From owner-freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Wed Mar 29 23:22:11 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pf@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAC9BD24370 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 23:22:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dave@horsfall.org) Received: from viclamta29p.bpe.bigpond.com (viclamta29p.bpe.bigpond.com [203.38.21.93]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "", Issuer "Openwave Messaging Inc." (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 88B3FFF3 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 23:22:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dave@horsfall.org) Received: from smtp.telstra.com ([10.10.26.4]) by viclafep22p-svc.bpe.nexus.telstra.com.au with ESMTP id <20170329212056.FHVD17692.viclafep22p-svc.bpe.nexus.telstra.com.au@smtp.telstra.com> for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 08:20:56 +1100 X-RG-Spam: Unknown X-Junkmail-Premium-Raw: score=7/83, refid=2.7.2:2017.3.29.203916:17:7.944, ip=110.141.193.233, rules=__HAS_FROM, __TO_MALFORMED_2, __TO_NAME, __TO_NAME_DIFF_FROM_ACC, __BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT, __IN_REP_TO, __HAS_MSGID, __SANE_MSGID, __REFERENCES, __USER_AGENT, __MIME_VERSION, __CT, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN, __SUBJ_ALPHA_NEGATE, __NO_HTML_TAG_RAW, BODY_SIZE_700_799, BODYTEXTP_SIZE_3000_LESS, __MIME_TEXT_P1, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY, RDNS_GENERIC_POOLED, HTML_00_01, HTML_00_10, BODY_SIZE_5000_LESS, RDNS_SUSP_GENERIC, IN_REP_TO, MSG_THREAD, __TO_REAL_NAMES, LEGITIMATE_SIGNS, NO_URI_FOUND, NO_CTA_URI_FOUND, BODY_SIZE_1000_LESS, BODY_SIZE_2000_LESS, RDNS_SUSP, __MIME_TEXT_P, REFERENCES, NO_URI_HTTPS, BODY_SIZE_7000_LESS Received: from aneurin.horsfall.org (110.141.193.233) by smtp.telstra.com (9.0.019.015-1) id 58DBC0A1000DD52C for freebsd-pf@freebsd.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 08:20:56 +1100 Received: from aneurin.horsfall.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by aneurin.horsfall.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id v2TLKurH066384 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 08:20:56 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from dave@horsfall.org) Received: from localhost (dave@localhost) by aneurin.horsfall.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) with ESMTP id v2TLKteJ066381 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 08:20:56 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from dave@horsfall.org) X-Authentication-Warning: aneurin.horsfall.org: dave owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 08:20:55 +1100 (EST) From: Dave Horsfall To: FreeBSD PF List Subject: re: When should I worry about performance tuning? In-Reply-To: <404620925.34894.1490821068262.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g03> Message-ID: References: <404620925.34894.1490821068262.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g03> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (BSF 67 2015-01-07) X-Home-Page: http://www.horsfall.org/ X-Witty-Saying: "chmod 666 the_mode_of_the_beast" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-BeenThere: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Technical discussion and general questions about packet filter \(pf\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 23:22:11 -0000 On Wed, 29 Mar 2017, Martin MATO wrote: > In the first case, you'll should prefer setting greylisting / tarpitting > at minimum, feeding a firewall table for blacklisting is a neverending > story (plus, there is some real chance blocking real MX relays). A judicious selection of DNSBLs and enforcement of RFC-compliance etc do the trick for me; I block several hundred attempts each day, with very few false positives and hardly any getting through (and I don't mind wasting SMTP cycles). And was the OP really blocking only a few ports and allowing the rest? If so, that's backwards to good practice. -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer."