Bryan Stevenson wrote: > It's the fact that the legit folks get nailed as well. > > Listen..we all agree that spam is evil...we all agree that mail servers > should not be open.....BUT is it so bad to give the folks running the server > a chance to fix it first??
I would also very much like a chance to update my Win2K to SP2 and supply some security fixes directly after install, but Nimda always gets there first. Shouldn't I get a chance to fix it first? Face it, it is the way things work. You may not like it this way because you were running an Open Relay and got locked out, but I like it this way. And I control what email gets through to my server. > My issue is that once found to be open it is > incredibly difficult to get off the blacklist. This means that legit folks > can be without mail for a long time. Even if ORDB continues to aid in > stopping legit mail, they could at least invest in some decent hardware and > bandwidth. I mean 5-10 hours to test a mail server is so ridiculous it's > not funny. If they are going to keep it up then the test should be avble to > be performed in a matter of minutes and not hours. Actually, hardware and bandwidth are not the issue, sufficient testing clones spread around the globe and testing interval randomization are the issue. If they simply used 1 IP to do all the testing it would be pretty simple to lock out that IP. If they use more but test immediately it is still very easy to lock out their IPs. Jochem ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
