North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: How do you stop outgoing spam?

  • From: Brad Knowles
  • Date: Tue Sep 17 14:39:08 2002
  • Reply-by: Wed, 1 Jan 1984 12:34:56 +0100
At 11:07 AM -0700 2002/09/17, Scott Francis wrote:


 Much more complex to implement and manage; doesn't scale well. The fewer
 decisions the anti-spam system has to make, the better it will work. If it
 only has to decide whether or not a specific IP/port combination has exceeded
 a certain threshold, it will run much more smoothly than if it's examining
 the contents of each packet.
Indeed, that will be a lot more scalable. But if you still have to look into each packet to see which ones are link encrypted (and therefore should be left alone) and which ones aren't (and therefore should be transparent proxied and/or traffic-shaped), that is quite a bit more work.

The question is how much abuse is too much? Is it okay to allow all open port 25 connections (traffic-shaped to low average bit-rates), or is any abuse too much?

--
Brad Knowles, <[email protected]>

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania.

GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++)>: a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI++++$ P+>++ L+ !E W+++(--) N+ !w---
O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP>+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++)
tv+(+++) b+(++++) DI+(++++) D+(++) G+(++++) e++>++++ h--- r---(+++)* z(+++)