IT Employment

Ask something
Discussion Locked

Why I hate AOL - by LordInfidel

0 helpful
18 replies

by lordinfidel

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

I recently had the mis pleasure of finding out some disturbing information.

After setting up a small netwk for a client of mine and connecting them to the net via dsl. I found that they could no longer send mail to AOL users.

I configured them a local smtp server. So I tested that the connection from my mail server to theirs was good.

telnet aolIP 25 and got this

550 - The IP address you're using to connect to AOL is either open to the free relaying of e-mail, is serving asan open proxy, or is listed in the Dial-Up List operated by MAPS (www.mail-abuse.org). AOL cannot accept further e-mail transactions from your server until either your server is closed to free relaying/proxy, or your IP address is removed from MAPS Dial-Up List. For additional information, please visit http://postmaster.info.aol.com

18 replies

by lordinfidel

OK, WTF?

My smtp server is not a open relay server. It is protected with a firewall and only allows internal users to connect to it and relay. And they need the proper credentials.

What gives.

So I do some more research i go to the mail-abuse.org site. Their must be some mistake, AOL, a big sender of spam, must be high.

And I find that since my client is on DSL and that their IP is dynamic. That the entire /16 Netblock that my ip sits on is blocked from sending mail to AOL (and others).

If you are unaware of MAPS and their Nazi agenda, read my letter to them below.

by lordinfidel

From: LordInfidel [mailto:LordInfidel@.com]
Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 7:45 PM
To: dul@mail-abuse.org
Subject: DUL, A irresponsible list

Let me first start off by saying that I whole heartedly agree that Public Open Relay servers should be closed. Any Open Relay Server found should be black holed.

However, That is not the goal apparently of the MAPS DUL. You nor any other agency has the right to say that I am not allowed to use a smtp relay server for my own personal use.

If my ISP says that I am not to engage in hosting my own servers, then I have 2 choices. Either abide by their acceptable use policy or find another ISP.

(cont'd)

by lordinfidel

You, however, have no authority to infringe on my right to use my own personal local smtp server. Closing off entire DUL NetBlocks is not the answer.

When, on my corporate network, if I either see attempts of mail relay thru my mail server (which is turned off for relaying) or I receive lot's of spam from a particular mail server. I make an attempt to contact that mail servers owner first.

If that fails, I then contact both them and their ISP stating that I am not accepting further connections from said mail server until it is closed from relaying. Then I report the server to the ORDB (www.ordb.org)

That is a responsible action.

In the case of dial-up users that do not keep the same IP. An attempt first can be made to the reply-to address in the e-mail. If that fails, then the ISP to whom that IP belongs to should be contacted, with a copy of the e-mail.

It is then the responsibility of the ISP to take action against the user if that said user violates their (the isp's) acceptable use policy.

Internet users in general are uneducated in what spam is and automatically think that every piece of mail is spam and should be stopped. I too receive hundreds of e-mail spam. I just delete them, the same way I do with junk mail coming to my house.

All to often I see Spam-Cop abuse messages coming to my mail box because some user out there received an e-mail and did not want to follow the opt-out instructions. 99% of the time, the e-mail was not even from our company. It just made mention of one of our websites. I then have to take time out of my day to respond back to Spam-Cop and the end user informing them that they should use the clearly labeled opt-out link in the e-mail and read the headers of the e-mail.

(cont'd)

by lordinfidel

Users in general are irresponsible in their reporting of spam. While I can accept that from end users. I can not accept irresponsible behavior from an organization that claims to want to end spam.

What is even more irresponsible is your statements in http://mail-abuse.org/dul/participants.htm urging ISP's to filter traffic. This is not the ISP's responsibility or job. You can not and should not suggest or encourage such port filtering at the ISP level. With the exception of known, security practices at the router level to prevent DoS attacks.

Your theory is like saying that since there are bank robbers, we should close down all public access to banks unless you are a member of that bank.

Your Analogy of the Land Owner and the Duck hunter is a lame attempt to legitimize your actions (letter to Mr. MacMillan http://mail-abuse.org/dul/letters.htm). First off, there is not just a handful of us legitimate users. That is just plain ignorant. Second, in your analogy, it is the LAND OWNERS right to say that no one can duck hunt on his property. No one else has the right to say that he HAS to allow duck hunters.

If my ISP says I can not operate a smtp server then it is their right to do so.

What you are doing isequivalent to the Mafia Style shakedowns of a neighborhood. In essence if an ISP does not play your game, you block their Dial Up users e-mail. Forcing them to join you.

You can't control the net. I suggest that you stop being part of the problem and become part of the solution.

LordInfidel

(This e-mail was sent thru a local smtp server on a DSL DHCP issued IP)

by lordinfidel

yes, this pisses me off.

No one, other then my ISP has the right to say that I should not be able to send thru my own mail server.

What's next, if your machine IP is not in the same netblock or ISP that the mail server is in, it too will be rejected?

The MAPS is just a ignorant attempt to force it's views onto others.

I really hope that the ISP's out there recognize the irresponsible behaviour and infringment on our rights this is.

As for AOL. Their presence on the list as a participant is arrogant and hypocritical.

If you notice though, ISP's such as AOL who become members, their mail servers will *never* make it on the block list.

F*&!#ng hypocrits AOL makes me sick

by zlitocook

AOL has become a monster! I know every one will not like this but!!! AOL is following Microsofts lead, you do what we like or you dont do any thing with our software. I could post what the AOL tech. help said to do to my computer after upgrading to 8.0 but it would take 10 post or more. I have to use AOL but would switch in a hot second if I could.

by lordinfidel

?

Me very confused as to why you are forced to use it.

From your peer directory listing you should be able to get another provider or at least get yourself DSL.

by zlitocook

Al Bundndy in computers! The wife loves AOL and has all her stuff configered for it. I just got her using Win98 at home last year. And I became a contract worker in july, so she makes more money! I can setup a $500.000,000 company and secure it. ButI can not upgrade my home system:( I want back in the work force!

by oldefar

If I understand the problem correctly, your client cannot send email to AOL recipients because of AOL policy. AOL has taken a position of too bad, so sad, we don't care.

If these AOL recipients want email from your client, it seems the solution would be for them to change services. Perhaps you should advise them (via an unblocked email address) that they will be unable to receive this important mail from you because of AOL policy on what they are allowed to receive, and suggest several alternative services they could switch to.

It may be that sufficient users will switch, forcing AOL to change its position. If so, you win. It may be that the recipients you hope to reach will switch to receive messages from your client. If so, you win. It may be that your intended recipients don't find sufficient value in receiving email from your client. If so, AOL is right.

by lordinfidel

Don't get me wrong.

I really despise AOL. Truly I do.

But, the bigger picture is MAPS and their Nazi like attitude towards controlling the use of the net.

Maps (mail-abuse.org) is trying to make it so that all ISP's forcibly restrict what their dial-up users can and can not do on the net.

If they succeed in bullying ISP's into joining them, you can lose very valuable freedom on the net.

I look at it like, if you give up this one ablilty, what is to stop them from saying. OK, hackers use portscanning to survey their victims. Let's shut off everyone's ability to connect to the net except for ports tcp 80,443 and udp 53. Since everyone has already been forced to use web mail because all 110 and 25 access has been shut off.
yeah, That's the net that I want to live in.

If someone wants to use AOL, that is their choice. I don't to punish the AOL user. AOL afterall is a great place for someone who has never used the net before. I will at least give it that much.
But for AOL to team up with these spam nazi's and dictate who can and can not send mail is hypocracy in it's highest form. Since at least a 1/4 of the spam I receive is from aol.

by oldefar

I agree in principal with your position that no group should dictate how information is exchanged over the net.

The problem with characterizing a person, group, or organization ? as in calling MAPS ?spam nazis? ? is that the discussion becomes personal and defensive rather than logical and objective. Intelligent debate gets buried in emotional rhetoric, and this obstructs everyone?s ability to implement rational solutions.

I personally object to any and all attempts to control thoughts, beliefs, or activities that do not cause personal injury to others. I find institutional censorship counter to my inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

What is needed is a technical solution to block spam that is recipient controlled. While you and I may find the delete key as sufficient with spam as the trash can is for snail mail spam, I understand why others desire a more automated approach. This would be a noble area for the volunteers at MAPS to address asan alternative to their current efforts. It returns responsibility to the individual, striking a blow for freedom.

by road-dog

Stopping spam by any means possible. All one has to do is look into the member directory and gain loads of non web savvy email users. The fact that someone uses an AOL might make them fit a "sucker" profile.

Thus they are a huge slow moving target for spammers.

AOL stores all of the email for their users rather than having an real email client at the user PC, this becomes a storage nightmare.

Suffice it to say, what made AOL successful also makes it impractical. The answer is not to make the rest of the web just as bad, but to find a better way to run their services.

by tbragsda

Your rant is valid, but AOL is the one with the power in this case. They CAN do whatever they like with some 30,000,000 users, they could fix policy with most anyone. And you cant just tell foke to use another service. You want to tell your clients that "well you just cant reach those 30m clients"

I dont pretend to have a answer to either problem. AOL, MAPS, what are we supposed to do? I dont have a contact at AOL who can change policy.

by lordinfidel

I am just reitarting it.

But, besides the emotionalism, I equate their tactics to that of the Nazi's.

They want to be able to control that aspect of the net by saying who can and can not host mail servers.

They also strong arm other ISP's to follow.

Sounds like Dictatorship to me. It goes beyond censorship. Because once that right is given up, there is nothing from stopping them to take away the rest of our rights to use the net as we see fit.

While I agree the end-user could do with tools that help them control spam. But their *are* tools available; people just choose not to use them.

But this is not really an automated approach. This is a blanket prevention of all E-mail, legitimate and spam, from Dial-up user netblocks.

So the only way that you can host your own mail server would be for you to get a static IP.

Then you also effectively kill off another business sector. The dynamic DNS sector.

They make their living off of dial-up users using their service to host dns.

If you read my letter to them, it was very clear and concise. It did use rhetoric, but only to combat their analogy.

I did offer an alternative to their practice.
As others have done.

Others I am sure have pointed at theerrors of their ways. I personnaly though find it objectionable that by an ISP joining their ranks, that their netblocks will not show up on the block list.

by lordinfidel

Is that They have some big set of balls participitaing in this when their user base generates so much spam it's unreal.

The fact that by participating in the MAPS DUL program so that their netblocks do not get on the block list is appalling and pathetic.

That's my basic beef.

Countless times I have alerted AOL about their servers being used to relay spam. And never once have they replied back. But instead left the server or account open, forcing me to block that server IP.

AOL though did not create MAPS. They just had the balls to join and back them.

by lordinfidel

But then again, when I renovated my house, I wired up every room.

I have my own office w/dsl that is also the server room. Which houses my firewll, router, mail server, file server, gaming machine. Plus a workbench for my test network.

But then again, I also have my own domain name so I don't need to rely on external ISP's for their domain.

Wish I had advice for the workforce thing. I know it sucks right now.

I actually got a tip for a very large 100,000+ plus world wide company,applied (granted I am over qualified for the position, but it is a larger org then where I am at, plus alot more cash, it would be my first real shot at 6 figures) and they have not called me for an interview.

And I live 5 minutes away from theircorp office.

Go figure.

by guruofdos

This happens with the majority of ISP's, not just AOL. See the article on page 302 of the January 2003 edition of PC Shopper. This is also on line at pcshopper.co.uk.

Basically, any SMTP mail server (and AOL uses web-based mail in a proprietary format so it's NOT actually AOL's fault!) using the SMTP protocol has the ability to act as a relay between two external servers. This is an inherent feature of SMTP because it means backbones can accept mail from remote servers and relay it to another server if a direct connection is down. Unfortunately, this is a gift handed to spammers on a plate. Spammers often fake source addresses and open relays will happily accept forged mail with no checks! A list of open relays (port 23) is maintained by OpenRBL and DBSL (Distributed Sender Boycott List - www.dsbl.org). If for any reason, your mail happens to be relayed via one of these servers, or your address happens to be on a spam list that uses these servers on their 'blacklist', your email address will be added to the list by default. This can happen to ANYONE on ANY ISP. Aol users actually have less history of this happening then most other ISP's who use regular POP/SMTP/Dial-Up email services.

I use AOL, because it's cheap, reliableand AOL Bertelsmann UK is a separate company from the US AOL Time Warner combo and I get free 24/7 phone support. I don't have to like AOL though, just because I use it!!!

by lordinfidel

I am a huge proponent of locking down smtp servers so that they are not open-relay.

Open-Relay servers should be black-holed until they are fixed.

With that said, your right AOL is not the only ISP on their list.

But MAPS is way different from the ORDB and DBSL.

They "blanketly state" that absolutely NO dial-up users can use their "own" smtp server. That they MUST be forced to use their ISP's mail server to route "ONLY" that ISP's authorized domain name(s).

This is where my beefis.

I should not be punished because there are irresponsible people on the net. If that were the case and applied to all aspects of the net, there would be No Net. 99% of users do not know how to secure or protect their machines. And at least 60% of the admins out there still have no clue how to protect their machines.
(Yes I pulled the 60% # out of my ass)

And I bet that most small companies connected via dsl have NO protection.

How many people have you see running PWS on their machine. Alot.

This discussion is closed to new replies.