[69348] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Anti-Spam Router -- opinions?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dave Howe)
Wed Apr 7 08:26:36 2004
From: "Dave Howe" <DaveHowe@gmx.co.uk>
To: "Email List: nanog" <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 13:25:45 +0100
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Erik Haagsman wrote:
> Spammers can only work when making enormous amounts of connections
> each hour, so limiting a normal user to 10 connections per hour with
> some extra slack after two or three connectionless hours, with an hour
> blocking penalty if the user goes over shouldn't pose a problem to Joe
> Average and will definitely keep spammers at bay without the added
> administrative overhead of sending user's mail statistics.
I think 10 is a bit low.
I am not really an abnormal email user - but I tend to block answer a lot
of emails, and send them as fast as I type them - so I can easily send
20-30 emails in the first hour, then maybe an hour slack, then another
dozen or so - depending on inbound traffic and what arguments are ongoing
on my mailing lists at the time.
Ok, I could in theory use web forums, usenet (probably also subject to
your rate limiting) or whatever for this, but tbh I don't think I can in
practice - if the discussion is on a mailing list, at best I would have to
sign that list to a web mail account and reply that way, and as an average
user I don't see why should I make life awkward for myself like that just
to make life easier for admins (and I *am* an admin, so I have to look at
both sides of the coin here)
if you had (say) 30 emails per hour, accumulating unused emails until you
have 200, then that might work - but again, I notice you are limiting by
smtp session, and a spammer could easily send 100 emails each going to 100
recipients in a single session.
