spam is getting worse

hotstreek704

New member
Makes my life easier when I don't have to deal with 300 screaming idiots. Where they give out their email addresses when they sign up for stuff, then each one gets 200 spams a day. Besides, It's my network, I get to decide what goes in and out. Technically their email no matter what the content is company property.

maxpower.gif
 
that's actually entirely untrue.

the internet privacy act of 1995 puts very precise labels on e-mail and other electronic property rights.

it is YOUR PRIVATE PROPERTY if one of these three conditions apply:

1) it is to you
2) it is from you
3) it is about you.

thus, email addressed to you, even at your company domain, is YOUR PRIVATE PROPERTY until you authorize someone else to look at it.

regardless, when servers reject my mail server it unnerves me; because it's on an ISP's list of dynamic IPs does not mean it is automatically a spamhost.

that's the problem, to be frank. the solution is intelligent, learning client-side filters.

~ dan ~
 
hm; it could be, but i always THOUGHT it was a federal deal. i've been sued over electronic property and won for exactly this reason. i intercepted a document that was about me and used it to get a guy i worked with at a consulting firm fired; he sued me and the employer and lost because since his message was about me, i was entitled to distribute it however i saw fit and the consequence was that he got fired for trashing a team member's decision to a client.

~ dan ~
 
You made me think. Maybe all those seminars and security discussions were in error with their take on the legal "ownership"; for lack of a better term, of and email sent through a company owned server.

Turns out it is Not an easy question. There are grey areas. The best I can tell we're both right.

Quoting my company's attorney: "The email message content remains the property of the author,
even if the email file becomes the property of the company."

Specifically regarding the filtering mail for spam (or any other reason: Filtering is considered intervention, on the level of what happens to the file, therefore it's OK to do. There are no laws in place that require a company to allow it's employees to send or receive any particular email. In other words, if I choose to I may legally filter email crossing my company's resources, (network, servers, etc.) in any manner or for any reason. Which makes sense, because the network resources are property of the company. The only thing I may not do is Intercept and alter, publish or redistribute the email content without permission of the owner of the content.

The really scary thing that we all need to be aware of is that, so far, there's no federal law that requires employers to notify employees that their communications are being monitored. Legislation was introduced in Congress in 1991 by Sen. Paul Simon, D-Ill., that would have required advance notification to both employees and customers of electronic monitoring. The bill, known as The Privacy for Consumers and Workers Act, prohibited undisclosed monitoring of rest rooms and dressing-room and locker-room facilities, except when the employer suspected illegal conduct. The bill, which was never passed, would have provided for fines for violations and permitted injured employees to sue for compensatory and punitive damages and attorneys' fees.

So as far as the general issues, we can both say we're right, but specifically regarding what I was talking about in this thread, which is spam filtering; I have every right to do it.
To be honest if anyone complained, I would put their email account in the bypass file so it doesn't get filtered. Then you'll see how quickly they come crawling back to me.

As far as server side filtering, for anything other than a small business; it's the only way. To have a separate spam-filtering app on each of my company's workstations is ridiculous. Why don
 
that all makes very good sense.

word to guys digging for useful information, and thanks for the multi-perspective outlook.

i was thinking more along the lines of filtering BY CONTENT, which involves reading words and stuff, but you've got a point. what the company does with its own resources are entirely up to it (excepting the intellectual property rights involved with the conten). so a company could say "we're not delivering this message because it's a waste of our resources" but i'm still not convinced a company could say "we're not delivering this message because it contains the word 'sale' three times."

but yeah, i hate being rejected because i'm a dynamic IP.

~ dan ~
 
Regarding the other thin we spoke about:

access-list 152 deny tcp any any range 135 139 log
access-list 152 deny tcp any any eq 445 log
access-list 152 deny udp any any eq 1900
access-list 152 deny tcp any any eq chargen
access-list 152 deny tcp any any eq 8000
access-list 152 deny udp any any eq tftp
access-list 152 deny tcp any any eq 4444
access-list 152 deny tcp any any eq 5554 log
access-list 152 deny tcp any any eq 9996 log
access-list 152 deny tcp any any eq 42
access-list 152 deny tcp any any eq sunrpc
 
Back
Top