NANOG Channel Archives and Editorializing
pceasy at norfolk.infi.net
Fri Aug 7 19:53:44 UTC 1998
At 19:12 8/6/98 -0700, you wrote:
>>do much for the issue one way or another. However, the question is begged:
>> "Should information on potential network abuse points be shared and public
>Yes it should. All of the majors mail packages now have versions out that
>will correct the problem. Those that are still open for relaying are in
>that state becasue they don't want to upgrade. As long as they are in that
>condition they are a "nav hazard".
>There are software utilities that will scan the Internet for open-relay
>hosts, by IP address. Not putting them on a list will not hide them from
>these scanners. However, it will help the spam-fighter to know where these
>sites are, they can be black-holed.
This is basically my point and position. Problems cannot be fixed if they
are not first identified. If someone should get abused, and the abuser got
the relay from a list and not his own efforts, that *should* encourage the
relay owner to get off his/her/it's duff. No one is as security concious
as he who has just been robbed.
Wabbit season!..duck season!..wabbit season!..duck season!..SPAMMER SEASON!
PC-EASY computer services
(757) 495-EASY 
More information about the NANOG