On Friday 21 August 2009 00:23:07 Olivier Nicole wrote:
> > > This is a difficult question.
> >
> > I disagree.
>
> Just that because you disagree makes the question not simple :)
Perhaps you didn't understand. I tried to explain why the choice of
pre-DATA reject_rbl_client lookups should be preferred to doing them
through content filters. Yes, I made the exception of untrustworthy
lists. If you look back, you'll possibly see that I was proposing
responsible, informed use of DNSBLs.
The rest of this mail consisted of straw man arguments, not worthy of
reply. None of the arguments put forth suggested how DNSBL use in
content filters might be superior to pre-DATA reject_rbl_client.
I think blind reliance on content filtering is ill-advised, based on
poor logic and lack of understanding of the nature of spam. SA and
other content filters will be checking the same DNSBL as I am, with
addition of some that I'd consider less trustworthy. Furthermore, by
virtue of having accepted the DATA, a MTA assumes responsibility for
these few messages amidst all the spam garbage.
I'm not opposed to content filtering; on the contrary, I know it's
an important third or fourth line of defense for many sites. Those
sites which are using it as the first line get what they deserve.
--
Offlist mail to this address is discarded unless
"/dev/rob0" or "not-spam" is in Subject: header
