Messages in this thread | | | From | "Richard B. Johnson" <> | Date | Thu, 25 Sep 2003 08:30:14 -0400 (EDT) | Subject | Re: [OT] Re: Horiffic SPAM |
| |
On Thu, 25 Sep 2003, Helge Hafting wrote:
> Richard B. Johnson wrote: > > On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > > > > >>On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 02:11:59PM -0400, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > >> > > > Well it seems that fire-walling the SPAM servers is *not* a good idea. > > They are persistant, gang up, and will not give up until they are > > able to deliver the mail! When I firewall them, my network traffic > > According to standards they will give up after 5 days or so. > > > ends up being continuous SYN floods as every spam-server in the > > country tries to connect. It doesn't do any good to set `ipchains` to > > REJECT instead of DENY. They just keep on banging on the door. > > > > Have you considered teergrubing them instead? That ought to > fix the bandwith problem. And it is not so fun for whoever has > the spam server either - either disrupting some spammers operation > or harassing some server admin into making his box un-abuseable. > >
I thought it would be easier than that. However, I did write a program that keeps the connection open forever (until the SPAM-server hangs up). This slows down the servers. I also thought that I could make multiple connections to the server and never hang up, depriving the SPAM-server of resources. However, I can't make a new connection with the same socket (don't know why), EISCONN, without closing the previous. This means that I need a new socket for each connection. I run out of sockets before the SPAM-servers do.
> Helge Hafting >
Richard B. Johnson Project Engineer Analogic Corporation Penguin : Linux version 2.2.15 on an i586 machine (330.14 BogoMips). - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |