MESSAGE
| DATE | 2007-09-15 |
| FROM | Ruben Safir
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] mail systems
|
From owner-hangout-at-mrbrklyn.com Sat Sep 15 01:37:54 2007
Received: from www2.mrbrklyn.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by www2.mrbrklyn.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id l8F5bqAe002459
for ; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 01:37:54 -0400
Received: (from majordomo-at-localhost)
by www2.mrbrklyn.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id l8F5bq14002458
for hangout-outgoings; Sat, 15 Sep 2007 01:37:52 -0400
X-Authentication-Warning: www2.mrbrklyn.com: majordomo set sender to owner-hangout-at-nylxs.com using -f
Received: from www2.mrbrklyn.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by www2.mrbrklyn.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id l8F5bRgl002452;
Sat, 15 Sep 2007 01:37:29 -0400
Received: (from ruben-at-localhost)
by www2.mrbrklyn.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id l8F5bQH6002451;
Sat, 15 Sep 2007 01:37:26 -0400
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2007 01:37:26 -0400
From: Ruben Safir
To: Ron Guerin
Cc: Ruben Safir , hangout-at-mrbrklyn.com
Subject: Re: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] mail systems
Message-ID: <20070915053726.GA2367-at-www2.mrbrklyn.com>
References: <20070914201955.GA28874-at-www2.mrbrklyn.com> <46EB4628.30009-at-vnetworx.net> <20070915033113.GA1051-at-www2.mrbrklyn.com> <46EB557E.8010205-at-vnetworx.net> <20070915051338.GA2132-at-www2.mrbrklyn.com> <46EB6D05.30106-at-vnetworx.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <46EB6D05.30106-at-vnetworx.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i
Sender: owner-hangout-at-mrbrklyn.com
Precedence: bulk
Content-Length: 2109
Lines: 45
Status: RO
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 4838
> >
> >
> > Yeah that's what's bothering me. Some of the results in mailq seem to tell
> > me that spams are being being delayed in the outgoing mail and that these mails
> > are originating from the MAIL-DAMEAN or some such. I believe that they are coming from
> > the info-at-nylxs.com alias, but I'm not certain and the mail logs are not clearifying this.
> >
> > Also, majordomo returns spam messages to the user-at-domain where a request is suposedly
> > generated from, and that might also be the origin.
> >
> > Neither would concern me, but an exploit for relaying would make me really worry.
> >
> Mmmm. Well, actually backscatter can get you in trouble too. It's sort
> of indirect relaying, whereby instead of you "delivering" the spam to
> the victim, you _bounce it to them_.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backscatter#Backscatter_of_email_spam
>
I'm not worried about that. Most of the Majorodomo responses are intentially
using sender adresses which are invalid (hence I find them). Sendly, more than
90% of my mail is now blocked by SORBS accoding to the logs.
I'm worried that the pop2 is exploited or that the local relay allowance is being
exploited. I could never figure out how to limit the pop2 to local domains with
TCP Wrappers.
Ruben
--
http://www.mrbrklyn.com - Interesting Stuff
http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
So many immigrant groups have swept through our town that Brooklyn, like Atlantis, reaches mythological proportions in the mind of the world - RI Safir 1998
http://fairuse.nylxs.com DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS - RI Safir 2002
"Yeah - I write Free Software...so SUE ME"
"The tremendous problem we face is that we are becoming sharecroppers to our own cultural heritage -- we need the ability to participate in our own society."
"> I'm an engineer. I choose the best tool for the job, politics be damned.<
You must be a stupid engineer then, because politcs and technology have been attacted at the hip since the 1st dynasty in Ancient Egypt. I guess you missed that one."
© Copyright for the Digital Millennium
|
|
