Bugtraq mailing list archives
Re: virus handling
From: "Mike Healan" <mike () spywareinfo com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:33:36 -0500
3.1.1.) Abuse Role Account Providers should provide an adequately stuffed abuse role account
Typo: "stuffed" > "staffed"
3.1.2.) e-mail Alias and Web-Interface Additionally providers should provide e-mail aliases for the IP addresses of their customers (eg. customer at 127.0.0.1 can be reached via 127.0.0.1 () provider com) or a web interface with similiar functionality. The latter should be provided when dynamically assigned IP addresses are used for which an additional timestamp is required.
I would disagree with 3.1.2. Otherwise you could end up with direct marketing companies such as Doubleclick harvesting the IP addresses accessing their banner ads and then sending UCE to those people. Or for that matter, it could lead to a mass attack with someone sending UCE to every IP address allocated to an ISP. *Someone* probably will be using that IP and spammers clearly don't care who sees their spam. Otherwise I entirely agree with this. Bouncing a virus-infected email is worse than useless. It is active participation in the distribution of the worm and the damage to networks it is causing. Regards, Mike Healan Editor www.spywareinfo.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Thomas Zehetbauer" <thomasz () hostmaster org> To: <bugtraq () securityfocus com> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 10:45 AM Subject: RFC: virus handling
Current thread:
- RE: virus handling Rainer Gerhards (Feb 02)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: virus handling Mike Healan (Feb 02)
- RE: virus handling Shaun Bertrand (Feb 03)