On Tue, 5 Sep 2000, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
>First of all, the "250,000" is wrong:
I was just making up a number. I can go scan ARIN for all their netblocks
and give you the exact number of address that would have to be scanned.
(I won't. It's alot.)
>Second, dialup users don't have enough bandwidth to matter.
>Bouncing SPAM across a 42 or 24 kb/s modem link is insignificant.
Oh hell yes they do. I've seen a single 28.8 user kill an email server.
(Ok, I'll admit Netscape Messenger Server is mostly to blame, but still.)
Mail isn't coming back to that address. Let's see 1000 4k messages with
50 people per... that's about 22min to send spam to 50k addresses. Hang
up, dialup with a differenat address, and send another 1000. (Granted,
the cable modem would take about 2 minutes, but it'd be hard to hide.)
>Tell me, would you like this done to you? You may assume typical
>corporate enhancements: no PGP, filter runs on Windows 2000, any
>unknown headers get stripped out, etc.
... message size restrictions, attachment mangling, false virus detection...
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Sep 07 2000 - 21:00:21 EST