I work for an ISP. Last week I had to deal with three corporate customers who had decided to install teergrube. They all though they were getting a little bit more pro-active about dealing with spammers. The only problem with this is they all receive their mail via SMTP relayed from our mail servers.
So, now I not only have to deal with clueless customers who have open relays, I've got to deal with clueless customers who don't actually realise that teergrubing is only going to inconvenience them and their ISP.
I use Marc Mercury's SA-Exim 4.20/3.0. Marc is a teergrubing man, hates spammers.
But one of the things he says "don't" to, is teergrubing your ISP's forwarding MX. The reason's reasonably obvious, to anyone who's even a little clued up.
As you say, there are clueless customers. But, not only that, to my mind teergrubing is mostly useless anyway, since in 99.9% of all cases - even if you are not using your ISP's mail forwarder - you're not teergrubing the spammer, you're teergrubing his proxy.
So yes, I'd agree entirely. Use DNSBL or RDNSBL checking with SA. SA's philosophy in this respect is *good*, since total blocking is never employed; points across the scale contribute to a whole. With total BL blocking such as Exim 4's ACLs or Postfix's UCE blocks, the mailadmin is shooting himself in the foot - every time.
Tony
-- Tony Earnshaw
There's none so daft as them as will not learn
http://j-walk.com/blog/docs/conference.htm http://www.billy.demon.nl Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The best thread debugger on the planet. Designed with thread debugging features you've never dreamed of, try TotalView 6 free at www.etnus.com. _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
