On 2024-06-10 at 10:34:09 UTC-0400 (Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:34:09 +0200) Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users <uh...@fantomas.sk> is rumored to have said:
>>> On Mon, 10 Jun 2024, 12:37 pm Jeff Peng via Postfix-users, < >>> postfix-users@postfix.org> wrote: >>>> why not postscreen for this purpose? > >> On 2024-06-10 at 09:35:25 UTC-0400 (Mon, 10 Jun 2024 14:35:25 +0100) >> Gilgongo via Postfix-users <gilgo...@phreak.co.uk> >> is rumored to have said: >>> Thanks - I thought about postscreen, but wasn't sure if it would be >>> overkill for such a small server? Could look again though. > > On 10.06.24 10:11, Bill Cole via Postfix-users wrote: >> Postscreen is not 'overkill' in any sense. It is designed to shed load from >> spambots, so as long as you don't enable the after-greeting tests, it will >> be a lighter load than a Perl policy filter. > > Not mentioning pregreet test which is AFAIK impossible with policy server. Right, and the pregreet test is really the biggest hammer of all against the spammiest of spam. -- Bill Cole _______________________________________________ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
