Port 25 Blocks

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Collector»NZ, Mar 6, 2005.

  1. My reading of Cnet The Register and others shows a number of Overseas
    ISP's are blocking all port 25 traffic on thier network not directed to
    the SMTP server of the ISP.

    Now I would be shitted if this becomes a standard in NZ I use port 25
    with my own SMTP server (Well secured against others using it) and would
    be pissed if I have to relay (Not allowed) via my ISP SMTP.

    Anyone aware of any ISP's in NZ playing this silly bugger game yet
    --
    >>Follow ups may be set to a single group when appropriate!

    ======================================================================
    | Local 40.9000°S, 174.9830°E |
    ======================================================================
    "I used to jog, but the ice kept bouncing out of my glass."
    "With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine......
    However, this is not necessarily a good idea...."
    Collector»NZ, Mar 6, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Collector»NZ wrote:
    > My reading of Cnet The Register and others shows a number of Overseas
    > ISP's are blocking all port 25 traffic on thier network not directed to
    > the SMTP server of the ISP.
    >
    > Now I would be shitted if this becomes a standard in NZ I use port 25
    > with my own SMTP server (Well secured against others using it) and would
    > be pissed if I have to relay (Not allowed) via my ISP SMTP.


    Unless your ISP is being very anal, you are allowed to relay via their
    SMTP server. You are a customer of theirs, on an IP of theirs, and they
    allow all their IPs to relay mail through their MTA (regardless of what
    addresses are in the FROM or TO header).

    In answer to your question, I'm not aware of any ISPs in NZ doing this
    yet. Despite the obvious problems, I personally think it's a "Good
    Idea", as it will drastically cut down on virus/trojan infected machines
    spamming and propagating via email.

    If your ISP does implement it, you can always enable smtps on your
    server, which wouldn't be blocked (unless they get really strict). You
    could also run a VPN between your home computer and your MTA, which is
    less ideal.
    Daniel Lawson, Mar 7, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Collector»NZ

    thing Guest

    Daniel Lawson wrote:
    > Collector»NZ wrote:
    >
    >> My reading of Cnet The Register and others shows a number of Overseas
    >> ISP's are blocking all port 25 traffic on thier network not directed
    >> to the SMTP server of the ISP.
    >>
    >> Now I would be shitted if this becomes a standard in NZ I use port 25
    >> with my own SMTP server (Well secured against others using it) and
    >> would be pissed if I have to relay (Not allowed) via my ISP SMTP.

    >
    >
    > Unless your ISP is being very anal, you are allowed to relay via their
    > SMTP server. You are a customer of theirs, on an IP of theirs, and they
    > allow all their IPs to relay mail through their MTA (regardless of what
    > addresses are in the FROM or TO header).
    >
    > In answer to your question, I'm not aware of any ISPs in NZ doing this
    > yet. Despite the obvious problems, I personally think it's a "Good
    > Idea", as it will drastically cut down on virus/trojan infected machines
    > spamming and propagating via email.
    >
    > If your ISP does implement it, you can always enable smtps on your
    > server, which wouldn't be blocked (unless they get really strict). You
    > could also run a VPN between your home computer and your MTA, which is
    > less ideal.



    Given the amount of morons who set up a "real" company email server on
    the end of an adsl modem in NZ then winge when it does not work
    consistantly (the micro-outages break things) I ***almost*** wish NZs
    ISPs did block port 25 (would break my own email server but anyway) and
    people were forced to smarthost via their ISP.

    In NZ our ISPs seem to be keeping a reasonable amount of control on
    rogue smtp servers so hopefully we wont see port 25 blocks soon
    (especially as spammers seem to be moving to sending through "your" ISP
    now anyway).

    Since most NZers do not have flat rate broadband getting a huge bill
    sould prove a good incentive to fix their un-secured systems, unlike the
    USA/Canada where flat rate charging means "we dont care" (and I have had
    to deal with a few of those). Hopefully the few morons who get stung
    will abandon broadband as "unsafe" and make the Internet that bit safer
    for the rest of us.

    regards

    Thing
    thing, Mar 7, 2005
    #3
  4. Collector»NZ wrote:
    > Anyone aware of any ISP's in NZ playing this silly bugger game yet


    personally Im all for it, but only if there is a condition of it being
    turned off unless asked for.
    Dave - Dave.net.nz, Mar 7, 2005
    #4
  5. Collector»NZ

    thing Guest

    Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
    > Collector»NZ wrote:
    >
    >> Anyone aware of any ISP's in NZ playing this silly bugger game yet

    >
    >
    > personally Im all for it, but only if there is a condition of it being
    > turned off unless asked for.


    probably better turned on unless asked for off.

    Of course I am some bright spark in the ISP will try and charge for the
    configuration as a "value added".

    regards

    thing
    thing, Mar 7, 2005
    #5
  6. In article <>,
    thing <> wrote:

    >Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
    >> Collector»NZ wrote:
    >>
    >>> Anyone aware of any ISP's in NZ playing this silly bugger game yet

    >>
    >> personally Im all for it, but only if there is a condition of it being
    >> turned off unless asked for.

    >
    >probably better turned on unless asked for off.


    Regretfully, I'd have to agree.

    >Of course I am [sure] some bright spark in the ISP will try and charge for the
    >configuration as a "value added".


    But then, given the vast majority of clueless Windows-based
    spambait/virusbait would be on the cheapest Internet access packages,
    and I'm on something of a premium package, I would hope that, if my ISP
    ever introduced such a block, they would lift it at my explicit request
    for no extra charge.
    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro, Mar 11, 2005
    #6
  7. In article <>,
    thing <> wrote:

    >Given the amount of morons who set up a "real" company email server on
    >the end of an adsl modem in NZ then winge when it does not work
    >consistantly (the micro-outages break things) ...


    I don't see why micro-outages should cause any reasonable MTA to
    malfunction.

    How long do these micro-outages go for, anyway? I regularly leave SSH
    connections open to clients' machines for days at a time, and the only
    ones that are liable to break off every now and then are to one client's
    office, who funnily enough is using TelstraClear's ADSL, not Telecom's
    one.
    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro, Mar 11, 2005
    #7
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?Q2Fyb2wgQg==?=

    struggling at starting blocks getting workgroup recognised

    =?Utf-8?B?Q2Fyb2wgQg==?=, Feb 7, 2005, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    494
    =?Utf-8?B?QnV6eg==?=
    Feb 13, 2005
  2. Andrew Albert

    IDS on 3640 Blocks Telnet and SSH traffic

    Andrew Albert, Jun 7, 2004, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    431
    Andrew Albert
    Jun 7, 2004
  3. a.nonny mouse
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,096
  4. SuperIce
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,870
    James
    Oct 1, 2004
  5. AM
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    869
    Dumbkid
    Apr 8, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page