From: Jay Chandler (listssequestered.net)
Date: Thu Sep 20 2007 - 15:34:37 CDT

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Frank Gruellich wrote:
> Hi,
>
> some of my mail account users recently noticed while using public WLANs
> in hotels or something, that port 25 is either entirely blocked or
> redirected to another MTA (to which they don't want to give their
> mails). I think WLAN providers do that to block spammers abusing open
> mail relays or spam bot networks.
>
> To provide our mail service to these networks we thought about doing
> some ugly VPN tricks, we thought about more ugly web mailers... but I
> would like the much simpler way to accept SMTP via SSL at 465 in the
> hope, that neither open servers nor infected boxes offer encrypted spam
> relay. So what's your experience, is this a port that is treated same
> as port 25 or is there in general a better chance for this?

As Victor's said, 587 is the way to go. A network that blocks outgoing
587 is either a high security corporate site, or the sign of an admin in
desperate need of a clue with regard to what he's doing...

--
Jay Chandler / KB1JWQ
Living Legend / Systems Exorcist
Today's Excuse: Bit rot

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]