On Sat, 2009-02-14 at 10:42 -0800, Ricardo Kleemann wrote:
> >> > Do you use any MTA-level DNSBLs?
> >>
> >> No.
> >
> > If you have ample of ressources you can do this. If you are getting
> > tenthousands of mails you can't (or won't). We reject about 90% of the
> > spam at MTA. That's mostly Bot
Hi,
> Do you use any MTA-level DNSBLs?
No.
If you have ample of ressources you can do this. If you are getting
tenthousands of mails you can't (or won't). We reject about 90% of the
spam at MTA. That's mostly Bot spam. Why should we burn good ressources
for that stuff? Interestingly, that al
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 12:43 -0600, McDonald, Dan wrote:
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 12:20 -0600, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 17:43 +, Martin Gregorie wrote:
I've heard it said that IPV6 will...
You can always spoof an IP address of a
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 12:43 -0600, McDonald, Dan wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 12:20 -0600, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> > On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 17:43 +, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> > > I've heard it said that IPV6 will...
> > You can always spoof an IP address of any type. The only email header
> >
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 12:20 -0600, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 17:43 +, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> > I've heard it said that IPV6 will...
> You can always spoof an IP address of any type. The only email header
> you can trust absolutely is the topmost Received header in an ema
IPv6 will not banish NAT. It's too useful for other purposes.
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 9:43 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 18:01 +0100, Benny Pedersen wrote:
>> On Thu, February 12, 2009 19:29, John Hardin wrote:
>> > Ultimately that's what you have to do. The only way to autom
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 17:43 +, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> I've heard it said that IPV6 will put paid to privacy for
> whistle-blowers etc because, with that fully implemented, NAT will
> vanish and all IPs will be unique.
Mail servers, of necessity, _do_ use unique IPs, whether v4 or v6.
> B
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 18:01 +0100, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> On Thu, February 12, 2009 19:29, John Hardin wrote:
> > Ultimately that's what you have to do. The only way to automatically
> > filter 100% of spam is to unplug your MTA from the 'net.
>
> unless one implement policyd to whitelist known s
On Thu, February 12, 2009 19:29, John Hardin wrote:
> Ultimately that's what you have to do. The only way to automatically
> filter 100% of spam is to unplug your MTA from the 'net.
unless one implement policyd to whitelist known senders and greylist
the rest and or whois sender ip and or sender
On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 16:04 -0600, McDonald, Dan wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 19:10 +, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 12:50 -0500, Kris Deugau wrote:
> > Is there any way that greylisting can be implemented that would allow
> > users to opt in/out of it on a per-account basi
On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 19:10 +, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 12:50 -0500, Kris Deugau wrote:
> Is there any way that greylisting can be implemented that would allow
> users to opt in/out of it on a per-account basis?
sqlgrey supports opt-out/opt-in models. It's a database tab
Jesse Stroik wrote on Thu, 12 Feb 2009 11:18:03 -0600:
> Of course not.
Of course, yes. It helped tremendously in the first years and still does.
Not so good, but still.
> > Do you use any MTA-level DNSBLs?
>
>
> No.
If you have ample of ressources you can do this. If you are getting
tentho
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009, Martin Gregorie wrote:
Is there any way that greylisting can be implemented that would allow
users to opt in/out of it on a per-account basis?
Sure. Have them send you an email with the opt-out request and edit the
config file when you get it. :)
http://www.decf.berke
(Please keep this on-list, no need to CC me. Reply-to and M-F-T set
accordingly.)
Jesse Stroik wrote:
I wasn't clear. I'm suggesting the user delete them.
I'm getting the impression you haven't spent much time in an ISP
helpdesk role.
A *lot* of the complainers are on dialup. Telling th
On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 12:50 -0500, Kris Deugau wrote:
> John Hardin wrote:
> > Do you greylist?
>
> Not currently. I'm not sure it's a useful option for a core ISP mail
> system, either; a LOT of the more vocal customers are the ones who
> expect email email to approximate instant messaging...
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009, Jesse Stroik wrote:
John Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009, Kris Deugau wrote:
> What do you do to push that last 5% or so of missed spam over the
> threshold from nonspam to spam?
Do you greylist?
Of course not. The assumption that spammers cannot follow RFCs is
Kris Deugau wrote:
Jesse Stroik wrote:
You don't. Hit delete.
Sorry, there aren't enough of me to hand-filter 30K ISP user accounts.
I wasn't clear. I'm suggesting the user delete them. Overaggressive
spam filters that get false positives are much more dangerous to email
than spam.
Kris Deugau schrieb:
> John Hardin wrote:
>> Do you greylist?
>
> Not currently. I'm not sure it's a useful option for a core ISP mail
> system, either; a LOT of the more vocal customers are the ones who
> expect email email to approximate instant messaging... :/
do selective greylisting
look
John Hardin wrote:
Do you greylist?
Not currently. I'm not sure it's a useful option for a core ISP mail
system, either; a LOT of the more vocal customers are the ones who
expect email email to approximate instant messaging... :/
Do you use any MTA-level DNSBLs?
zen. But that doesn't
Jesse Stroik wrote:
You don't. Hit delete.
Sorry, there aren't enough of me to hand-filter 30K ISP user accounts.
Unfortunately I'm getting reports that the current catch rate is closer
to 50% on a number of accounts - of course, without reporting of some
kind I can't do much to improve tha
John Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009, Kris Deugau wrote:
What do you do to push that last 5% or so of missed spam over the
threshold from nonspam to spam?
Do you greylist?
Of course not. The assumption that spammers cannot follow RFCs is a
silly one. There are a variety of greylisting
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009, Kris Deugau wrote:
What do you do to push that last 5% or so of missed spam over the
threshold from nonspam to spam?
Do you greylist?
Do you use any MTA-level DNSBLs?
--
John Hardin KA7OHZhttp://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
jhar...@impsec.orgFALahol
Kris Deugau wrote:
What do you do to push that last 5% or so of missed spam over the
threshold from nonspam to spam?
You don't. Hit delete.
If AI is ever truly developed, then your computer may be able to more
accurately determine spam from nonspam, but for a lot of spam where
spamassassi
What do you do to push that last 5% or so of missed spam over the
threshold from nonspam to spam?
Things already done:
-> I autoupdate Justin Mason's "sought" ruleset daily
-> I update the core rules on an irregular basis (although it averages
out to at least once a week - usually at the same t
24 matches
Mail list logo
