Re: greylisting on debian.org?
On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 11:01:09AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org> writes:
>
> > The specific example used was some spam source sitting in the same /27
> > netblock in a colo server room, and getting through the graylister because
> > a proper MTA from the same /27 netblock had already been added to the
> > "approve it, it does retries" list of the graylister.
>
> Ok, now I understand. As I've already said, graylisting on /27
> netblocks amounts to inventing new network standards, which I believe
> should go through the IETF standardization process before we block
> email from people who don't comply with our newly invented standards.
Really, I don't understand why you wrote this.
Greylisting already exists. This would just make it _less_ of a problem.
By greylisting from /27 netblocks, you wouldn't block any additional
mail as opposed to greylisting in general; quite to the contrary.
Greylisting in this manner does not require anything specific from a
remote host, except that it must follow the standards as defined in
RFC2821 and come back some time after it received the initial 4xx status
reply. What part of that is a "newly invented standard"?
Moreover, I'd like to point out that any piece of software which intends
to implement some anti-spam measures will have to interpret some
specific standard more strictly than required by the relevant RFCs so as
to be able to distinguish spambots from human beings. There is no way
around that, save making degrading some human being to "anti-spam
measure for the Debian Project" and requiring him or her to manually
approve each and every email to our mailinglists. I don't think you want
that.
--
Fun will now commence
-- Seven Of Nine, "Ashes to Ashes", stardate 53679.4
Reply to: