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

Re: blacklists



On Wednesday 08 December 2004 20:16, Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au> wrote:
> > Craig, why do you think it's undesirable to do so?
>
> because i dont want the extra retry traffic.  i want spammers to take FOAD
> as an answer, and i dont want to welcome them with a pleasant "please try
> again later" message.  i think it is a sin to be polite or pleasant to a
> spammer :)

I agree that we don't want to be nice to spammers.  But there is also the 
issue of being nice in the case of false-positives.

The extra traffic shouldn't be that great (the message body and headers are 
not being transmitted).  When a legit user accidentally gets into a 
black-list their request to get the black-list adjusted can often be 
processed within the time that their mail server is re-trying the message.

> even on my little home system, at the end of an adsl line, i reject nearly
> 10,000 spams per day (and climbing all the time).  i would expect that to
> at least double or triple if i 4xx-ed them rather than 5xx, depending on
> how much came from open relays or spamhaus rather than dynamic/DUL.

30,000 rejections per day is only one every three seconds.  Not a huge load.

I am not trying to convince you to change your system (I'm not entirely 
convinced to change mine at this time).

-- 
http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/   My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/  Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/    Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/  My home page



Reply to: