Admailstrator wrote:

> Wondering if anyone had any feelings positive or negative on the Barracuda
> Networks Spam Filter.
>
>
They consider it acceptable to bounce messages that contain spam, and
allow the user to configure it to do so. As a result, it bounces spam
to innocent victims that have had their addresses forged onto spam runs.
That is completely unacceptable.

KWW

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Kevin Wayne Williams  <kww.nihongo@verizon.nut> wrote:
>Admailstrator wrote:
> 
>
>They consider it acceptable to bounce messages that contain spam, and
>allow the user to configure it to do so. As a result, it bounces spam
>to innocent victims that have had their addresses forged onto spam runs.
>That is completely unacceptable.

Is this the default configuration?  If it is, that's bad.  But if the user
has to deliberately configure it to do something unacceptable, it is not
the fault of the software but the user.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra.  C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

"Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr." <LarrySheldon@cox.net> wrote in
news:F1%vc.5875$1L4.1652@okepread02:

> I'm wondering if this is a stealth spam of some kind, since
> it is asked here and on NANOG (that I know of) from time to time.

The last time (in my recent memory- admittedly, I scan NANOG without reding
every post) it was brought up there it was my boss.

IME the barracuda is crap, thus far. Our first eval unit showed us that
asynchronous bounces will hose it good and proper, as it builds a new
"profile" each time it receives mail for a new address... This means that a
dictionary attack is effectively a Barracuda DOS. Two other units on eval
have either failed to boot at all or experienced almost-daily random
reboots- not a desireable trait in a frontline MX.

~Empty
--
'You're not friends. You'll never be friends. You'll be in love till it
kills you both. You'll fight, and you'll shag, and you'll hate each other
till it makes you quiver, but you'll never be friends. Love isn't brains,
children, it's blood... blood screaming inside you to work its will. I may
be love's XXXXX, but at least I'm man enough to admit it.'
Spike

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

In article <c9q46g$jl3$1@panix2.panix.com>, Scott Dorsey says...

> Kevin Wayne Williams  <kww.nihongo@verizon.nut> wrote: 
[vbcol=seagreen] 
[vbcol=seagreen] 
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Is this the default configuration?  If it is, that's bad.  But if the user
> has to deliberately configure it to do something unacceptable, it is not
> the fault of the software but the user.

If the behavior is unacceptable, the option to activate the behavior should
not be available.

--
Norman
~Win dain a lotica, En vai tu ri, Si lo ta
~Fin dein a loluca, En dragu a sei lain
~Vi fa-ru les shutai am, En riga-lint

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]