Has anyone had any experience with this device? Turntide.com. Looks like a
traffic-shaping device designed specifically for cutting down spammers
throughput to your inbound SMTP servers. My main concern is, how does it
make the distinction between legitimate mass-mailings (e.g.: mailing lists
OK. Make it 100, or make it 20 by default, user can ask for 100. Or
anything else like that. The *POINT* was that too often, a compromised
end-user machine can send *THOUSANDS* of messages. Not tens. Not
hundreds. Thousands.
Here's another way to structure this sort of policy using
a soft
On Wed, 2004-04-07 at 13:18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If any of your user connections is the origin of more than
5 SMTP sessions in a single day, send an email to the
registered contact at that site with a little statistical
summary of the activity. No blocking of sessions, just a
note
Erik Haagsman wrote:
Spammers can only work when making enormous amounts of connections
each hour, so limiting a normal user to 10 connections per hour with
some extra slack after two or three connectionless hours, with an hour
blocking penalty if the user goes over shouldn't pose a problem
On Wed, 2004-04-07 at 14:25, Dave Howe wrote:
I think 10 is a bit low.
It is, although it's more of an example value than a practical one.
You'd have to get some statistics on average e-mail use from your mail
servers and tune the value accordingly.
I am not really an abnormal email user -
which is why many of us have fought so hard against bad solutions. the
baynesian filtering crowd is the worst. it's like treating every illness
with antibiotics... what you end up with is a lot MORE illness in the
medium to longer term, due to antibiotic-immune mutations.
Any content analysis
On 6 Apr 2004, at 05:23, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To succeed against the spammers we need to IGNORE the content
and target the behaviors. Why does your mail server accept
incoming email from unknown and unauthenticated sources?
Why does your mail server allow your customers to relay
more than a
On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 11:02:33 EDT, Joe Abley said:
How do you distinguish between a home user sending twenty legitimate,
real messages per day, and a home user whose PC has been 0wned, and
which is sending twenty illegitimate messages per day?
Back of the envelope handwaving calculation
If you rate-limit 2 million compromised machines to 20 msgs/day each,
there's only 400 million spams. Total.
IF you can rate-limit them across the whole Internet, If you limit 2
million machines to 20 msgs/day per mail server you are back up to your
10 Billion msgs/day mark. This is where
Dan Hollis wrote:
On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you rate-limit 2 million compromised machines to 20 msgs/day each,
there's only 400 million spams. Total.
this implies network operators will suddenly find a clue, something which
will never happen. ever.
Clue is
On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 13:17:53 PDT, Dan Hollis said:
this implies network operators will suddenly find a clue, something which
will never happen. ever.
Death of the Internet Predicted. Film at 11.
Note that *no* anti-spam solution will work unless the network operators
have enough clue to
On Tue, 6 Apr 2004, Petri Helenius wrote:
Dan Hollis wrote:
On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you rate-limit 2 million compromised machines to 20 msgs/day each,
there's only 400 million spams. Total.
this implies network operators will suddenly find a clue, something which
On Apr 5, 2004, at 10:49 AM, Andy Johnson wrote:
Has anyone had any experience with this device? Turntide.com. Looks
like a
traffic-shaping device designed specifically for cutting down spammers
throughput to your inbound SMTP servers. My main concern is, how does
it
make the distinction
From: Matthew Crocker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sounds like YABA (Yet Another Band Aid) solution for spam. If
rate-limiting the spam packets does an effective job at killing spam.
It will only make the spammers switch to a distrubuted attack method
using trojaned virus hosts sending 1 mail
... will only make the spammers switch to a distrubuted attack method
using trojaned virus hosts sending 1 mail message at a time.
switch to? i don't know where you're getting your spam from, but the
spammers switched to that methodology a long long time ago.
The evolution of spam/viruses
On 5 Apr 2004, Paul Vixie wrote:
that's why greylisting has been so effective -- to combat it the
spammers would have to add the one thing they cannot afford: state.
see http://www.rhyolite.com/dcc/ for how to get started.
why is 'state' so hard to afford? they already have a list of email
16 matches
Mail list logo
