Re: [Asrg] Re: 6. Proposals: MTA MARK

[David Maxwell <david@crlf.net>]

On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 02:51:11PM +0200, Tomi Panula-Ontto wrote:
> True, but actually, MTAMark and ReverseMX don't address the issue of
> hijacked computers completely. It merely changes the situation so that
> the hijacked computer will not take direct connections to the receiving
> MTAs,
> but instead spammers must try
> a) to make the hijacked computers send messages via registered MTA for that
> network
> b) hijack the dns server (to register that hijacked computer)
> c) hijack the registered MTA
> d) any ideas?
> 
> Anyway, it'll limit their possibilities and will target their efforts
> on compromising the MTAs, workstations and DNS servers.

The key is:

MUA running machines are maintained by end-users.
MTA/DNS running machines are maintained by network administrators.

The MTA/DNS machines are likely to be orders of magnitude more safe from
attacks, due to correct configuration, choice of OS, up to date patch
sets...

-- 
David Maxwell, david@vex.net|david@maxwell.net -->
Net Musing #5: Redundancy in a network doesn't mean two of everything and
half the staff to run it.
					      - Tomas T. Peiser, CET      


_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg