On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 12:51:20 -0600, David Gibbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jeff Koch wrote:
> > Good grief. What a 'holier than thou' attitude.
>
> Not in the slightest ... you didn't mention you had customers that might
> be spammers (I won't touch that).
>
> Based on your original post, it
increase your bandwidth utilization, or put a
heavier load on your mail gateway.
And I won't touch that 'spammer as a user' comment either
-JR
- Original Message -
From: "David Gibbs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, Dec
Jeff Koch wrote:
Good grief. What a 'holier than thou' attitude.
Not in the slightest ... you didn't mention you had customers that might
be spammers (I won't touch that).
Based on your original post, it seemed to me that your primary problem
wasn't the spam going out, but that people were getting
Good grief. What a 'holier than thou' attitude.
To be more specific we have had cases where user cgi scripts have been
subverted into being spam senders. And yes we don't allow FormMail scripts
that don't control the recipient list - but occasionally a user will
upload a weak formmail script a
Jeff Koch wrote:
We've been burned a few times by spammers getting into our servers to
send out spam. Does anyone know (or can provide a reference) for how SA
could be integrated into qmail to examine outgoing emails?
IMHO, your energy would be far better served working on securing your
servers
