[swinog] Locking for a old SonicWall to buy
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, I search one of this Sonicwall to buy, if somewehre have one and like to sell it please contact me Offlist. * SonicWall Pro 19 Version * SonicWall Pro 100 19 Version * SonicWall Pro 200 19 Version * SonicWall Pro 300 19 Version Mit freundlichen Grüssen Marcel Stutz Netzwerk Unix Administrator - -- | Genotec Internet Consulting AG | E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hegenheimermattweg 119a | Website : http://www.genotec.ch CH - 4123 Allschwil | Schweiz | | Zentrale: +41 61 487 99 99 - --- | Fax : +41 61 487 99 98 | Support : 0848 321 123 easy[hosting] | 500 MB, unl.Pointings, | Subdomains und E-mails,| Supportanfragen bitte immer an Internetzugang und mehr| [EMAIL PROTECTED] SFr. 150/Jahr | Web: http://support.genotec.ch | - -- -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 8.1 iQA/AwUBQos6Cm67Rst+AWkCEQI2NQCeIrRGyW++1Mlq3gY46zx0nx7h+csAn0Za onZYkCPUETJG1nrtWLCeV7BF =+V5E -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] SPF implementation
Juerg Reimann wrote: To whom it may concern... I've run a little test whether Swiss ISPs use SPF or not and it turned out that very few have actually implemented it (actually, I found not a single one). Is there a reason for that? It's a very simple implementation and it could prevent a lot of damage like the most recent one after Sober.Q. SPF is broken by design. I would suggest ISPs should implement SPF quickly and talk to their customers about it. (See http://spf.pobox.com/ for further information.) How about you start with your domain and your users first and then report back how it went and what problems you encountered? Lead us the way! -- Andre ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
RE: [swinog] SPF implementation
hi juerg sorry to say, but it seems you don't know all the advantages/disadvantages of SPF. SPF validates the domain of the mail envelope return-path. this will lead spammers to use on-time-domains (register skdlfjasldfj24829402.com for that) ;-) at the moment you can only use SPF to verificate, that this user is really allowed to send email/spam/whatever and therefore you just say: ok, it's not spam. so, just use SPF as a additional criteria to your probably spamassassin based spam filter, or do you really deny mails on SPF values? another problem are relayed domains or domains, which are forwarded. the SPF entry will be false for that one. then, how do you solve customers, which use abroad email servers to send their emails? (e.g. customer in germany, uses t-online.de mailerver and yes, i know that ther is a solution called SMTP AUTH - tell this to the customer ,-)) and i'm sure you can fake the headers that you will not use SPF to validate those headers. so, in conclusion it's just a thing that takes the spammer some weeks/days/hours to implement a new solution and start again throwing tons of mails out to the big dark space called internet ;-) just my 2 cents -steven oh, at least you implemented it ;-) -su-2.05b# host -t TXT jworld.ch jworld.ch descriptive text v=spf1 ip4:66.150.163.128/26 ip4:82.195.224.240 ~all -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Juerg Reimann Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 4:01 PM To: swinog@swinog.ch Subject: [swinog] SPF implementation To whom it may concern... I've run a little test whether Swiss ISPs use SPF or not and it turned out that very few have actually implemented it (actually, I found not a single one). Is there a reason for that? It's a very simple implementation and it could prevent a lot of damage like the most recent one after Sober.Q. I would suggest ISPs should implement SPF quickly and talk to their customers about it. (See http://spf.pobox.com/ for further information.) Regards, Juerg Reimann -- jradio.ch St. Jakobstrasse 39 CH-8004 Zürich +41 43 544 07 70 business card: http://jradio.ch/contact/ security keys: http://jradio.ch/pubkeys/ ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] SPF implementation
On Wed, 2005-05-18 at 16:08 +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote: Juerg Reimann wrote: To whom it may concern... I've run a little test whether Swiss ISPs use SPF or not and it turned out that very few have actually implemented it (actually, I found not a single one). Is there a reason for that? It's a very simple implementation and it could prevent a lot of damage like the most recent one after Sober.Q. SPF is broken by design. URL/ref/explaination/fulltext/elaborate? It indeed does not stop spam, it does (partially) stop faking your source email domain, which could partially stop virus spreads, but that would require that a large (75%) of the global is using it. No check somewhere - does not work. I personally would like to see every SMTP box checking that mails are signed per PGP, but that implies other problems too I guess... deployment is the first thing and that other thing called PKI seems to be a long long way on the road to oblivion too. I would suggest ISPs should implement SPF quickly and talk to their customers about it. (See http://spf.pobox.com/ for further information.) How about you start with your domain and your users first and then report back how it went and what problems you encountered? Lead us the way! Well, there is a SPFv1 record on his domain: jworld.ch TXT v=spf1 ip4:66.150.163.128/26 ip4:82.195.224.240 ~all But that ends in a ~all, thus basically the last Sober.Q runs (I assume he means that german propaganda crap of the last couple of days) would not have been 'stopped' because of the above. The ~all would simply mean a softfail, thus the box will accept it, though maybe some spamcheck engine might choose to add some points to the spamscore because of it. The point why I don't have SPF stuff on my domains is simple: IPv6 is not supported well enough, read: it is defined ambiguously and most likely the few boxes that have SPF checking installed won't understand the ip6 directive, thus when sending mail from a domain with the ip6 directive and -all, mail is most likely to end up in nothingness, which is not what one wants, and ~all is simply not adequate. If the above concern would be gone, which will take quite some time, I might add it, as it would save getting my addy used to spam a large number of the ISP's who do check it. Getting those bounces is just a bit annoying even if they end up in the spam folder. Greets, Jeroen signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
[swinog] IP 194.209.131.192 from swisscom in blacklists (blueberry service ?) ?
The IP 194.209.131.192 seems to be from the swisscom-mobile block 194.209.131.192 - 194.209.131.223. And it seems this server is listed in two blacklists. RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB RBL: SORBS: sender is a abuseable web server\n\t [194.209.131.192 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net]\n\t RCVD_IN_CBL_SPAM RBL: Listed in cbl.abuseat.org\n\t [194.209.131.192 listed in cbl.abuseat.org]\n\t This is causing trouble for customers of ours (and swisscom). Martin Martin Blapp, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ImproWare AG, UNIXSP ISP, Zurlindenstrasse 29, 4133 Pratteln, CH Phone: +41 61 826 93 00 Fax: +41 61 826 93 01 PGP: finger -l [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP Fingerprint: B434 53FC C87C FE7B 0A18 B84C 8686 EF22 D300 551E -- ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
RE: [swinog] SPF implementation
It indeed does not stop spam, it does (partially) stop faking your source email domain, which could partially stop virus spreads, but that would require that a large (75%) of the global is using it. No check somewhere - does not work. SPF will only work for scoring, but not for rejecting e-mails. it's like IPv6 - you cannot expect the whole internet and all domain admins to really put SPF in place - so you'll have around 15% of domains which are using SPF and the rest is not using it or even aware of it (implify everywhere ~all). -steven ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] SPF implementation
Hi Juerg, I've run a little test whether Swiss ISPs use SPF or not and it turned out that very few have actually implemented it (actually, I found not a single one). Is there a reason for that? It's a very simple implementation and it could prevent a lot of damage like the most recent one after Sober.Q. Well, we do. We are not quite an ISP, but for most of the domains we host, we have started to apply SPF. Actually, I know that ip-plus has SPF-rules (restrictive) and solnet also does (allow all). I would suggest ISPs should implement SPF quickly and talk to their customers about it. (See http://spf.pobox.com/ for further information.) Most of our users have been victims in the past of forged from addresses and did indeed understand when we proposed to use SPF. The problem is that if big ISPs like bluewin (where most forged mails come from - at least for us) don't implement it, it's hard to catch the fraud. Regards, Jean-Pierre -- HILOTEC Engineering + Consulting GmbH Energietechnik und Datensysteme Tel: +41 34 402 74 00 - http://www.hilotec.com/ ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] IP 194.209.131.192 from swisscom in blacklists (blueberry service ?) ?
Hi all, The IP 194.209.131.192 seems to be from the swisscom-mobile block 194.209.131.192 - 194.209.131.223. And it seems this server is listed in two blacklists. Looks like this is swisscoms wireless service. And they are also listed in spamhaus.org. Martin Blapp, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ImproWare AG, UNIXSP ISP, Zurlindenstrasse 29, 4133 Pratteln, CH Phone: +41 61 826 93 00 Fax: +41 61 826 93 01 PGP: finger -l [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP Fingerprint: B434 53FC C87C FE7B 0A18 B84C 8686 EF22 D300 551E -- ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] IP 194.209.131.192 from swisscom in blacklists (blueberryservice ?) ?
Martin Blapp wrote: Hi all, The IP 194.209.131.192 seems to be from the swisscom-mobile block 194.209.131.192 - 194.209.131.223. And it seems this server is listed in two blacklists. Looks like this is swisscoms wireless service. And they are also listed in spamhaus.org. Hmm... A rather expensive way of spamming... via Mobile. Fürst got desperate? -- Andre ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
[swinog] [***Spam***] hispeed crap was Blutige Selbstjustiz
Hello It would be very nice if some of the listmembers which are using hispeed as provider, would check their computer with an actual virusscanner. Monday Received: from pefvfim.com (217-162-115-194.dclient.hispeed.ch [217.162.115.194]) by melitta.init7.net (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-1) with SMTP id j4GHhS7x017551; Mon, 16 May 2005 19:43:29 +0200 Today Received: from osndbb.ch (217-162-207-74.dclient.hispeed.ch [217.162.207.74]) by groundhog.init7.net (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-1) with SMTP id j4IGlOqj009620; Wed, 18 May 2005 18:47:26 +0200 Kind regards Adrian Senn -- |p mbox: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ | |g mbox: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ASCII ribbon campaign ( )| |www: http://www.senn.ch/ - against HTML email X | | http://www.cevinet.ch/vCards / \| ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
