Alex wrote:
Hi,
I'm interested in people's opinion of UCEPROTECT. I'm aware of how it
works, but even UCEPROTECT1 seems to catch an awful lot of ham, and I
wondered if I was doing something wrong.
I've set the score to 0.01 for now, while I watch and see how it works
here. What's a more reasonable score? I don't think I would ever use
UCEPROTECT2 or UCEPROTECT3, as we have a lot of verizon/comcast users
where the whole block or ASN could be blacklisted.
Can you give me some history of this blocklist?
Thanks,
Alex
this is actually an interesting addition to your MTA
from their web site:
Edit /etc/postfix/main.cf:
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
...
check_sender_access dbm:/etc/postfix/check_backscatterer
...
Create new file:/etc/postfix/check_backscatterer:
<> reject_rbl_client ips.backscatterer.org
postmaster reject_rbl_client ips.backscatterer.org
I decided to try it here with
check_sender_access pcre:check_backscatter.
new file has this in it:
/^(<>$|postmaster@|MAILER-DAEMON)/ reject_rbl_client ips.backscatterer.org
beauty of that is, that it only triggers if the SMTP envelope is <> or
postmas...@* or MAILER-DAEMON*
then it checks the senders ip against the backscatter list.
MOSTLY, what do I care if I don't get ANY bounce, let alone if they are
on the backscatter list.
so, the FPs' would be confined to bounces anyway.
and, at smtp time, the error goes direct to responsible smtp server, and
doesn't create your own backscatter.
_________________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned and certified safe by SpammerTrap(r).
For Information please see http://www.spammertrap.com
_________________________________________________________________________
