<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:s="http://www.techrepublic.com/search" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"  xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
    <title><![CDATA[Discussion on Spam Relay: Up close and personal ]]></title>
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836]]></link>
    <atom:link rel="hub" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" />
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836/rss" />

    <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>2013-05-24T02:46:55-07:00</lastBuildDate>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I test with cain.. if it can see the traffic.. something needs to be fixed]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2670101]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[As a baseline, I use cain to see what passwords are visible. If it can see the clear text then I adjust my network.pop3, imap and unencrypted smtp turn up along with http, ftp and other protocols I won't use if at all possible.I'm finding dovecot fantastic for pop/imap though, comment out pop3 and imap, uncomment pop3s and imaps then generate your certs and the users are safe though none the wiser.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2670101]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Neon Samurai]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2008 14:30:25 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I disable PoP3 and IMAP]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2669774]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I typically have those two protocols disabled at the Exchange server right away.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2669774]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2008 05:46:19 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[pop3s, smtps or imaps.. if smtps would work between servers we could]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2669141]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[.. kill off clear pop3, imap and smpt. At least you can disable pop3 and imap, and stick to smtps for client to server connections.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2669141]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Neon Samurai]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2008 05:39:37 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Disabling POP3]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2669085]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[will not do what you want.  POP3 is a mail CLIENT that delivers mail from the spool to a mail user agent.  The mail user agent does NOT connect to the POP3 server to deliver outgoing mail.  The POP3 server connects to an SMTP process (exchange in this case) to deliver outgoing mail.And if you have an IMAP server running, it also connects to a mail user agent to transfer mail.  The mail user agent, in this case, also does not connect to the IMAP server to deliver outgoing mail.  (It connects to an SMTP process...)]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2669085]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[ghicks@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2008 00:27:03 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I have to agree]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2627591]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Your last bit of advice, LL, was right at the top.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2627591]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[santeewelding]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 09:13:31 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Question PineappleBob]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2627589]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I'm not sure what you mean by different domains. Are you referring to different domains at one location or different physical locations?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2627589]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 09:05:16 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Thanks PineappleBob]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2627588]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[That was one question I did have as to if it made sense for small entities, the facility where the Exchange server is located has 25 users so your comments answered my question about that.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2627588]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 09:02:28 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Barracuda for multiple domains!]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2627580]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Remember too, even the entry level Barracudas can handle multiple domains. If you have multiple domains to which you support, perhaps you can spread the cost accross them and ease each domains' burden.I have about a dozen domains which I filter. Each domain can then forward to the &quot;real&quot; email server at each domain.This may be an added 'feature' you could sell.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2627580]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[PineappleBob]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 08:34:47 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Barracuda for sure]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2627546]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[We have a Barracuda for 22 months now and it has reduced our spam to nearly non-existent. It is fast and does a great job. We are a small office (less than 12 people), but have emails that are listed on numerous real estate web sites and as such are quite public and well targeted.In those 22 months we have seen over 21 million attempted emails, with just over 1% of that being legit. Within a few days of installation of the Barracuda, the 'cuda does learn over time, we went from users with over 100 spams a day down to maybe 10. Within a month, spam was maybe 1 a day. I highly recommend the Barracuda for a small office. Every user commented how nice it was once we got one. It is easily the best money I have spent on my network.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2627546]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[PineappleBob]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 08:24:52 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Astaro]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2627451]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I've heard some good things about Astaro, have you any experience with it?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2627451]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 06:06:30 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[That's awesome]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2627066]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Thanks for sharing that story, Locrian. I've been around IT a long time (30 years), even been through a few similar situations. Totally tired, 3 AM in the morning and no other alternative. I make what I initially think is a mistake and it resolves the issue. Dahh. I truly appreciate your post, probably more than  you will ever know.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2627066]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2008 12:18:22 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Luck is the residue of industriousness]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2626876]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[We all know more than we know we know.Your 'luck' was the sum of your experience telling you where to look and what to do.What's worked for me in the past in chasing down little hobgoblins like that one has been to try to do thing 'wrong' when I am out of options.I learned this from watching a friend some 20 years ago.  He was trying to get a HD's SCSI termination to work.  It didn't.  He did everything right, went to specs, went to all the documentation... everything.Finally he deliberately hooked the thing up 'wrong' and it worked.That's my biggest piece of advice.  When you've done everything right, try something wrong.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2626876]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Locrian_Lyric]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2008 09:38:05 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[It could well be]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2626814]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[that you do not need one yet, but its good to be prepared for when you do.  Educating users to not use a work mail account to do on-line shopping goes a long way to preventing spam.  Depending on size of the agency and number of visable email addresses, it could be a few years befor one is required.  But, knowing options and costs ahead of time simplifies the process.  For that matter, you could always build a spam filter on a linux box with spam assasin and clamav.  Ill dig around, I would be surprised if there is not a walk through or distro designed as such.  (Not counting the commercial free for home use distros like Astaro).]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2626814]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Dumphrey]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2008 08:11:02 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Interesting Dumphrey]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2626785]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I'm researching for my next article on botnets and have been in conversation with IronPort as they have several leading experts in that field. So, I will have to chat with them about their products as well.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2626785]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2008 07:57:52 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Neon Samurai, I know what your talking about]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2626783]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I find that technology totally amazing and even wrote an article about it if your interested:http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/wireless/?p=189It was the Netgear router that had the MetaMaterial antennas in it, allowing beam-forming.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2626783]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2008 07:55:18 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[CG IT, reading my mind]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2626751]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I have been working my due diligence in that regards. The exchange server isn't working that hard and Mail Security for Exchange by Symantec is reportedly a fairly good spam filtering application. I always like to offer more than one option to a client, as doing so is in their best interest.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2626751]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2008 07:50:58 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I think it's Buffalo that makes the 27 antenna router]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2626614]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[It was either Buffalo or Netgear anyhow; .11N with 27 or so antenna stuffed in the router box. Linksys has treated me well and the 350N was a noticeable upgrade but that other router is worth a look.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2626614]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Neon Samurai]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2008 05:29:33 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Mike....Barracudas are ok....]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2626462]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[but the question one has to ask is  are there enough spam and suspect attachments being sent to users to warrant purchasing it.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2626462]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[CG IT]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 27 Oct 2008 17:41:13 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I agree totally]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2626333]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I understand very much about it being a disservice to my client. Its the other way around, I've been able to do quite a bit with minimal costs and that facility is running quite well. Even with the Rustock infection the outgoing email was down less than a day and that was a Sunday. So, it becomes hard to justify additional costs, especially now. That's why I have to have me ducks in order.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2626333]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 27 Oct 2008 13:07:39 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[SDfix is another good tool]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2626304]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[for the 2008 scamola crap.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-276836-2626304]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Dumphrey]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 27 Oct 2008 12:37:02 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

