Combate ao spam no Brasil – a gerência da porta 25

Combate ao spam no Brasil – a gerência da porta 25


Spam Combat in Brazil
Port 25 Management The discussion on Port 25 started
when we started to feel uncomfortable with the significant position
that Brazil was obtaining in the league tables of world spam generation, And then, you know, we decided
to delve a bit deeper into the problem and discover the real reason behind this and how this problem could possibly be solved. For the end user, nothing has changed. However, for the spammer, a lot has changed, as the spammer shall no longer be able
to operate as an e-mail server at the end A standard server, that’s what I mean. The user, when his or her machine
was captured by these spammers, quickly exhausted the
machine’s processing capacity, and the machine’s capacity
in terms of bandwidth with the Internet constantly sending e-mails. Research, mapping and action I suggested that we should
set up an antispam work group within the Steering Committee. Why? After all, this is a problem that affects, afflicts all Internet users,
right, because in those days, back in 2005, ninety per cent
of electronic messages sent by e-mail were unwanted messages and this was a problem, an important
method of injecting viruses, malicious programs or Botnets, or other programs seeking to steal passwords. Spam was, therefore, an important
way of infecting users’ machines. 99% of IP connections were outside Brazil, and more
than 90% were headed outside Brazil in chinese In this way, the reputation, the quality, and the security of the
Brazilian Internet service in the world started to be very strongly
significantly affected As a result, Brazil started to be present
in a list of major world spammers, and then all Brazilian IPs started to appear in these lists, with a serious consequence: there started to be blockages
on the part of several, and I mean several, e-mail
servers from throughout the world, regarding the receipt of
messages from Brazil. After all, it was a long job, taking a long time, But essentially its core target was the following: To make sure that the user did
not have his or her machine captured, making this machine be transformed into a spammer e-mail server on the Internet. Port 25 Management
The Question Port 25 is a port where you,
any machine, may access another machine through this port and say ‘hello’, and then the port shall respond something, and then you ask it to send you an e-mail, you shall ask for its help,
to forward an e-mail to someone This was perfectly acceptable on the Internet, For you to be supported
by someone along the way to send an e-mail to a third person, which is the very basis of the SMTP system; However, this is also an open door,
an easy route for abuse. Port 25 was being abused by people who wanted to deliver unwanted e-mails; so they would get users, without their knowledge, to deliver
the e-mail message directly, so that they would not be
directly held responsible for that malign attitude, that of delivering electronic mail that the people did not want to receive. In a 15 month spell
Cert.br conducted an study 500 million spam messages were received.
And as each message had at least 10 addressees About 5 billion spam messages
would have been sent in only 15 months Discussions and referrals As from 2008, we started to talk with the different segments that
were involved with the problem. In other words, ANATEL, because, as ANATEL regulates
telecommunications companies, a blockage of Port 25 would
need assistance from ANATEL, and history showed that this
was indeed necessary. In addition, access providers,
the telecom companies themselves; and the users, through consumer
defence organisations: and this led us to
reach our conclusion that, for us to manage
to move so many players, We needed to have a, so to speak,
follow a certain formality, some steps that we indeed
followed from then on. In 2009, the Steering Committee
passed a ruling suggesting that users should no longer use Port 25 for e-mail communication, but Port 587, through
the e-mail providers. The providers should help the
users to make this migration and the telecom companies should
proceed with blocking Port 25, all this being backed
up by best practices, Or, in other words, in what
we thought would be, after all, let’s say, a good solution to reduce the volume of spam that
came out of the Brazilian network What does it mean to shift the port number? This is a technical reason, it is simply a change
to the port number, and you well know that
there are thousands of ports that you could use for all the services. If there is an agreement
between one end and the other, You can use any port, for any service, Provided the two ends have
configured this service; for example, the sending of files
is not port 21, but port 2221, You just need to reach an
agreement with the other person, If you have agreed on something with
him or her, then it works in the same way. And what about Net neutrality? In fact, the group’s work was
a technical recommendation, In order to improve
the Brazilian Internet, regarding the security
of the Brazilian Internet. At no moment have we even spoken about discriminating Joe’s e-mail, which is slower, Or those of Jack, that would be quicker. It is interesting for us to
remember principle number 6, out of the 10 principles for Internet governance
and use, established by the Steering Committee. When, after 2 long years of discussion, we approved this sixth principle,
that of neutrality of the network, we took care to say: “Except for technical reasons.” So, did the Brazilian Internet improved
with the closing of the port 25? It is better, without a shadow of doubt. You just need to refer to the
CERT.br statistics about the countries that send most spam, and all that; This definitely made a big difference. Multistakeholder is possible The result of a multistakeholder process, It shall always be seen as better, Because it counts on adoption by all proponents And all those who have discussed this process. This is an advantage from
the political standpoint. It is complex, and it is also great
from the democracy standpoint, and that of the different forces that act; And it is even greater
because of its final result, In which society came out
a winner; in other words, there was nothing too
strong that could have prevented society
from bringing a gain. So, this is what I think
was my case, personally, And also for the telecom sector, an immense pride in being
part of this process and of being able to publicise
it the way it is done.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *