Hi SwiNOG subscribers,
Hi Swisscom,
As written in SMTP RFCs a mailserver sending to a mailserver should
use port 25 and a client sending to a mailserver (submitting a
composed message) should use submission port 587. So far the approach
in general is a good one, but just the approach, the
Hi SwiNOG subscribers,
Hi Swisscom,
As written in SMTP RFCs a mailserver sending to a mailserver should
use port 25 and a client sending to a mailserver (submitting a
composed message) should use submission port 587. So far the approach
in general is a good one, but just the approach, the
Is there any chance Swisscom could change these antispam error messages
to CLEARLY indidicate they are generated by the Swisscom servers?
If Swisscom customers try to send messages to our customers which may
look spammy according to Swisscom's new spam filter, they get errors
like this:
snip
Oli Schacher schrieb:
Is there any chance Swisscom could change these antispam error messages
to CLEARLY indidicate they are generated by the Swisscom servers?
You seem to have got an old message somehow. I got one today from the
first one of our customers which is affected and this one was
steven.glog...@swisscom.com wrote:
Hi everyone
To officially talk about the mail problems on port 25 with swisscom dsl
I would like to give you some (technical) information.
Thanks for the extensive explanation!
One question there though: do you send a message to all customers
actually
I do agree on Jeroen's comment. Redirecting and doing content inspection is
evil.
I've seen a similar case with a nation wide operator in another country. What
they did was simply block port 25 except for their own mailserver. This might
sound nasty but after all, all swisscom customers should
steven.glog...@swisscom.com wrote:
Hi everyone
Will we start to block completely port 25 in the future? No,
absolutely not.
I rather have that you actively block port 25 without any inspection and
just like you are offering now allow people to request the port to be
opened. This avoids the
Some ISP are already filtering port 25 for all customer and will unlock it
on request (AS44885 to only name one I know). As far as I heard, it is the
cheapest, most efficient way to do this with best results and it does not
tackle the oh-don't-touch-my-privacy issue that I understand anyway.
Let's be savvy. That is the best option for everybody. It is just funny to
notice that it is always the same people that will suffer from spam and it
will always create profits for others, not only spammers, but also people
that can sell products and services to fight against - think of the
Spam coming through Bluewin ADSL is not something new.
Doing whatever action to stop spam in an early stage (aka years ago) would
not had result in a shitload of support calls.
But the guys at Swisscom waited long enough to implement this, so they don¹t
deserve my empathy...
I know enough ISPs
I do not think that there are so many spammers located in Switzerland.
Actually, I don’t think that there are so many spammers on earth at all, I
rather think that a very few guy bother a very wide number of innocent and
legitimate email users. However Switzerland is probably a good place to
* on the Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 08:15:44PM +0100, Gregory Agerba wrote:
However Switzerland is probably a good place to infect computers,
since the infrastructures are probably of good standing.
Actually, Switzerland has a high Microsoft-density (much higher than
Germany, for instance), which
12 matches
Mail list logo
