[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: greylisting



On Tuesday 20 July 2004 15.46, Russell Coker wrote:

> It's not similar to TMDA in that it normally should not bother users,
> as opposed to TMDA which is specifically designed to annoy people.

The similarity is that it requires an extra step by the sender, which is 
why most spammers/viruses fail. Only, the extra step is fully automated 
(which is why, over time, postgrey will probably be defeated by some of 
the spammers)

> >  - server pools which don't send out the second try from the same
> > IP.
> This will still work eventually, it may just take more time.
> How many such server pools are there?

There are quite a few, apparently, but as my box only has a few personal 
accounts, I'm not the one who can give accurate statistics.  Before 
postgrey switched to lookup by subnets, there were 10 or 15 pools in 
the whitelist, IIRC. (personally, I saw google's outbound mailservers - 
gmail and newsalerts - and hostpoint.ch in Switzerland)

> > [0] I maintain the postgrey Debian package, as you may have guessed
> > from the style of this email :-)
> Any chance of back-porting it to woody?  I'm not sure I can upgrade
> my mail server to unstable at the moment...

As I've said, the main problem is that it requires postfix 2.1, which 
will be the bigger problem.

greetings
-- vbi

-- 
Protect your privacy - encrypt your email: http://fortytwo.ch/gpg/intro

Attachment: pgplrCsb8OkLS.pgp
Description: signature


Reply to: