North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Historical
Re: New and interesting network abuse.
- From: Suresh Ramasubramanian
- Date: Tue Jan 11 02:43:42 2005
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=L1hA3TaYyFfsw0Q57uaLLSNz/b+FDqLObh6m4EEZ6JsjhsES9hyDrlYgqzaBDM3tBDKJsgFLsHgUgsKLLi2c/fUHS4Nocnh0dg26d4gzUrpEqhTZY2lz49u8lTDyOSv7ucWHRrgPPqB6PoYNoG13ryCZQBbNbra4Kbv5PhfR+bU=
Thread that I just started yesterday about port 25 blocking and if
more ISPs werent doing this bidirectionally.
Which is what your local ISP, and other ISPs that have dialup pools, must do.
--srs
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 01:33:00 -0600, Ejay Hire <ejay.hire@isdn.net> wrote:
>
> My apologies if this strays off topic, but I wanted to share my recent
> experience.
>
> We had a collocation customer come in and request a t1 of pots lines for
> their servers, then complaints that their "security" software wasn't
> working because of our RPF checks. As it turns out they were dialing up
> to a local isp, and sending bulk email using our bandwidth, but the
> dial-up's ip.... And receiving the TCP ack on the dial up.
|
