--On Tuesday, July 15, 2003 8:17 PM -0600 John Brown
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Nope, I thought it might be operational in nature. ergo
spammers and others now scanning for qmail-smtp-auth patch
users and using those weak sites as a relay.
I think this *is* operational in nature. FYI, we have
Yup, what he said.
yeah, all those lovely home based DSL/Cable/Wireless users with Linux/BSD
qmail-smtp-auth setups thinking they are safe and can relay off of their
nifty box at home / soho.
We
john
On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 01:53:38AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Jul 20
Nope, I thought it might be operational in nature. ergo
spammers and others now scanning for qmail-smtp-auth patch
users and using those weak sites as a relay.
the issue is that those sites will PASS the current "open relay"
check tools and thus not be BLACK LISTED.
Hey, what a cool feature. P
On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 10:46:01AM -0500, Ejay Hire wrote:
> Hi all. I've got a 7206 in a remote collocation facility that's running
> dot1q back to the community switch. When MRTG's cfgmaker only finds
> the physical interface, not the vlan sub interfaces. The other devices
> in the network u
Henry Linneweh wrote:
I simply would like to borrow this /24 if you are not going to use in
the near and distant future or ever for that matter.
It can not be attached to any subdomain and or any or part of any
routing table,
this would most helpful in the development of methods to prevent ddo
I simply would like to borrow this /24 if you are not going to use in the near and distant future or ever for that matter.
It can not be attached to any subdomain and or any or part of any routing table,
this would most helpful in the development of methods to prevent ddos and dos.
Thank you ve
