Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Spam Solution


From: Alavan <alavan () pangeatech com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 15:53:25 -0700

Please correct me if I'm missing something here:

Microsoft and POBOX.com support Caller ID and SPF to help thwart phishing and SPAM.

I can see it helping phishing (kind of) as the phishers won't be able to forge the FROM address. But, that won't stop naive users from entering their personal information onto the fake site even with some rogue FROM address. Also, the phishers can just claim to be from a hired consulting agency and send the SPAM from a hijacked PC on a domain that sounds somewhat technical (or something like that).

Also, if spammers can't forge, so what? They'll just grab the domain name from the PC they've hijacked and send away or go back to using the e-mail client on the machine. Once the spammers change their methodology (which they do all the time to counter anti-spam efforts), these measures will have little to no effect.

Plus, many people use a FROM address from one of their other POP accounts on other domains. For instance, let's say I'm sending an e-mail from home just before I leave to a business contact and I want them to see my corporate e-mail address instead. In order to accomplish this after Caller ID and SPF, all admins will have to get their users to switch to POP before SMTP to their corporate mail servers to avoid these returned e-mails (when the FROM address is intentionally forged).

From what I've seen, most of the SPAM comes from hijacked machines - even the SPAM from other countries. So, port 25 blocking is good, but not the be-all end-all as some "users" will want to host their own mail.

It seems to me that if we make all MTA's register somehow (both SMTP and POST), this would eliminate the hijacked machine as spambot phenomenon. We already have MX records for SMTP, but a lot of providers use different machines to receive (via SMTP) and send mail (POST). So, maybe a new DNS record is introduced for POST. Your machine(s) could do both or not. When your server goes to accept a message, it looks to see if the IP of the sending machine is listed in this new DNS record. If not, return a 5XX error.

Didn't I read something somewhere about the possibility of this?

Thanks,

Alavan

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html


Current thread: