North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Implementing anti-abuse techniques on ISP networks....
[ On Wed, August 6, 1997 at 18:01:36 (-0400), Christopher Masto wrote: ] > Subject: Re: Implementing anti-abuse techniques on ISP networks.... > > I don't know about the "huge players", but we're an Internet Service > Provider, not an Internet Blockage Provider. We don't allow spoofing, > and we don't allow relaying, but we're not about to put filters > to prevent dialup customers from connecting wherever they want. This is one of those more-or-less political answers that I was hoping not to see on the NANOG list! ;-) In any case it does give me a bit of an opportunity to define more clearly what I meant by "huge players", which I should have done in the first place. The primary benefit to the world at large from filtering dial-up access to arbitrary SMTP ports will be from those ISPs who have either weak AUPs (in this respect); or who offer low-cost initiation accounts with easily, or nearly, anonymous quick, or automatic, registration; or both. If you have a strong AUP and you let your users know you will enforce it, and if you can find some happy balance between making it easy for new users to open accounts and ensuring you have enough of a fix on them that you can track them down should they violate your AUP, then I would agree that there's no need for you to filter your customer's ability to make legitimate connections wherever they want. However if you're one of those "huge players" that has a black-hole abuse mailbox (or even one that only results in account cancellation long past when there's any benefit to taking such action) and invites new users to sign up for the first month for some tiny amount of money paid with the mere presentation of a vaild credit card then I *really* want you to think very seriously about the business benefits of such filtering vs. the minor operational annoyance of implementing these filters. Note that if you do have a strong AUP that effectively tells your customers that they must use your e-mail gateway and only your e-mail gateway, then are not such filters merely a good strong technological way to enforce that part of your AUP with full and equal fairness to all? ;-) BTW, I have it on good word that <[email protected]> would be a good place to discuss some of the non-operational aspects of this issue..... I've Cc'd this message there in hopes of striking up that discussion over there and in hopes of avoiding further non-operations related discussion on the NANOG list! ;-) [[ I can forward copies of my original post to isp-mail-filter too if that's desired.... ]] -- Greg A. Woods +1 416 443-1734 VE3TCP <[email protected]> <robohack!woods> Planix, Inc. <[email protected]>; Secrets of the Weird <[email protected]>