Anti spam solutions

[Ralph Doncaster]

On Wed, 8 Oct 2003, Fraser Campbell wrote:

> On Wednesday 08 October 2003 15:30, Peter L. Peres wrote:
> > I thought it's easier to stem the flow at the bottleneck as opposed to
> > when it is raining down on everyone. I did not say it would be cheap or
> > easy. Someone has to pay for it too. Tax money probably, after enough
> > people get sufficiently upset about spam and viruses. Which they about are
> > now imho. I'd like to see what the US Congress comes up with wrt spam.
>
> Many ISPs are taking measures to stem the flow.  Symaptico for examples forces
> all users to relay mail through a Sympatico server.  This makes tracking
> spammers significantly easier for Sympatico.  Whether they actually act on
> such information, or monitor it, I cannot be sure, anyone?
>
> Rogers seem less active in the fight.  They require authentication of smtp
> connections but don't stop their customers from relaying directly to anywhere
> else in the world.  This makes it virtually impossible for them to track who
> is sending spam., I can't imagine that logging all smtp traffic on a network
> the size of Rogers would be fun.

When Sympatico blocked port 25 for their business customers, we got a
flood of new signups. ;-)
We don't block any ports and have minimal spam problems (one or 2 a week
at most).  Our current policy is to suspend a customer's account upon any
evidence of spam, and charge them a re-activation fee.  Second time we
terminate their service.

-Ralph

--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml