Thanks for the explanation and quick replies from everyone. I was definitely
wrong in my assumption on how botnet works.

I think I understand the issue now and my problem can easily be fixed by
skipping the IPs or my internal forwarders.

That is  adding the following to botnet.cf fixed it.

botnet_skip_ip                  ^128\.6\.72\.254$
botnet_skip_ip                  ^128\.6\.72\.72$
botnet_skip_ip                  ^128\.6\.31\.85$
botnet_skip_ip                  ^128\.6\.31\.86$

Hanz



John Rudd wrote:
> 
> hanz wrote:
> 
>> 
>> I believe if botnet.pm is checking all the path  the mail went thru like
>> how
>> dnsbl is used, botnet will get more accurate.
> 
> No, it would throw a lot more false-positives.  Every end user 
> (corporate, home, etc.) on a dynamic IP address would suddenly get their 
> email flagged by botnet, because the originating host matches the botnet 
> conditions.
> 
> 
> Consider this senario:
> 
>     a) user on dynamic IP sends email to their ISP's mail server
>     b) ISP's mail server submits message to your mail server
> 
> In your suggested processing, this would generate a false positive: the 
> message would be marked as a potential botnet even though the message 
> was handled in a legitimate manner (message went out through the ISP's 
> mail server instead of coming _directly_ from the dynamic host).
> 
> Botnet specifically only tries to look at the host that submitted the 
> message to  your environment because of this.
> 
> 
> So you might ask "what about ISPs that aren't policing their network, to 
> keep botnets from relaying through them?"   Those can much more easily 
> be targeted by DSBLs than trying to DSBL every little dynamic host 
> (though, pbl.spamhaus.org seems to be trying to do that).  In one way, 
> Botnet tries to encourage a bottle-neck of mail traffic through each 
> provider's mail server, partially to make it easier to manage all of the 
> end points recipient postmasters have to deal with.
> 
> 
> So, basically, I wont be changing botnet to do what you're asking for. 
> I consider it to be a rather bad idea.  Though, you could fork the code, 
> call it something else, and make your own that behaves however you want.
> 
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/Botnet-0.8-Plugin-is-available-%28FINALLY%21%21%21%29-tf4221965.html#a12987885
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Reply via email to