[olug] Cox and port 25

[Tim V - DZ]

To some degree I agree.  As Jay pointed out, the cox smtp server already
shows up on one Blacklist.  Now nobody on the cox network can send mail
to anyone that uses that Blacklist for spam filtering.  Also, Cox's mail
servers have been historically buggy, how often is this smtp server
going have problems?  Because whenever it's having problems, nobody on
the cox network will be able to sent mail at all - there are no
workarounds if you can't use an external server at all.  While it is a
valiant effort to rid a slice of the world of SPAM, and at the same time
provides some instant accountability to the source, it's fairly
limiting, could bottleneck, and creates a single point of failure.  I
don't like it, and would like it even less if I was a business. 

My laptop is set up for pop/smtp on a non-cox server.  Now when I'm at
home I'll have to change the SMTP server, and when I'm away I'll have to
change it back...

How much is Quest DSL?

-t

-----Original Message-----
From: olug-bounces at olug.org [mailto:olug-bounces at olug.org] On Behalf Of
Nathan Rotschafer (OLUG)
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 8:24 AM
To: Omaha Linux User Group
Subject: Re: [olug] Cox and port 25

Now consider I run a valid business and work from home and need to send 
company email from my house what do I do?  If the email comes through
Cox's 
servers some place will tag it as spam or refuse delivery based upon the
fact 
that it is "forged".  Now what do I do?  In my opinion Cox just put a
major 
blow to work from home business people and that is completely
unacceptable.  
If there was another compelling solution in the Omaha Metro area I might
just 
consider it after this...they are not big brother and cannot act as if
they 
are...I understand the spam issue but they can track back where spam
comes 
from without such a drastic business cutting measure.  Overall this
measure 
gets 2 thumbs down to Cox and they will be forced to change it back I
assure 
you before the month is over as many people will not stand for it...

Nate

On Friday 27 June 2003 08:41 am, Jay Hannah wrote:
> "Nathan Rotschafer (OLUG)" wrote:
> > I think we need to protest this...it seems instead of allowing legit
> > access they want you to spoof your domain through their
servers...how is
> > this a good solution???
>
> 1) In the event that I decide to spam 1.2 million people from a
> harvester program I downloaded, I have to do it through Cox's SMTP
> server. Easier for abuse at cox.net to find me and shut me down w/o
having
> to reconfigure firewalls.
>
> 2) In the event that I'm running a Linux server in my home (which I'm
> not supposed to do, but I do (sound familiar to anyone else on OLUG?
> -grin-) and it gets hacked by some Taiwanese college student, and
*they*
> try to launch 1.2 million emails from it, they won't be able to. Cox
> doesn't have to argue w/ their customers whose machines have been
> exploited that yes, they *were* sending spam from their house, even
> though the customer didn't have any idea what was going on. The kid
from
> Taiwan would have to go through Cox's SMTP server, which they probably
> wouldn't bother doing, and if they did is (again) easier to shut down.
>
> That's my take on it anyway,
>
> j
> _______________________________________________
> OLUG mailing list
> OLUG at olug.org
> http://lists.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug

_______________________________________________
OLUG mailing list
OLUG at olug.org
http://lists.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug