[97956] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: DNS Hijacking by Cox
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sean Donelan)
Sun Jul 22 21:20:51 2007
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2007 21:19:44 -0400 (EDT)
From: Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>
To: William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com>
cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <46A3F3C7.2040908@gmail.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Sun, 22 Jul 2007, William Allen Simpson wrote:
> Comcast still blocks port 25. And last week, a locally well-known person
> was blocked from sending outgoing port 25 email to their servers from her
> home Comcast service.
MSA port 587 is only 9 years old. I guess it takes some people longer
than others to update their practices. Based on what I know how
comcast's abuse systems implement their port 25 restrictions, I think it
is extremely unlikely it was based on other people having her e-mail
address in their Outlook programs.
Some people complain ISPs refuse to take action about abuse and
compromised computers on their networks. On the other hand, people
complain when ISPs take action about abuse and compromised computers on
their networks. ISPs are pretty much damned if they do, and damned if
they don't.
Several ISPs have been redirecting malware using IRC to "cleaning"
servers for a couple of years trying to respond to the massive number
of bots. On occasion they pick up C&C server which also contains some
"legitimate" uses. Trying to come up with a good cleaning message for
each protocol can be a challenge.
Yes, false positives and false negatives are always an issue. People
running sevaral famous block lists for spam and other abuse also
made mistakes on occasion.
