Re: Unusual spam recently - hummm - postprocess
In article <[🔎] 20040604183404.GL12051@linuxmafia.com> you wrote:
> It's possible you're taking that fact into account: I'd be curious to
> hear how you (or others) are ensuring that such bounces go somewhere
> appropriate.
Well, fisrt of all, I accept mail for outgoing relay only from verified
sources, this includes SMTP AUTH or based on ip address. This is of course
not 100% secure. And second, you should try to not generate bounces. This
includes spam rejects, unknown mailboxes and virus alerts. All those must be
rejcted on the smtp level. This is all one can do in his own local
responsibility.
For backup MX or centralized mail gateways it is therefore a matter of good
service to do all those rejections at the smtp level, which might involve
replicated addressbooks or even pipelining.
A lot of organisations forget to include their backup mx into their mail
concept and are the main reaons for bounce-floods caused by malware or
faked-sender spam. (of course with open relays it does not help if you do
not bounce, but those are note the biggest source of spam). Direct delivery
from dialups or open proxies are much more common, at least for the large
mail providers.
Greetings
Bernd
--
eckes privat - http://www.eckes.org/
Project Freefire - http://www.freefire.org/
Reply to: