Re: Current status?
- From: billg999@xxxxxxxxxxx (Bill Gunshannon)
- Date: 4 Sep 2008 19:01:27 GMT
In article <8c328cb8-33b0-42e2-b590-5aab5a7b2670@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
johnwallace4@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
On Sep 4, 6:37 pm, billg...@xxxxxxxxxxx (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
In article <mpcBTO6SI...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
koeh...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Bob Koehler) writes:
In article <gLRvk.272770$TT4.161515@attbi_s22>, "John E. Malmberg" <wb8...@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
If it is not supposed to send e-mail, and it attempts to, don't you
think someone should find out why?
We've had a lot of problems deploying COTS products that send
out notifications via email, from systems that the security folks
think shouldn't be "mail servers".
So "supposed to" is in the eye of the beholder.
Not really. Those particular devices should be sending their email to
the real mailserver which should be the only one communicating with mail
servers in the the outside world. If network/system managers, in particular
ISP's, followed this rule 99% of SPAM cold be dealt with in ver short order.
Enforcing "email from recognised SMTP servers only" would indeed get
rid of much spam instantly, and is a tactic already used by some folks
to reject *incoming* mail, but it would also break hundreds of little
convenience Windows apps that have their own mailsenders built in, and
inconvenience millions of their users.
So, because windows did something wrong we shold allow Email to further
degenerate? I think not. :-)
Log watchers, webcam watchers,
etc, anything which sends notification by email when something
"interesting" happens, using its own built-in mail server;
....... should be sending their emails to a legitimate email server which
could then deliver it to the recipient. As it's supposed to be!!!
they would
all need their user/installer to actually know their ISP's SMTP server
address so they could do the setup properly. How many PC users
actually know or care much about that kind of thing?
Who cares. It's not the users setting things up wrong that is causing
the problem, it is the ISP's and even some corporate systems managers
who don't know what they are doing. If the ISP sets their firewall up
to block non-MTA machines from connecting to port 25, the problem goes
away. If the user really wants to use advanced features of these toys,
they need to learn how to do it right. Period, end of story. We have
rules for just about evrything we do in life today, from driving to
keeping a pet and everything in between. A lot of these rules are
very inconvenient (like picking up after your dog or driving the right
way on a one way street). But you still have to do them. Networking
shouldn't be any different. And it doesn't even take new laws to make
it happen. It just takes competence.
bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
billg999@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Current status?
- From: Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply
- Re: Current status?
- From: Jan-Erik Söderholm
- Re: Current status?
- References:
- Re: [RBL] Current status?
- From: John E. Malmberg
- Re: [RBL] Current status?
- From: John E. Malmberg
- Re: [RBL] Current status?
- From: Bob Koehler
- Re: [RBL] Current status?
- From: Bill Gunshannon
- Re: Current status?
- From: johnwallace4
- Re: [RBL] Current status?
- Prev by Date: Re: Loose Cannon-dian
- Next by Date: Re: Note to Island Computers customers
- Previous by thread: Re: Current status?
- Next by thread: Re: Current status?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|