RE: [Full-Disclosure] Backdoor not recognized by Kaspersky
From: Nick FitzGerald (nick_at_virus-l.demon.co.uk)
To: firstname.lastname@example.org Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 13:50:59 +1300
"Aditya, ALD [Aditya Lalit Deshmukh]" wrote:
> how about the smtp server simply rejecting mail from spoofed hosts ? as
> all the viruses generate spoofed hosts and it is very easy for any smtp
> server to do a dns lookup on the sending server, if the hostname / ip
> address do not match reject the message.
Because, no matter how much you may not like it, some of us have to use
spoofing. It is a designed in feature -- sure a "weakness" by today's
standards, but not as much of a weakness as the fact that the whole
Internet as we know it is based on protocols and mechanisms that
_assume_ physical security and guaranteed locatability of connected
machines and those with administrative authority over them. In fact,
those factors were so deeply ingrained in the original design that I
doubt anyone involved in spec'ing, designing and implementing what
became ARPAnet even thought to ask about such issues.
In short, _if_ something was on that network it was _supposed to be
Who in their right mind would adopt such a system for "the Information
Super-highway" and encourage business to "get on the net" when it was
deployed as an open sewer rather than a self-trusting closed network??
Gluing another layer of "machine authentication" into the SMTP protocol
won't fix any of the fundamental underlying problems that allow spam
and mass-mailed viruses to aggrieve us so...
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.