I know that there's the option to set myHelo, where we set what helo
is given by assp to the real smtp server.
I don't see a way to control the first 220 line that is presented to
the sender though. I'm talking about a line like:
220 ourrealsmtpserver.domain.org (whatever disclaimer the smtp
On 9/21/2009, K Post (nntp.p...@gmail.com) wrote:
Is this something that might be doable? It would help to obscure the
internal smtp server's information.
Security through obscurity is a waste of time and resources, and at most
only provides a FALSe sense of security.
--
Best regards,
I agree, but this isn't just for security (for which this certainly
wouldn't hurt), but also would allow us to customize each ASSP's
server response, which would be useful in a round robin IP scenario.
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Charles Marcus
cmar...@media-brokers.com wrote:
On
Really Charles?
So, by that equation, I should leave my doors unlocked because I have
a dog in the house???
;-)
Steve
Sent from my iPhone
On 21.09.2009, at 18:49, Charles Marcus cmar...@media-brokers.com
wrote:
On 9/21/2009, K Post (nntp.p...@gmail.com) wrote:
Is this something that
I didn't mean to start an argument - though obviously I'm right :)
I was just asking if it's feasable to add this to the code
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Маллиндайн Стивен (Steve Mallindine)
st...@sc.ru.ru wrote:
Really Charles?
So, by that equation, I should leave my doors
I'm not arguing, just having a heated discussion :-D
But seriuosly, security through obscurity isn't a waste of time if
done properly AND in addition (not replacement of) other security
measures...(that's why god invented firewalls and honeynets :-D )
Steve
Sent from my iPhone
On
On 9/21/2009 11:16 AM, K Post wrote:
I agree, but this isn't just for security (for which this certainly
wouldn't hurt), but also would allow us to customize each ASSP's
server response, which would be useful in a round robin IP scenario.
Well, yeah, but since you didn't mention a round-robin
On 9/21/2009, 0;;8=409= !B825= (Steve Mallindine) (st...@sc.ru.ru) wrote:
So, by that equation, I should leave my doors unlocked because I have
a dog in the house???
Well, since your example has absolutely zero relation to the substance
of my comment...
A better example would be:
So, by
On 9/21/2009, 0;;8=409= !B825= (Steve Mallindine) (st...@sc.ru.ru) wrote:
But seriuosly, security through obscurity isn't a waste of time if
done properly
Other than complicating debugging in case of problems, it doesn't hurt
anything, but port scanning is cheap, and it is simple to detect
Again, I was merely asking a question - didn't mean to heat things up.
The real mail servers are inaccessible from the outside. They're not
port scannable.
I was just hoping to be able to have assp give the first 220 header
and not show the real server's header. That's CLEARLY not easy to do
10 matches
Mail list logo
