If the misspelled recipient is always the same, then why not set up an alias
for that misspelling? 


Sincerely,

Randy Armbrecht
Global Web Solutions, Inc.
804-346-5300 x112
877-800-GLOBAL (4562) x112
http://globalweb.net


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alchaemist
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 11:07 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] AAaa! dictionary lock-out bug

Hi,

Just my two cents...
And I will not enter into the "trust/distrust auth users" discussion that
this innocent post trigered.

The error is because an authenticated user, tried to send an email to a non
existing local account.
Once and again till the server got tired (exceeded hard error limit), and
blocked the IP.

The recipient is ALWAYS the same. Unless the sender is a complete idiot :)
and misspells all the emails all the time (And no software can help him in
that case).
So... it obviously is NOT a dictionary attack, because a dictionary attack
would try different addresses of course.

Then, IMail by design, perhaps *should* allow one failure, and keep the
failed email address. And only start counting errors after a second
different email address is tried and failed. That obviously to avoid the
need of keeping a full list of failed and only counting unique failed
emails.

Another option would be, instead of just counting errors, to count them in a
configurable short period.
Lets say.. a dictionary attack would try lots of times per minute... while a
legitimate sender with a mistake will try only once in a while.

So, I think this is really a valid concern.
And also, I am pretty sure that IPswitch will do nothing about it ever.... 
(ouch).

Regards!

Javier Albinarrate




"Oblio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Ok, how did this get over-looked in development?  I have an
> *authenticated* user who's trying to send a message to another user in 
> the same domain, but the recipient doesn't exist.  After my [hard 
> error limit] number of failures, the server locks out their IP, 
> effectively blocking any mail from anyone in the domain (165 users)!
Oops?
>
> I'm all for protecting against dictionary attacks, but shouldn't we be 
> a little more forgiving to *authenticated local users*???
>
> To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
> List Archive: 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
> Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
> 



To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/

To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/

Reply via email to