Slashdot Mirror


FTC Recommends ISPs Disconnect Spam Zombies

Mike Markley writes "CNN is carrying a story about the the FTC's plans and concerns around spam zombies. They say they will be identifying such zombie hosts and notifying ISPs, and are recommending that the ISPs disconnect indicated users. There's also a recommendation likely to raise the ire of the geekier sorts: that ISPs only permit users to send mail through their own servers (presumably by blocking port 25 outbound)." From the article: "Law enforcers in 25 other countries, from Bulgaria to Peru, are also participating in the campaign, the FTC said. Absent from the list of cooperating countries was China, where experts say rapid growth and a relative lack of technical sophistication have led to a large number of zombie computers."

15 of 411 comments (clear)

  1. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  2. Re:Go ahead, block 25 by dgatwood · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The right answer is pretty simple, actually. Start out with port 25 blocked. When the user calls to complain, unblock it on a per-user basis. People who need port 25 unblocked know enough to request it, and there's no valid excuse for denying it. People who run Win-zombies don't have any valid reason to ask for it to be unblocked and generally don't know enough to ask for it anyway, as most of them think that "port" means the ethernet jack on their DSL router/modem....

    Problem solved, and everybody wins.

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  3. What about VOIP/911 services? by ringfinger · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Completely cutting them off would be a disaster. Most users wouldn't know what happened or how to get back connected. Plus, support costs for ISP's would go through the roof.

    People use their broadband connections for phone and 911 services now -- cutting them off completely could literally cut them off from emergency services.

  4. I already do this on my home net by WillerZ · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Traffic to or from port 25 is dropped at my router. My external email provider gives me SMTP-TLS on a high port, so I lose nothing.

    This means that even if a worm gets through the NAT and manages to infect my patched-to current AV-running machines, it can't do what 90% of them want to. Thus, when the patch/AV database update arrives and kills it, I know I've not contribued to the problem.

    --
    I guess today is a passable day to die.
  5. So what? by grub · · Score: 5, Informative

    That ISPs only permit users to send mail through their own servers (presumably by blocking port 25 outbound)

    My ISP doesn't block 25 outgoing but a few spam blacklists have my IP range on their "DSL/Cable/Dialup" listings so I send mail from my internal server through the ISP.

    The result? No more "You're on a dynamic IP" bounce messages.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  6. Re:Spam Zombies? by Rei · · Score: 4, Funny

    dear brain owner,

    compliments of the season to you. I am Barrister Urrrrrrrrrrrr Guurrrrrrrr. I represent Rrrrrrrr Rrrrrrrrrr, son of the late gen. Rrrrrrr Urrrrrrrgh, who was the former military head of state in Transylvania. he died in 1312. since his death, the family has been losing a lot of money due to vindictive church officials who are bent on dealing with the family. based on this therefore, the family has asked me to seek for a foreign partner who can work with us as to move out the total sum of us$75,000,000.00 ( seventy five million united states dollars ) in gold, presently in their possession. this money was of course, acquired by the late president and is now kept secretly by the family. the Swiss government froze all the accounts of the family in Switzerland in 1571, and some other countries would soon follow to do the same. This bid by some government officials to deal with this family has made it necessary that we seek your assistance in receiving this money and in investing it on behalf of the family.

    This must be a joint venture transaction and we must all work together. since this money is very heavy, extra security measures have been taken to protect it from theft or seizure, pending when agreement is reached on when and how to move it into any of your nominated bank accounts. please contact me so we can arrange to meet you at a graveyard of your convenience in the Transylvania area to complete the transaction. as it is in a rather large box, please bring a chainsaw to assist in cutting it open.

    Note: Please send your reply through (Urrrrrrrrrrrr.Guurrrrrrrr@sco.com)

    --
    All we want to do is eat your brains.
  7. Re:25? Already blocked. by barc0001 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here's Bob. Bob is your boss at a small to mid sized company. He's not what you'd call "technical". You're the company's "tech" guy. You also do other things, but when the computers don't work, you're the go-to guy. Your company isn't that large, or that technical itself, so you host your mail with your company's ISP, PhoneCo. When Bob goes home, however, his ISP at home is CableCo. Bob is perpetually calling you either at home, or into his office because he "damn well can't send that email!" Invariably, the reason is because his account is configured to the wrong SMTP server, depending on where he his located.

    Wouldn't it be nice if you could just set up his account to use the company's ISP for SMTP all the time? You used to be able to do that, until the spineless CableCo decided they were just going to blanket-block port 25, no exceptions, instead of doing traffic analysis and chopping off the offenders. But that would take work, and effort, and nobody wants to do that, so just block 25 and call it a day!

    Note: Some elements of this story might be based on real experiences, which may explain the negative bias towards blanket policies of any type as bandaids.

  8. Re:25? Already blocked. by The+Cisco+Kid · · Score: 4, Informative

    Yes, so you make sure you pick a clueful ISP that has MSA (RFC 2476) support, which uses port 587, then you set his mail client to use that, and it works fine both when hes in the office, or at home, regardless of port 25 restrictions wherever he's getting his connectivity from.

    Since MSA requires him to *authenticate* (which most clients, even OE and ilk will do happily) when he connects on port 587, and the ISP only accepts *outbound* mail on that port (other ISP's wanting to delvier mail *to* your ISP still use 25) it isnt terribly attractive to spammers.

  9. Re:Blocking port 25 seems reasonable by The+FooMiester · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hardcore geek here, with a UID that's far lower than yours.

    Don't block my outbound port 25.

    Don't block my outbound ANYTHING.

    Block me off completely when my machine hurts the internet by spamming/flooding/whathaveyou.

    I'm so sick of this "Let's surrender our internet because of Microsoft" bullshit. I'm sick enough of it to burn karma by posting this crap that's going to get modded into oblivion.

    Not all of us know someone with a well connected server. Not all of us want to post mail from somewhere other than our box. I know that my box is working and isn't logging what I'm sending somewhere else. I know that the government isn't reading my email logs. I know that my server is MY SERVER and that's THAT.

    If you don't like it, go back to AOL. Then you can have your little closed interface, able to email all of your little friends who use the same closed interface, and get charged for what I can get for free. All I have to pay for is my connection, whereas you'll have to pay for every "value-added" service you use.

    --
    The previous has been a secret message to my comrades.
  10. Re:Go ahead, block 25 by Lord+Kano · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What happens when spam-bots block pop/IMAP ports on the local machine and then send pop-up windows to the user saying "You can not recieve email because your ISP blocks 'Port 25', call and request that they unblock it."

    User:"I need you to um, 'Unlock Port 25'?"
    Tech Support:"What seems to be the problem?"
    User:"I can't get my email and I need you to unlock port 25."
    Tech Support:"You'll have access in 30 seconds."

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  11. Re:Go ahead, block 25 by Bombcar · · Score: 4, Funny

    You'll then see trojans that say, "Call your ISP and ask them to unblock port 25 to see hot naked networks!"

    Bet your last dollar on it.

  12. Not the worst solution.. by Fatal67 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    But there are better ones. I have just shy of 2 million broadband users on my network. Every day I have many customers who are detected as being infected. Automagically they are placed in a walled garden where the only page they can load tells them what is happening. Basically it tells them that they have been compromised. If we can determine the virus/trojan they are running, we give them a link to a locally stored method of corrrecting the problem. I have never received a complaint about it, but I have received hundreds of calls saying thank you.

    I do have to question the FCC's thinking though. Most people who get infected are not of a technical nature. If you disconnect them from the net, they are at a loss of how to fix the issue. Obviously they don't have uptodate protection on their machine. if they go out and buy a brand new copy of whatever virus software, it will need to download the latest definitions, which they can;t do because you shut them off.

    It reminds me of the mid 90's where if your ds3 to one of the 6 or so backbones went down they would send you an email to notify you. Or sending them a letter telling them you shut their phone off and telling to call you to get it turned back on.

  13. Re:Small Business Users / external hosting by gregmac · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Blocking port 25 would just about kill small business people that use a 3rd party hosting service for their webpages and email.

    It doesn't matter what SMTP server you send outgoing mail from (so long as it's not blacklisted) -- SMTP doesn't check domain names or anything (which is also really the reason spam can exist so easily).

    I had a situation that was really annoying a few years ago. We were on DSL with the incumbant phone company, and used our own co-located server to send mail. One day, I could no longer connect to SMTP. Called them, of course teir 1 tech support says "no, nothing has changed". I wait for a while to see if it'll go away, then call them back a couple hours later. This time, the guy says that they noticed one router wasn't blocking 25, so they "fixed" it. I decided just to use their server, since it was an easy fix (make a DNS entry in the office only that points to their IP instead of ours).

    This was fine for a couple months. Then one day, we couldn't send mail again. I tried to connect to their SMTP, and it would either timeout, or VERY slowly connect. I call them, and they say they're being hammered by viruses, and it'll be fixed soon. Within half an hour it was back to normal. This happened about 3 more times, and I got really annoyed. I called and asked them to remove the port 25 block (just for my account -- even to only my mail servers IP), because it was rediculus we couldn't send email. They said they couldn't, I'd just have to wait. Well, it was several hours and still not working, so I called again, and asked to speak to a manager or supervisor. Basically, same deal "no, we can't take off the block. Maybe you can use webmail". Although it would work, I didn't want to tell everyone to use webmail instead of their email clients just because of this. I called another ISP, asked them how long it would take to get me DSL (and made sure I could use my mail server), ordered it, and called my ISP back and set to get rid of their connection.

    Of course, this started another rediculus series of events. The DSL remove order and DSL add order (that get filed by old and new ISPs, respectively) got "mixed up", and a couple days after moving to my new ISP the DSL signal was lost. An angry call to the phone co had it back within an hour (yet it somehow still takes 5 business days normally).

    The old ISP also decided that we actually couldn't cancel when we did - we were on a 1yr contract, and had to pay 50% of 8 months service or something for cancelling early. We had been a customer for 3 years, and none of our bills for the past year said anything about a 1year contract. They also couldn't produce the contract -- not even an unsigned version. In subsequent calls, they claimed that it was a verbal contract yet couldn't name who had supposedly made it. Eventually months later, in an effort to get our local phone service back (we had switched to a CLEC many years ago), they decided to "credit" our account for the charges. Of course, we remained with the CLEC.

    Anyway, that got a tad off topic, but I felt the need to vent. Stay away from the big phone companies ;)

    --
    Speak before you think
  14. Re:Stupid policy. by alienw · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Finally, someone with an ounce of sense. Or, how about this (very real) scenario? My university now publishes SPF listings. Therefore, I have to use the university (authenticated) SMTP server to send out email (to avoid getting an SPF fail for that email). However, my new ISP blocks port 25, so I can't use the university's server anymore and they cannot be bothered to port-forward some other port to the SMTP server. I have to use the ISP's mail server and risk getting my email deleted by the recipient as spam.

  15. Crap. by Randseed · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Earthlink/Mindspring already pull this shit. They block all outgoing traffic on port 25 to all servers except their own SMTP servers which they've blessed. The catch is that then email sits on their lame SMTP server for x number of hours if it doesn't go out, instead of the immediate notification I get from my own server. Then there are problems with the mail servers of the ISP going to shit -- I don't care why.

    Roadrunner, by contrast, doesn't do this. This is why I subscribe to their service now and dropped Mindspring.

    Email I send goes over my LAN to my SMTP server, which then handles sending it out. 99% of the time I don't have a problem. When I do, it's usually for some shit like AOL or sending mail _to_ Earthlink or Mindspring, at which point they get a complaint email (whcih they of course ignore), and then a bunch of enraged calls from their customers (who don't understand the entire thing) saying that the ISP's email reception is broken (which it _is_). This wastes their time dealing with their enraged customers. If they don't like it, they can fix their fucking systems.

    Of course, I could set a smart host to my ISP's mail server, which solves the problem, but grants me the problem I pointed out in the first paragraph.

    If ISPs are going to block outgoing port 25 and effectively break the net that way, then they need to FIX THEIR FUCKING SMTP SERVERS FIRST. If they would do that, then I wouldn't give a rat's ass what the fuck they do aside from the principle of the thing.

    All of this evades solving the real problem. The real solution is to filter spam using something like Spamassassin and, because that's a drain on resources, block the originating SMTP host automatically (and send an email to the technical contact) when X number of spams are received from the same IP address. When Y number of spams are received from an ISP, block that entire ISP. The IP mappings are available or, at least, could be made available. Then the ISP's resources are only tapped up to X (or Y) number of spams. This blocks zombies, but is a stopgap solution. The real solution lies with the originating ISP, which needs to map that back to an account and cut that account off. After that, the originating ISP which was used can send a bill back to the user and turn them into the FTC for violating anti-spam legislation. All this, of course, with forced banning of ISPs running zombies.

    This, in turn, puts pressure on Micro$hit to fix their fucking operating system, and on users to keep their systems up to date.

    Now the simplest solution? Wait for it, it's mind-numbingly simple. If you're going to block port 25, ALL ISPs should allow opening of port 25 with a no-questions-asked phone call with the understanding that if it's caught sending spam then, after a human review, the account will be cut off.