Marc Perkel a écrit : > > I'm considering using it as a sort of white list to not accidentally add > the host to my black list. Any server that does sender verification or > is issuing NDR reports (even if misconfigured) and not hosts that should > be blacklisted as spammers. These are hosts that are (in the case of > SAV) trying to fight spam and therefor should be protected from black > listing. >
You need to review your argument. 1- nothing stops a spammer from implementing SAV probes. 2- some servers should be blacklisted even if they are not operated by spammers. you wouldn't whitelist an open relay because it implements SAV, would you? and what about a site full of owned boxes? 3- in many cases, the MTA was configured to use SAV, either "accidentally" (because it was a default, or because admin copy-pasted a howto), by a former sysadmin or by an consultant. in short, just because the MTA does SAV doesn't mean it runs for people who "are trying to fight spam". 4- some spam filters bounce mail. they sure are trying to fight spam. sure, but not for the benefit of everyone! 5- some sites include the original viruses or phishes in their bounce. are they "trying to fight spam"? do you think the following IPs should be whitelisted (picked from a few randomly selected IPs in backscatterer.org): 116.20.10.215 (China, no PTR) is listed in spamhaus PBL, Barrachuda BRBL and SORBS to name a few well known DNSBLs. 117.47.198.161 (Thailand, no PTR) is listed in the PBL. ...
