First of all I am in the US. I sometimes forget these are international
list.
Yes windows is the problem but not for the reason you spell out. Yes windows
does have some security problems but so do all operating systems. The main
problem with windows is it world wide acceptance. The spammers and virus
writers concentrate on windows as it has the most potential to create the
zombies because of the vast market share.
Up until about two years ago almost all viruses were for windows. Recently
both Mac and Linux need to now have limited virus protection. As the market
share shifts they will need better and better virus protection.
I am not saying we should pick on the little guy or charity but I am saying
many of the small mailservers and administrators are not doing their users a
favor when they can easily contract for a mail server from a qualified
company and yet have full control to add and delete users, add forwards,
alias and etc. You would not let an unqualified person drive your car so why
would you let an unqualified person run a mail server.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michel Bouissou" <michel(_at_)bouissou(_dot_)net>
To: <spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com>
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 3:42 PM
Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] SPF will solve spam and punish spammers
Le vendredi 23 Juillet 2004 21:25, John Keown a écrit :
Well if the rumors are correct and spf and sender id become a fact then
to
send email from a mta on DSL or Cable modem is going to be very
expensive.
I have heard talk that the large access providers are going to require a
very substantial deposit for running a mail server on their network.
They
are also blocking port 25 to further prevent mailservers other than
their
own to relay email to the net.
I don't know where you got these "rumors" from, and which IAP and country
its
may concern.
I personnally live in France, and my IAP's AUP is that it specifically
permits
its customers to run any server they want, the IAP provides full/IP access
without any port filtering, provides a fixed IP and provides a
customizable
Reverse-DNS entry for that IP.
And this is in the _contract_, not in rumors. (And if it were not in the
contract, I wouldn't have subscribed to their services in the first
place).
They also have an abuse service which supposedly takes care about abuse
problems.
Now what you say doesn't sound logical to me. Because "when SPF and
Sender-ID
become a fact", it will be actually much easier to protect receiving MTA's
from end-user-borne spam and viruses coming from virused/trojaned Windows
machines.
Because if they send direct-to-MX crap forging the sender name, as they
currently do, SPF will help keep them out of any MTA that wishes so.
So SPF will make this much less of a problem, and it seems really
illogical
that IAPs would in the same time forbid their customers from running
servers
where:
a/ The "true" servers are not the problem
b/ The problem will be mostly solved.
Now consider that 99,9999% of the "trojan spam" and viruses come from
Windows
machines, thanks to the lack of security provided by this so-called
operating
system, and now you know where the problem really is.
The problem, actually, is not with the users.
--
Michel Bouissou <michel(_at_)bouissou(_dot_)net> OpenPGP ID 0xDDE8AC6E
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Send us money! http://spf.pobox.com/donations.html
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com