Unsecured wifi might be contributory negligence

Ian Batten igb at batten.eu.org
Thu Feb 23 10:45:58 GMT 2012

On 23 Feb 2012, at 09:27, Roland Perry wrote:

> In article <C4A0E2748F0246C4BDD0CF9593D0B324 at pingu>, Ian Johnson <Ian.Johnson at uwe.ac.uk> writes
>>> Traditionally you run the risk of getting blocked if your network is
>>> hijacked by a spammer.
>> Wireless users can't contact my MTA, and would need to login to my
>> ISP's.  No issues.
> Many spammers will have their own MTA (it's faster than using someone else's anyway), or back in the day use an open relay. I've got an MTA on my Windows laptop (which is part of my road warrior kit).

But a lot of ISPs block port 25 (and sometimes even 587) to and from anything other that their MTAs.  It's a common complaint for customers who want to (for whatever reason) use their own MTA.    I think that, aside from a few hold-outs, that's generally now held to be good practice.

>> That's assuming I was legally compelled to surrender the logs. 

Logs?  In a domestic setting?


More information about the ukcrypto mailing list