North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: SMTP store and forward requires DSN for integrity

  • From: Andrew - Supernews
  • Date: Sat Dec 10 12:38:42 2005

>>>>> "JP" == JP Velders <[email protected]> writes:

 JP> Right now dumb AV filtering is akin to a Smurf amplifier.

Good analogy. I would extend it by pointing out that "dumb AV
filtering" is actually only a part of the general backscatter
problem. The existence of BATV isn't an excuse for mail system
operators to ignore the backscatter problem any more than the
existence of stateful firewalls is an excuse for people to run smurf
amplifiers.

Right now, unless you are a large provider or corporate, or unless
your mail system is massively over-engineered, any spammer can, at any
time, drown you in bounces (30 million SMTP transactions in response
to one spam run has been observed in practice). BATV doesn't help you
if the problem is SMTP transaction volume, any more than a firewall
will help you cope with a saturated network link.

It is, in my view, the responsibility of every mail system operator to
design and operate their systems in such a way as to minimize the
impact of backscatter on innocent third parties. This is not to say
that DSNs should not be sent (because that would indeed cause an
integrity problem) but that they should be avoided. Forged virus
backscatter is just one of the more trivial examples (trivial because
much of it is caused by A/V systems that _know_ they should not be
doing it); there are many other sources of backscatter that are not
specific to viruses, most of which can easily be controlled by proper
feedback to the SMTP server (e.g. accounts which go over quota and
_stay_ that way should be set to reject traffic at SMTP time, so that
they don't become continuous sources of backscatter).

-- 
Andrew, Supernews
http://www.supernews.com