Reply to post: Re: Schultz Re: A good argument for bandwidth managenent

Net neutrality fans' joy as '2.3 million email' flood hits US Congress

Matt Bryant Silver badge
Facepalm

Re: Schultz Re: A good argument for bandwidth managenent

"The FC just realized what happens if everyone can sent unlimited numbers of emails....." Please do some research - the daily email traffic in the US is in the hundreds of billions of emails, so 2m is a drop in an ocean. Usually, when dealing with email bombing (sorry, 'legitimate protest'), the limiting factor is the max size of the targeted client's mailbox, 20GB being the figure I recall from Exchange and Outlook 2007, which was the last time I bothered worrying about such an attack. The factor I have found to be the issue is the performance of the disk system in the Exchange server, but seeing as most government organisations attach them to at least NAS arrays if not full-on SAN arrays, dealing with 2m emails is hardly an issue.

You then also have to consider two other important factors - firstly, many organisations now have email monitoring and security software which will identify and nullify mass email attacks; secondly, if you advertise your protest as intended to overwhelm someone's email system then, by the laws of most Western countries, you are organizing a denial of service, which is a criminal act even if your target negates the effects of your protest.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR WEEKLY TECH NEWSLETTER

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021