João Miguel Neves a écrit : > Charles Marcus escreveu: >> On 2/8/2009, João Miguel Neves (joao.ne...@intraneia.com) wrote: >> >>> I recently enabled reject_unverified_sender in my postfix configuration, >>> but it seems like it fails when the server against which the sender is >>> verified uses greylisting. I've been getting log entries like (@ were >>> replaced by _AT_): >>> >> You're not trying to verify ALL senders are you? This ia a really bad >> idea, and will get you blacklisted by a lot of providers, especially if >> you have high traffic . >> > Yes, I was. Thanks for the heads up. I don't have high traffic, but I'm > limiting the effect of SAV.
and how do you limit it? 71.66.121.221 is listed on zen.spamhaus.org (via cbl) and spamcop (as well as Barracuda BRBL, SORBS, ... etc). it is also a residential IP as can be seen from the rDNS (.res.rr.com). >> You should only perform SAV against servers that YOU control, or at >> least have an agreement ahead of time with them. >> > That would mean that the most useful use of SAV is negated. Or is there > some prior arrangement that would allow me to do that to hotmail.com, > gmail.com, yahoo.com*? > > I'm going to reduce the target domains, but is there a known agreement > with MS, Google or Yahoo to use SAV against their servers? > No, and it won't help you anyway. spammers can easily use a valid address. and these domains have too many users that most addresses you'll test are valid! (did you never see the "sorry, this account is not available" when trying to open an account?).
