[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 01/29/2007 05:53:01
PM:
I'm not even that sure it would help the spam problem. The majority
of the spam I receive these days come via ISP mail servers or open
relays. This may of course simply mean that I'm not receiving a
normal pattern of spam...
I don't think
Rob MacGregor wrote:
On 1/29/07, Ben Kamen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yea, I meant to control port 25 egress from nets like Cable/DSL/Dialup
users...
Me, personally, I'd hate it. I can deliver mail faster and more
reliably (from past experience) than my ISP. When that's not an
option I
Ben Kamen wrote:
Ok, so port:25 blocking still seems to be a bad idea for the
mostpart because ISP's (in general) still do not have their act
together. (and looking at how they spend their money probably never
will.)
Actually, I think blocking port 25 by default is an excellent idea
On Tuesday, January 30, 2007 11:39 AM -0500 David F. Skoll
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, I think blocking port 25 by default is an excellent idea
providing you unblock it if people ask for that. Since the vast
majority of computer users never bother to change defaults, blocking port
25
Kenneth Porter wrote:
On Tuesday, January 30, 2007 11:39 AM -0500 David F. Skoll
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, I think blocking port 25 by default is an excellent idea
providing you unblock it if people ask for that. Since the vast
majority of computer users never bother to change
John Rudd wrote:
For defaults, don't forget IMAP, outbound ssh, outbound passive ftp, and
the other simple ones.
But, yeah... agree in principle. Block all but the REALLY
common/basics, provide a web interface (accessible only from client
networks, not from the outside world) for
HI.
Some important information is still missing, so I will try to complete
the picture
by reading between the lines.
Please correct me if I get anything wrong...
I have a Linux box which is used as a web server and mail server. It
is directly on the web and it serves roughly 60 different
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 09:47:26AM -0800, Kenneth Porter wrote:
Actually, I think blocking port 25 by default is an excellent idea
providing you unblock it if people ask for that. Since the vast
majority of computer users never bother to change defaults, blocking port
25 by default will
On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 02:58:53PM -0500, David F. Skoll wrote:
Philip Prindeville wrote:
Simply saying, One of your customers tried to spam me,
but I rejected it... here are the logs isn't enough. They
insist that I give them a copy of the message
I think that's perfectly reasonable.
I didn't see this cross the MIMEDefang list so I'm forwarding it from the
Dovecot list:
Forwarded Message
Date: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 3:14 PM -0700
From: Esther Schindler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Dovecot] help a journalist: What do you wish
Jan-Pieter Cornet wrote:
If you have a domain, like, example.com, to contact in abuse
cases (eg as learned from reverse DNS), just do a DNS query for
example.com.contacts.abuse.net: TXT records are contact addresses, A
records list the number of contacts, and HINFO tells you if the contact
11 matches
Mail list logo
