Covington, Chris wrote:
I've noticed that Columbia University has an SA rule for no reverse DNS:
Have you used this technique before? For me, it was an incessant pain in the ass. You will be bombarded with complaints. The very reason that I'm using SA is that host-based blocking, with the exception of RBL's, is like stepping on cockroaches.
But the nifty thing about SA is that a rule (or, more likely, an eval function) that checks for a valid rDNS on the sending host doesn't have to result in an instant denial if it triggers. You can set it up to just add 1.5, or 0.5, or 0.1, points to the message's score.
(Indeed, adding just 0.1 or 0.01 would be a great way to test the rule for a little while, and get some sense of how much trouble it might cause if the score were increased.)
--Kai MacTane
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I looked Death in the face last night,/I saw him in a mirror,
And he simply smiled,/He told me not to worry:
He told me just to take my time."
--Oingo Boingo,
"We Close Our Eyes"------------------------------------------------------- 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
