On Monday, Nov 25, 2002, at 01:29 US/Pacific, Martin Schroeder wrote:
Doesn't matter. If the sender address was false information, then they can't appeal the blacklisting (and I don't want them to), but I'll stop getting spam from that address (and typically the addresses have been repetitive). What matters is that the spamming address wont keep sending me spam, yet _legitimate_ senders (who I expect wont be forging their sending addresses) will get the information which allows them to appeal the blacklisting.On 2002-11-25 00:15:11 -0800, John Rudd wrote:On Sunday, Nov 24, 2002, at 17:19 US/Pacific, Martin Schroeder wrote:Automatically bouncing spam is BAD. Look it up on Google.Well, if google says it, it must be true! :-) I automatically bounce spam with a warning (if they're not already inTo whome? Everything in the header can be assumed to be false.
Hasn't happened. 1769 addresses blacklisted, 3 appeals, one of which was a legitimate appeal, and it wasn't a friend. It is certainly possible that a friend could get blacklisted ... which is why there's an appeal process outlined in the bounced message. It just hasn't happened. And, if it did, hopefully the friend would understand and send the appeal.my blacklist), add the sender to my blacklist, and then throw away anyAh. So if you get a spam which claims to come from a friend, he automatically gets blacklisted.
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
