Thank you Kevin . I agree with you if we talk of spammer , rarely I have seen a spam over 90Kb infact I was also thinking to reduce npSize from 200000 to 1240000 .
In my case , let's say the the problem is not exactly with spammer but with "bombers" . I have seen on some server , that during peak time , there are bombers sending 5 or more big attachments (over 5 MB) ; these are not spammers but only "bombers" . On this attachment there is nothing of useful , they send these attachments only to overload the destination server. In a server which already has 30 smtp connections , 4 or 5 connections with big attachments takes the assp cpu usage near 100% . I experienced this yesterday on a server processing about 40000/email day. If you add also the work due to clamd , assp crashes and restarts often (!). I think that using npSize:= instead if npSize:=200000 these bombers could be stopped , because these bombers rarely have a well done configured mailserver, so if assp can get some ptr, mx error , the message could be blocked before to be accepted by assp . I think it's better an assp check , instead of accepting a 10 MB attachment with nothing useful. npSize:= (disabled) should work in this way I think. I'll test it this afternoon .. Graziano > Graziano wrote: > >> Hello >> >> suppose the spammer sends 1 MB pdf , and on assp I have >> >> npSize:=200000 >> >> The message will be received without any check (rbl,ptr,mx/a) ...because >> the pdf is over 200000 bytes . >> In this case it's better to have npSize:= , so assp could block the pdf >> due to rbl for example. >> >> What do you think ? >> > > If a spammer is sending 1mb attachments I would LOVE to have them send > me more so i can soak up their bandwidth(read: cost them more money). > > In reality, that would never happen, no spammer will waste their time > sending messages that large, bandwidth bills would be astronomical. > > Just sending one million messages(childs play for spammers) that size > comes to almost one TeraByte of data. > > According to the "all knowing"(heh) wikipedia, the number of spam > messages per day numbers 90 billion as of Feb of this year. > > ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-mail_spam#In_absolute_numbers ) > > Let's suppose that 1% of that turns into 1mb attachments, thats 900 > MILLION messages, or 900 TeraBytes of data, this would require more > bandwidth that youtube.com uses per day, not something a spammer would > normally have. Last year youtube.com was estimated to spend around 1 > million$ (US dollars) per month on bandwidth alone. Think a spammer will > want to spend that? I don't. (they like their botnets) > > > So, in response to your question, i think it's a non issue. > If you REALLY want to feel save, change your 'npSize' to 1Mb. > The setting is there to prevent ASSP wasting resources on large messages > that, 99.9% of the time, are going to be nonspam. > > > For the record my 'npSize' is set to "2621440"(2.5 megabytes) with no > issues to report. > > We routinely send and receive 2-20Mb+ pdf files(lots of 2mb ones, the > reason for my high setting), and ASSP humms along. > > Kevin > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > Assp-user mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Assp-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
