ESP unwittingly used to send spam

Late last week I heard from someone at AOL they were seeing strange traffic from a major ESP, that looked like the ESP was an open relay. This morning I received an email from AOL detailing what happened as relayed by the ESP.

IronPort Open Relay Vulnerability
Systems Affected
IronPort A60 running software version 2.5.4-005. According to IronPort, later devices and software versions using the same filtering mechanisms are vulnerable.
Overview
In recent weeks, one or more rogue spammers have been using misconfigured IronPort A60s as open relays to send unsolicited emails for AOL users via open relay. It is important for IronPort device administrators to review their configuration to shore up any vulnerability to this web server exploit.
Diagnosis
A seemingly minor configuration mistake made years ago internally has been exploited over the last several weeks to send out massive amounts of unsolicited email to AOL users. The spam mail originated from an outside zombie server, apparently infected with remote mailing viruses (such as BackDoor.Servu.76) according to the IT contact at IP 66.139.77.16. <ESP> has a filter specifically designed to deliver email over IP ranges set for AOL only. However, it was listed before a filter designed to log and discard bounced emails coming in through the Internet-facing of the IronPort appliance.
Impact
We have received 6,500 customer complaints so far through the AOL feedback loop. As the IronPort devices are black boxes, we are unable to determine how many unsolicited emails were delivered across them. It is difficult to ascertain whether or not the rogue spammer(s) knew only AOL addresses were delivered using this exploit. It is important to note that only AOL addresses were delivered in our specific case due to the order of the filters.
Solution
The solution was simple: move the filter designed to log and drop bounce messages coming in from the Internet to the top of the filter list so it will run first, as other filters may direct the IronPort device to deliver the emails through this vulnerability.
Authors: Jake Lanza, Baigh Auvigne, Daniel Fox

Congrats to the ESP for noticing this so quickly and being on the ball to stop this leak so quickly.
The compromise was first noticed when email coming back through the AOL FBL did not match any mail sent by the ESP. Initially, the ESP contacted AOL to report a problem with the FBL, but in working with AOL employees determined the email was coming from the ESP’s IP addresses.
This highlights the need to not just process FBL emails, but also monitor them and react when there are emails in a FBL that you do not recognize.
Ironport has responded here.

Related Posts

Update on Yahoo and the PBL

Last week I requested details about Yahoo rejections for IPs pointing to the PBL when the IP was not on the PBL. A blog reader did provide me with extremely useful logs documenting the problem. Thank you!
Based on my examination of the logs, this appears to be a problem only on some of the Yahoo! MXs. In fact, in the logs I was sent, the email was rejected from 2 machines and then eventually accepted by a third.
I have forwarded those logs onto Yahoo who are looking into the issue. I have also talked with one of the Spamhaus volunteers and Spamhaus is aware of the issue as well.
The right people are looking at the issue and Spamhaus and Yahoo are both working on fixing this.
Thanks for the reports and for the logs.

Read More

Predictions for 2008

I did not have a lot of predictions for what will happen with email at the beginning of the year so I did not do a traditional beginning of the year post. Over the last 3 – 4 weeks, though, I have noticed some things that I think show where the industry is going.
Authentication. In January two announcements happened that lead me to believe most legitimate mail will be DK/DKIM signed by the end of the year. AOTA announced that approximately 50% of all email was currently authenticated. They did not separate out SPF/SenderID authentication from DK/DKIM authentication, but this still suggests email authentication is being widely adopted. AOL announced they will be checking DKIM on their inbound mail. I expect more and more email will be DKIM signed in response to this announcement.
Filtering. The end of 2007 marked a steady uptick in mail being filtered or blocked by recipient domains. I expect this trend to continue throughout 2008. Recipient domains are rolling out new technology to measure complaints, evaluate reputation and monitor unwanted email in ways that tease out the bad actors from the good. This means more bad and borderline email will be blocked. Over the short term, I expect to see more good email blocked, too, but expect this will resolve itself by Q2/Q3.
Sender Improvements. As the ISPs get better at filtering, I expect that many borderline senders will discover they cannot continue to have sloppy subscription practices and still get their mail delivered. Improved authentication and better filtering let ISPs pin-point blocks. Instead of having to block by IP or by domain, they can block only some mail from a domain, or only some mail from an IP. There are a number of senders who are sending mail that users do not want mixed with mail that recipients do want. Right now, if there is more mail that recipients want in that mix, then ISPs let the mail through. This will not continue to happen through 2008. Senders will need to send mail users actively want in order to see good delivery.
Less is more. A lot of other email bloggers have talked about this, and I will echo their predictions. Less email is more. Send relevant mail that your customers want. Target, target, target. Good mailers will not send offers to their entire database, instead they will send mail to a select portion of their database.
Feedback loops. Use of feedback loops by recipient domains will continue to grow.
Mobile email. More recipients will be receiving email on mobile devices.
Suggestions for 2008

Read More

Greylisting: that which Yahoo does not do

Over the last couple days multiple people have asserted to me that Yahoo is greylisting mail. The fact that Yahoo itself asserts it is not using greylisting as a technique to control mail seems to have no effect on the number of people who believe that Yahoo is greylisting.
Deeply held beliefs by many senders aside, Yahoo is not greylisting. Yahoo is using temporary failures (4xx) as a way to defer and control mail coming into their servers and their users.
I think much of the problem is that the definition of greylisting is not well understood by the people using the term. Greylisting generally refers to a process of refusing email with a 4xx response the first time delivery is attempted and accepting the email at the second delivery attempt. There are a number of ways to greylist, per message, per IP or per from address. The defining feature of greylisting is that the receiving MTA keeps track of the messages (IP or addresss) that it has rejected and allows the mail through the second time the mail is sent.
This technique for handling email is a direct response to some spamming software, particularly software that uses infected Windows machines to send email. The spam software will drop any email in response to a 4xx or 5xx response. Well designed software will retry any email receiving a 4xx response. By rejecting anything on the first attempt with a 4xx, the receiving ISPs can trivially block mail from spambots.
Where does this fit in with what Yahoo is doing? Yahoo is not keeping track of the mail it rejects and is not reliably allowing email through on the second attempt. There are a couple reasons why Yahoo is deferring mail.

Read More