RE: [Exim] Should there be any reason for this?

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004, Hochstrasser Benedikt wrote:

> Ident has been abused many times to harvest [potential] email addresses.

Then solve the actual problem, instead of creating a new one.

They sure won't have any fun emailing to our crypted identd tokens.

And ident requests can yield useful evidence, too:

2004-04-18 22:08:37 H=(metorex.fi) [200.73.172.196] U=CacheFlow Server
[...] rejected

2004-04-19 09:54:10 SMTP call from [65.43.192.10] U=CacheFlow Server
dropped: too many unrecognized commands

2004-04-21 15:35:46 H=(130.209.204.200) [200.73.172.196] U=CacheFlow Server
[...] rejected

2004-04-21 20:08:12 SMTP call from [61.55.134.161] U=CacheFlow Server
dropped: too many unrecognized commands

Not nearly as many as there used to be, and the open-proxy squids seem
to have finally all been exterminated, but still...

> Plus, Windows doesn't offer it

I'm not sure why that would dissuade me from using it ...

> and most smtp gateways are to be considered "single user".

Many sources of SMTP calls nowadays are not bona fide mail gateways!
I'll use any weapon to deal with that problem, as long as it's not
actually harmful to the rest of the 'net. But we set a limited
timeout on our ident request, to avoid getting hung-up on
bl**dy-minded firewalls.

We're not the only ones using crypted ident tokens, as a perusal of
our log shows. They're not exactly common, admittedly, but they're in
there. Indeed, a subdomain of cam.ac.uk is represented ;-)