home folders

2003-06-17 Thread Alan Bort

check the following man pages:

man chmod
man chown
man newgrp

and search TLDP for user permissions, file permissions. Basically, what
you have to di is the following: you change the permissions of
everything you don't want them to access using CHMOD. NOTE: this is
highly dangerous... since you might limit access to a ritical file (i.e.
/bin/bash). If you are talking about FTP access, then in your server
config you should be able to tell chroot to some direcotry... In proftpd
you can customize that on a per user basis.

What are you trying to do?

El mar, 17-06-2003 a las 15:03, Ehrhart, Jay escribió:
> I have created users who are in the users group on a Red Hat 8.0 server.
> They have bash shell login.  How do I restrict users to their home
> folders?  I don't want them to be able to leave their home folders.
> 
> Thanks
-- 
Alan Bort
Linux Registered User 298277 -Country Manager- [http://counter.li.org]
[ http://www.linuxquestions.org ] Username: Ciccio
[ http://es.tldp.org ]
Ciccio.-


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

2003-06-17 Thread Ray Abbitt

On 17 Jun 2003, rm wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-06-17 at 13:47, Daryl Hunt wrote:
> > 
> > I run statics that match the DNS MX records.  When a reverse DNS lookup
> > happens, it all matches.  AOL checks this as well as do I.  Too many servers

I don't think they check for the reverse lookup matching the forward. 
If they do, it will break way too many legitimate servers. They may
be bouncing mail with NO reverse lookup (I do that myself)

> > out there are set to relay.  Setup your servers to only be relayed by those
> > people that are in the database.  All others would bounce.  This is also the
> > test that AOL will be using when they do an IP followup.
> 
> This is perfectly prudent behavior; but I don't believe it
> accurately describes what aol is doing.  In my bounced messages it
> clearly states that the message is being bounced because it
> originated from a block of "residential" IP addresses.  This was
> confirmed by an aol customer service rep.  They are apparently using
> a large "residential IP blacklist" - based not on any behavior but
> simply that the IP's are - "residential"

Sounds like they may be using the MAPS (Mail Abuse Prevention System)
DUL (Dial Up Listing). Most of the addresses on this list were 
reported to the list by the ISP's responsible for them. And lots of 
systems other than AOL use this list. 

> It's of course their right to block whatever they want, but I too
> believe it to be both poor business and ineffective spam control.  
> Aol lost 1 million subscribers in the last 6 months, and are
> projected to lose another 1 million in the next 6 months. They must
> be doing something wrong.
> 
If they are using the MAPS DUL, they are in good company and it does
stop a lot of spam. Not as much as it used to, but still quite a bit.
Enough so that most spammers are now abusing open proxies rather than
sending direct to mx or using open relays.

> For what it's worth, I'm not violating my TOS agreement, by running
> a mail server.

I'm not either, but I do have a static IP. 

-ray


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May BeOT]

Daryl Hunt wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Michael Kalus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

I wouldn't mind having my own fixed IP but they are hard to come by these
days.


I bought mine.
They aren't exactly cheap though. For me to get a static IP from my 
current ISP would cost me $300+ a MONTH.

--
Wielder of the mighty +1 LARTsaber of Unsubscribe Instructions At End of 
Message,
the +3 Clue-by-Four of No Attachments to a Mailing List,
and the -4 Shield of No Spell Checker

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]


- Original Message -
From: "Douglas, Stuart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 1:07 PM
Subject: RE: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be
OT]


> I'm sorry to say I tossed the early posts on this topic.  They only
started
> to catch my eye when a member of a Subaru enthusiast forum I monitor was
> complaining about not be able to get on the forum through AOL.

No, it is a good thing you did.  It will show how to setup a server that
passes all the tests and will NOT be placed in the Various Servers Filter
sooner or later.



-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]


- Original Message -
From: "Drew Weaver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 1:02 PM
Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be
OT]


> Thats not true really, I am employed at an ISP and our Forwards and
reverses
> all match, and we have a /19.

Let's not compare credentials here. It would be just a pissing match.  You
may think I am wrong but if you send your message to any of my servers and
it bounced from AOL, it will bounce on mine as well.


>
> -Drew
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Daryl Hunt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 2:50 PM
> Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be
> OT]
>
>
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "John Nichel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 9:20 AM
> > Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May
Be
> > OT]
> >
> >
> > > Drew Weaver wrote:
> > > > Since you're probably violating your ISPs ToS anyway I guess it
doesnt
> > > > matter if AOL doesn't accept your mail.
> > > >
> > > > -Drew
> > >
> > > Yes and no.  I have a business account, and am allowed to run things
> > > such as web servers and mail servers.  In their business TOS, it says
> > > nothing about me running these items on either static or dynamic ip's
> > > (my account has one static and 5 dynamic ip's).  I use the static for
my
> > > business website, my mail server is on one of the dynamic ip's, and a
> > > gateway set up on one of the other dynamics.  Their general TOS does
> > > state that dynamic users (regular home users) can not run these items
> > > though.  So it's kind of a grey area.
> >
> > No gray area at all.  You are running a Dynamic IP which will not pass
the
> > Reverse DNS lookup many email servers (including mine) will do when you
> > attempt to send it.
> >
> > >
> > > I'm not saying that AOL is wrong for this, as I'm sure a ton of SPAM
> > > comes from people running mail servers inside their own house.
> >
> > They aren't wrong anymore than most of the rest of us ISPs are.  The
hits
> > from a certain Cable Company in Bejing would astound you.  The server
will
> > get hit about 5 times a minute from an ip address that ends in 130.  If
> you
> > have an open relay, it will sense it and begin sending spam to the tune
of
> > about 30k a day.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > redhat-list mailing list
> > unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
> >
>
>
> --
> redhat-list mailing list
> unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
>


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]


- Original Message -
From: "Michael Kalus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 12:52 PM
Subject: RE: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be
OT]


> > When a reverse DNS lookup happens, it compares the dns with
> > the IP number. If they are not matched, the mail bounces.
> > Those on Dynamic IPs will bounce on ANY decent server.
>
> Excuse me but that is not what should happen. What if the IP does not have
a
> DNS name associated with it?

Then it bounces.  And that is exactly what should happen.  The MX record can
point to a different IP number than the Port 80 IP number.  But it must
match.


>
> I do run my own mailserver, it does NOT relay and if you try it you get
> dropped with an error code, I had people try to use it as a relay but even
> my own ISP only probes it and then went away when they realized it was
> closed.

Then you have nothing to worry about.

>
> What AOL should do is (if they really want to prevent spam) to go out to
the
> mailserver that makes the connection and see if they can relay to
> themselves, if they can then block it, if not let the mail go through.

They use Reverse DNS Lookup just like the rest of us that run legal servers.


>
> No need to punish the ones who do everything right but who are at the
mercy
> of their ISP.

If your mail is bouncing, it's does not meet the criteria for AOL and any
other properly setup Email Server.


>
> I wouldn't mind having my own fixed IP but they are hard to come by these
> days.

I bought mine.



-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Unable to convert root file system to ext3

2003-06-17 Thread Paul F. Williams

I recently upgraded a redhat system from 7.1 to 7.2
and unfortunately must have missed the opportunity
to convert from ext2 to ext3 during the upgrade.
Later I happened to notice that it still was using
ext2 so went through the steps to convert to ext3
that I found on the internet.  There seemded to be some
disagreement  whether the root file system could be converted
while mounted or whether you needed to boot from the
7.2 system cd and then convert.
In any case, I originally ran the following command
while root was mounted.
For the root file system

/sbin/tune2fs -j /dev/ida/c0d0p8

/sbin/tune2fs -c 0 -i 0 /dev/cida/c0d0p8

Also, I changed the /etc/fstab to mount an ext3 file system.

When the system boots it will only mount / as an ext2 file
system, but it does mount all the others as ext3.
The /var/log/dmesg has the following snippet.

VFS: Mounted root (ext2 filesystem).
SCSI subsystem driver Revision: 1.00
Compaq SMART2 Driver (v 2.4.25)
cpqarray: Device 0x10 has been found at bus 0 dev 1 func 0
cpqarray: Finding drives on ida0 (Integrated Array)
cpqarray ida/c0d0: blksz=512 nr_blks=35553120
cpqarray: Starting firmware's background processing
blk: queue c036cca0, I/O limit 4095Mb (mask 0x)
Partition check:
 ida/c0d0: p1 p2 < p5 p6 p7 p8 p9 p10 >
EXT2-fs warning (device ida0(72,8)): ext2_read_super: mounting ext3 
filesystem as ext2

Freeing unused kernel memory: 120k freed
Adding Swap: 526296k swap-space (priority -1)
Journalled Block Device driver loaded
kjournald starting.  Commit interval 5 seconds
EXT3 FS 2.4-0.9.19, 19 August 2002 on ida0(72,1), internal journal
EXT3-fs: mounted filesystem with ordered data mode.
kjournald starting.  Commit interval 5 seconds
EXT3 FS 2.4-0.9.19, 19 August 2002 on ida0(72,9), internal journal
EXT3-fs: mounted filesystem with ordered data mode.
kjournald starting.  Commit interval 5 seconds
EXT3 FS 2.4-0.9.19, 19 August 2002 on ida0(72,6), internal journal
EXT3-fs: mounted filesystem with ordered data mode.
kjournald starting.  Commit interval 5 seconds
EXT3 FS 2.4-0.9.19, 19 August 2002 on ida0(72,7), internal journal
EXT3-fs: mounted filesystem with ordered data mode.
kjournald starting.  Commit interval 5 seconds
EXT3 FS 2.4-0.9.19, 19 August 2002 on ida0(72,5), internal journal
EXT3-fs: mounted filesystem with ordered data mode.
If I run /sbin/tune2fs -l /dev/ida/c0d0p8
I see
tune2fs 1.26 (3-Feb-2002)
Filesystem volume name:   /
Last mounted on:  
Filesystem UUID:  21301280-5b21-11d5-9ed2-b7f85f4cdd21
Filesystem magic number:  0xEF53
Filesystem revision #:1 (dynamic)
Filesystem features:  has_journal filetype sparse_super
Filesystem state: not clean
Errors behavior:  Continue
Filesystem OS type:   Linux
Inode count:  262752
... etc
I tried numerous things such as
booting from the cd, then
tune2fs -O^has_journal /dev/ida/c0d0p8

fsck.ext2 -f /dev/ida/c0d0p8

mounting /dev/ida/c0d0p8

deleting .journal

unmounting

/sbin/tune2fs -j /dev/ida/c0d0p8

/sbin/tune2fs -c 0 -i 0 /dev/cida/c0d0p8

mkdir /x
mount -t ext3 /dev/ida/c0d0p8 /x
tune2fs -l /dev/ida/c0d0p8
seems to mount cleanly as an ext3 system, but
when I reboot it come up unclean again.
I would welcome any thoughts.

paulw

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

2003-06-17 Thread John P Verel

I am a home user, running stock Red Hat 9, using Sendmail.  The only
"server" software I run on this box is MySQL, for local use only.  I do
not run any DHCP sofware on this machine.  My ISP, Cablevision, does.
So, this AOL policy blocks ALL Optonline subscribers from sending to any
AOL customer.  This is grossly offensive by AOL.

John
On 06/17/03 10:55 -0400, Drew Weaver wrote:
> Do you run a mail server on a DHCP address? this makes perfect sense not to
> accept email from SMTP servers on dynamic addresses.

-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]

On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 02:42:53PM -0400, Drew Weaver wrote:
> actually, alot of ISPs including one we resell dont allow you to even make
> outgoing smtp connections unless you're going to there servers, and I know
> that MOST if not all of the Broadband providers in the US for residential
> service clearly state that you are NOT to run daemons of any kind on their
> service.

Well a daemon is any background process.  If your ISP doesn't allow
"daemons" then no Windows or *Nix systems can connect to those ISP's
legally.

By the way - The term daemon does not appear in any of the TOS I've ever
had.  Perhaps you have it confused with "server"? 

"server" being forbidden certainly appears in my TOS, but just being
smtp capable, incoming or outgoing does not a server make.

Don't confuse the use of certain protocols with running servers.  They 
are not the same thing.

> 
> -Drew
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Jeff Kinz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 12:30 PM
> Subject: Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be
> OT]
> 
> 
> > On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 10:20:55AM -0500, John Nichel wrote:
> > > Drew Weaver wrote:
> > > > Since you're probably violating your ISPs ToS anyway I guess it doesnt
> > > > matter if AOL doesn't accept your mail.
> > > >
> > > > -Drew
> > >
> > > Yes and no.  I have a business account, and am allowed to run things
> > > such as web servers and mail servers.  In their business TOS, it says
> > > nothing about me running these items on either static or dynamic ip's
> > > (my account has one static and 5 dynamic ip's).  I use the static for my
> > > business website, my mail server is on one of the dynamic ip's, and a
> > > gateway set up on one of the other dynamics.  Their general TOS does
> > > state that dynamic users (regular home users) can not run these items
> > > though.  So it's kind of a grey area.
> > >
> > > I'm not saying that AOL is wrong for this, as I'm sure a ton of SPAM
> > > comes from people running mail servers inside their own house.
> >
> > John is quite correct here.  AOl and many other large ISP's have
> > arbitrarily cut off millions of IP addresses which they have no evidence
> > are the source of SPAM simply because some of those IP's are dynamically
> > assigned. And some of those are sources of SPAM.
> >
> > They do this purely for money.  It is not a good practice for two basic
> > reasons:
> >
> > 1.  Using SMTP protocol from your home computer is NOT a
> > violation of your terms of service(TOS).  No where in the
> > TOS does it say you cannot do your own direct outgoing
> > SMTP connections and doing so does not mean you are running
> > a server.
> >
> > 2.  By doing this they are punishing large numbers of innocent
> > internet users in an attempt to harm the guilty.  It is
> > analogous to blowing up everyone in an entire city to kill
> > a few criminals.
> >
> > AOL should not  harm the innocent to punish the guilty especially when
> > there are better, more intelligent ways to keep the SPAM out which does
> > not impact non-spammers.
> >
> > AOL is simply being lazy, and cheap. But, they are, after all, a business.
> > They will always opt for the cheapest way to accomplish their goals.
> > I can't hate them for that, but I do disagree with the policy.
> >
> > Someday, when spamming is a capitol offense, some sanity will return.
> > :-)
> >
> > -- 
> > Jeff Kinz, Open-PC, Emergent Research,  Hudson, MA.  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > copyright 2003.  Use is restricted. Any use is an
> > acceptance of the offer at http://www.kinz.org/policy.html.
> > Don't forget to change your password often.
> >
> >
> > -- 
> > redhat-list mailing list
> > unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> redhat-list mailing list
> unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
> 

-- 
Jeff Kinz, Open-PC, Emergent Research,  Hudson, MA.  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
copyright 2003.  Use is restricted. Any use is an 
acceptance of the offer at http://www.kinz.org/policy.html.
Don't forget to change your password often.


-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: Limit users to home folders

Ehrhart, Jay wrote:
I have created users who are in the users group on a Red Hat 8.0 server.
They have bash shell login.  How do I restrict users to their home
folders?  I don't want them to be able to leave their home folders.
Thanks


Sorry if this a dupe.

Check out TLDP's[0] archives for a chroot jail.

[0]: http://www.tldp.org
--
Wielder of the mighty +1 LARTsaber of Unsubscribe Instructions At End of 
Message,
the +3 Clue-by-Four of No Attachments to a Mailing List,
and the -4 Shield of No Spell Checker

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Re: AOL Now Bouncing DHCP Addresses, Residential Addresses[May Be OT]