steven.glog...@swisscom.com wrote:
> well, actually.. it seems someone from us confirmed it in the comments of 
> http://blog.neocid.li/?p=105 ...    

Quite interesting read. As that states, if I understand correctly, that
per-default one gets into the group where outbound mail to non-swisscom
boxes get filtered.

If one uses SMTP-AUTH over Port 25, all is fine and you get re-directed
to port 587 and all is 'fine'.

I guess it only becomes active when you reset your DSL session (rock
solid at my place thus that nearly never happens afaik) as I still have:

tcp        0      0 194.1.163.39:25         92.105.157.240:45506
ESTABLISHED

But there is a bigger issue with the above, if that is truely how it
happens:

 - It is not documented anywhere on the Swisscom side
 - It was not communicated to customers
 - It does not account for people doing TLS, which would make the
   connection crypted
 - More importantly: it sets a very dangerous precedent that
   Swisscom is hijacking connections.

The last one is the really worrying part.

I don't mind port-25 filtering too much (I actually would fully agree
with sending ICMP Destination Port Admin Unreachable), as long as there
is an easy&non-cost way to disable that.

Redirecting traffic though, and thus being able to read along now that
is quite a very very bad thing.... and I truly hope that is not the case.

I do hope that Swisscom realises that by doing that they will never be
able to claim anymore that they can't do packet inspection, because then
they are doing so, and that is a very dangerous thing, for them, but
also for the customer (I am sure IPS and Storage folks won't mind
suddenly selling you lots of hardware though) and of course the
government being able to require even weirder things (we want you to
block website XYZ, you can look at the Host: header, just filter it
out...); yes I know taps are possible, but that is passive and thus
different from actively participating and thus modifying packets)

Also, it all is futile the moment botters grow up and start using TLS.

Any public or non-public comments on that, and more-over better, a way
to put straight what is then truly going on? :)

Greets with Love & Cuddles (as Swisscom works perfectly fine for me),
 Jeroen

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
swinog mailing list
swinog@lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog

Reply via email to